History of word phrases

The
theory of phrase or word combination in linguistics has a long
tradition going back to the 18-th century. According to Russian
scholars the term ‘word combination’ (словосочетание)
can be applied only to such groups of words which contain at least
two notional words forming a grammatical unit. Thus Soviet linguists
restrict the use of the term ‘word combination’ to combination of
notional words. Western scholars hold a different view of the
problem. They consider that every combination of two or more words
constitutes a unit which they term ‘phrase’. In other words,
western linguists do not limit the term ‘phrase’ to combination
of notional words and do not draw a sharp distinction between the two
types of word-groups such as ‘wise men’ and ‘to the
lighthouse’. The first and the most important difference of opinion
on the question between soviet and western scholarsconcerns the
constituents of the word groups forming grammatical units.

Another
debatable problem in soviet linguistics was whether a predicative
combination of words forms a word combination.

It
is generally known that a sentence is based on predication and its
purpose in communication. A word combination has no such aim. Word
combinations are more like words because they are employed for naming
things, actions, qualities and so on. In contrast with soviet
linguists some western scholars make no difference between subject –
predicate combinations of words and other word combinations, though
some western theories bear considerable resemblance to Russian ideas.

There’s
no traditional terminology in the works of English and American
scholars discussing combinations of words; and different terms are
used to express the same idea (phrase, combination of words, cluster
of words, word group).

9. The Sentence

When
we speak or write we convey our thougths through sentences. A
sentence is the only unit of language which is capable of expressing
a communication containing some kind of information. But linguistics
is at difficulty to define it. One of the definitions is ‘the
sentence is the smallest communication unit expressing a more or less
complete thought and having a definite grammatical structure and
intonation’. In most sentences intonation functions as part of a
whole system of formal characteristics.

The sentence and the word group (phrase)

Neither
words no word groups can express communication. Cf. the arrival of
the delegation is expected next week (a sentence). It is a structure
in which words are grouped (arranged) according to definite rules
(patterns).

Another
difference between the sentence and the phrase is predicativity.
Predicativity comprises tense and mood components. The sentence
together with predicativity expresses a fact, while a phrase gives a
nomination without time reference:

The
doctor arrived. The doctor’s arrival.

Predication
is a word or combination of words expressing predicativity. Thus the
essential property of sentence is predicativity and intonation.

Classification of Sentences

Sentences
are classified 1) according to the types of communication and 2)
according to their structure.

In
accordance with the types of communication sentences are divided
into:

Declarative
(giving information). E.g. the book is interesting (statement).

Interrogative
(asking for information). E.g. is the book interesting? (question).

Imperative
(asking for action). E.g. give me the book! (command, request).

Each
of these 3 kinds of sentences may be in the affirmative and negative
form, exclamatory and non- exclamatory.

Types of
Sentences According to Structure

I
a) Simple sentences containing one predication (subject-predicate
relationship)

b)
Composite sentences containing one or more predications Composite
sentences are divided into compound and complex sentences.

II.
Simple sentences and main clauses may be two-member and one-member
sentences.

The
two-member sentence pattern is typical of the vast majority of
sentences in English. It is a sentence with full predication. (The
Sun shines. She walks fast).

If
a simple sentence contains the subject and the predicate only, it is
called unextended. E.g. spring came.

If
a sentence comprises secondary parts besides the main parts, it is
called extended. E.g. Dick came home late.

The
one-member sentence contains only one principle part, which is
neither the subject nor the predicate. E.g. Thieves! Fire! A cup of
tea, please! A one-member sentence sometimes resembles a two-member
sentence. E.g. No birds singing in the dawn. It may be complex in
structure: e.g. And what if he had seen them embracing in the
moonlight?

Imperative
sentences with no subject also belong here: Get away from me!

If
the main part is expressed by an infinitive, such a one-member
sentence is called an infinitive sentence: Oh, to be in England!

The
exclamatory character is a necessary feature of these sentences.
Infinitive sentences are very common in represented speech.

Types of
One-member Sentences in English

Nominative
(substantive) E.g. Another day of fog.

Verbal
(Imperative: Don’t believe him! ,Infinitive: Only to think of it!
,Gerundial: No playing with fire!)

Adjectival
one-member sentences: Splendid! How romantic!

Types of
Sentences According to their Completeness

1. Complete
   (non-elliptical) sentences.

2. Incomplete
   (elliptical) sentences.

Elliptical
sentences are such sentences in which one or several parts are
missing as compared with analogous sentences where there is no
ellipsis. Elliptical sentences may freely be changed into complete
sentences, the missing part of the sentence being supplied from the
preceding or following context, by means of intonation: e.g. I sat
near the window, he – near the door (= he sat near the door).
Playing, children? (= are you playing, children?) Cf. A small but
cosy room (a one-member sentence); in the background stands/ is a
little writing table (an elliptical two-member sentence). The main
sphere of elliptical sentences is of course dialogue.

Соседние файлы в папке Gosy

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In grammar, a phrase—called expression in some contexts—is a group of words or singular word acting as a grammatical unit. For instance, the English expression «the very happy squirrel» is a noun phrase which contains the adjective phrase «very happy». Phrases can consist of a single word or a complete sentence. In theoretical linguistics, phrases are often analyzed as units of syntactic structure such as a constituent.

