- •Теоретическая грамматика английского языка
- •§ 2. The phoneme, the morpheme, the word and the sentence are units of different levels of language structure. The phoneme is a unit of the lowest level, the sentence — of the highest.
- •§ 5. The structure, classification and combinability of phonemes is studied by a branch of linguistics called phonology.
- •Morphology
- •Introduction
- •§ 10. The morphemes book- and -s differ essentially:
- •§ 13. Besides lexical and grammatical morphemes there exist some intermediate types.
- •§ 18. In accordance with their structure the following four types of stems are usually distinguished:
- •§ 25. All the words of a lexeme, both synthetic and analytical, are, as defined (§ 19), united by the same lexical meanings.
- •§ 26. Analytical words are closely connected with synthetic ones.
- •§ 28. As shown by a. I. Smirnitsky, words derived from different roots may be recognized as suppletive only under the following conditions:
- •§ 29. The above-mentioned criteria serve to prove the identity of lexical morphemes in spite of their difference in form. The same criteria can be used to prove the identity of any morphemes.
- •§ 30. We have already spoken (§§ 14, 15, 18) about lexico-grammatical morphemes and their functions as stem-building elements. Now we are to see their role in building up classes of words.
- •§ 31. Let us compare the following columns of words:
- •Parts of speech
- •§ 39. Lexemes united by the genera! lexico-grammatical meaning of "substance" are called nouns. Those having the general lexico-grammatical meaning of "action" are called verbs, etc., etc.
- •§ 43. It must be borne in mind, however, that not all the lexemes of a part of speech have the same paradigms.
- •§ 44. The influence of the category of number is obliquely felt even in a case like milk. The word milk is closer to the "singular" member of a number opposeme than to the "plural" one.
- •§ 48. In accordance with the principles described above it is possible to distinguish the following parts of speech in English:
- •§49. Many linguists point out the difference between such parts of speech as, say, nouns or verbs, on the one hand and prepositions or conjunctions, on the other.
- •§ 51. A similar distinction can be drawn between notional and semi-notional lexemes within a part of speech (see § 194) and between notional and semi-notional parts of speech.
- •§ 57. A. I. Smirnitsky defines conversion as a type of word-building in which the paradigm is the only means of word-building.
- •§ 63. The relations between these variants remind us of conversion:
- •§ 64. As follows from our previous discussion of the parts of speech in English, the noun may be defined as a part of speech characterized by the following features:
- •§ 66. Many nouns are related by conversion1 with lexemes belonging to other parts of speech:
- •§ 70. A noun may be used in the function of almost any part of the sentence, though its most typical functions are those of the subject and the object. (See Syntax.)
- •§ 79. Nouns like police, militia, cattle, poultry are pluralia tantum, judging by their combinability, though not by form 3.
- •§ 80. Sometimes variants of a lexeme may belong to the same, lexico-grammatical subclass and yet have different forms of number opposemes.
- •§ 82. Case is one of those categories which show the close connection (a) between language and speech, (b) between mor-phology and syntax.
- •§91. Nouns representing 'plural' grammemes may denote:
- •§ 92. Nouns representing 'common case' grammemes express a wide range, of meanings, the exhaustive examination of which is hardly feasible. Here are some of them.
- •§ 93. As we have seen, 'possessive case' nouns occur a great deal less frequently than their opposites1.
- •§ 97. In the Russian language a noun in the genitive case may be adnominal and adverbial, I. E. It can be attached to a noun and to a verb.
- •§ 100. Let us compare the-English noun with its Russian counterpart. The five properties we use as criteria for distinguishing parts of speech will serve as the basis of comparison.
- •§ 101. Adjectives are a part of speech characterized by the following typical features:
- •§ 104. Suppletive opposemes are few in number but of very frequent occurrence.
- •§ 113. In certain speech environments adjectives can bе used to communicate meanings in some respect different from those of the grammemes they belong to.
- •§ 115. Following is a brief comparison of the basic features of English and Russian adjectives.
- •§ 116. The adverb is a part of speech characterized by the following features:
- •§ 123. Quantitative adverbs like very, rather, too, nearly, greatly, fully, hardly, quite, utterly, twofold, etc. Show the degree, measure, quantity of an action, quality, state, etc.
- •§ 124. Circumstantial adverbs serve to denote various circumstances (mostly local and temporal) attending an action. Accordingly they fall under two heads:
- •§127; Circumstantial adverbs are mostly used in the function of adverbial modifiers of time and placer
- •§ 130. The numeral as a part of speech is characterized by
- •§ 131. The lexico-grammatical meaning of 'number' is not to be confused with the grammatical meaning of 'number'.
- •§ 133. In our opinion, the pair ten — tenth forms an oppo-seme of the grammatical category of numerical qualification.
- •§ 135. As to their stem structure English numerals fall into
- •§ 136. Numerals are easily substantivized, acquiring noun features. •
- •§ 144. The personal pronouns are the nucleus of the class. They are: I (me), thou (thee)1, he (him), she (her), it, we (us), you, they (them).
- •§ 157. Self-pronouns are often used in apposition for emphasis. Dickson's view on the Middle Ages themselves would have to wait until another time. (Amis).
- •§ 159. Demonstrative pronouns can be:
- •§ 162. The pronoun who is the only interrogative pronoun which has a case opposite, whom, as in Whom did you meet?
- •§ 180. Most quantitative pronouns form opposemes of comparison:
- •§ 181. Here belong other (others, other's, others'), another (another's) and otherwise.
- •§ 182. The pronoun one stands somewhat apart, outside the classification discussed above.
- •§ 183. As an indefinite pronoun it is usually a pro-adjective with the meaning "a certain" and refers