Common and technical use[edit]

There is a difference between the common use of the term phrase and its technical use in linguistics. In common usage, a phrase is usually a group of words with some special idiomatic meaning or other significance, such as «all rights reserved», «economical with the truth», «kick the bucket», and the like. It may be a euphemism, a saying or proverb, a fixed expression, a figure of speech, etc.. In linguistics, these are known as phrasemes.

In theories of syntax, a phrase is any group of words, or sometimes a single word, which plays a particular role within the syntactic structure of a sentence. It does not have to have any special meaning or significance, or even exist anywhere outside of the sentence being analyzed, but it must function there as a complete grammatical unit. For example, in the sentence Yesterday I saw an orange bird with a white neck, the words an orange bird with a white neck form a noun phrase, or a determiner phrase in some theories, which functions as the object of the sentence.

Phrase trees[edit]

Many theories of syntax and grammar illustrate sentence structure using phrase ‘trees’, which provide schematics of how the words in a sentence are grouped and relate to each other. A tree shows the words, phrases, and clauses that make up a sentence. Any word combination that corresponds to a complete subtree can be seen as a phrase.

There are two competing principles for constructing trees; they produce ‘constituency’ and ‘dependency’ trees and both are illustrated here using an example sentence. The constituency-based tree is on the left and the dependency-based tree is on the right:

The tree on the left is of the constituency-based, phrase structure grammar, and the tree on the right is of the dependency grammar. The node labels in the two trees mark the syntactic category of the different constituents, or word elements, of the sentence.

In the constituency tree each phrase is marked by a phrasal node (NP, PP, VP); and there are eight phrases identified by phrase structure analysis in the example sentence. On the other hand, the dependency tree identifies a phrase by any node that exerts dependency upon, or dominates, another node. And, using dependency analysis, there are six phrases in the sentence.

The trees and phrase-counts demonstrate that different theories of syntax differ in the word combinations they qualify as a phrase. Here the constituency tree identifies three phrases that the dependency trees does not, namely: house at the end of the street, end of the street, and the end. More analysis, including about the plausibilities of both grammars, can be made empirically by applying constituency tests.

Heads and dependents[edit]

In grammatical analysis, most phrases contain a head, which identifies the type and linguistic features of the phrase. The syntactic category of the head is used to name the category of the phrase;^[1] for example, a phrase whose head is a noun is called a noun phrase. The remaining words in a phrase are called the dependents of the head.

In the following phrases the head-word, or head, is bolded:

too slowly — Adverb phrase (AdvP); the head is an adverb

very happy — Adjective phrase (AP); the head is an adjective

the massive dinosaur — Noun phrase (NP); the head is a noun (but see below for the determiner phrase analysis)

at lunch — Preposition phrase (PP); the head is a preposition

watch TV — Verb phrase (VP); the head is a verb

The above five examples are the most common of phrase types; but, by the logic of heads and dependents, others can be routinely produced. For instance, the subordinator phrase:

before that happened — Subordinator phrase (SP); the head is a subordinating conjunction—it subordinates the independent clause

By linguistic analysis this is a group of words that qualifies as a phrase, and the head-word gives its syntactic name, «subordinator», to the grammatical category of the entire phrase. But this phrase, «before that happened», is more commonly classified in other grammars, including traditional English grammars, as a subordinate clause (or dependent clause); and it is then labelled not as a phrase, but as a clause.

Most theories of syntax view most phrases as having a head, but some non-headed phrases are acknowledged. A phrase lacking a head is known as exocentric, and phrases with heads are endocentric.

Functional categories[edit]

Some modern theories of syntax introduce functional categories in which the head of a phrase is a functional lexical item. Some functional heads in some languages are not pronounced, but are rather covert. For example, in order to explain certain syntactic patterns which correlate with the speech act a sentence performs, some researchers have posited force phrases (ForceP), whose heads are not pronounced in many languages including English. Similarly, many frameworks assume that covert determiners are present in bare noun phrases such as proper names.

Another type is the inflectional phrase, where (for example) a finite verb phrase is taken to be the complement of a functional, possibly covert head (denoted INFL) which is supposed to encode the requirements for the verb to inflect – for agreement with its subject (which is the specifier of INFL), for tense and aspect, etc. If these factors are treated separately, then more specific categories may be considered: tense phrase (TP), where the verb phrase is the complement of an abstract «tense» element; aspect phrase; agreement phrase and so on.

Further examples of such proposed categories include topic phrase and focus phrase, which are argued to be headed by elements that encode the need for a constituent of the sentence to be marked as the topic or focus.

Variation among theories of syntax[edit]

Theories of syntax differ in what they regard as a phrase. For instance, while most if not all theories of syntax acknowledge the existence of verb phrases (VPs), Phrase structure grammars acknowledge both finite verb phrases and non-finite verb phrases while dependency grammars only acknowledge non-finite verb phrases. The split between these views persists due to conflicting results from the standard empirical diagnostics of phrasehood such as constituency tests.^[2]

The distinction is illustrated with the following examples:

The Republicans may nominate Newt. — Finite VP in bold

The Republicans may nominate Newt. — Non-finite VP in bold

The syntax trees of this sentence are next:

The constituency tree on the left shows the finite verb string may nominate Newt as a constituent; it corresponds to VP₁. In contrast, this same string is not shown as a phrase in the dependency tree on the right. However, both trees, take the non-finite VP string nominate Newt to be a constituent.

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

References[edit]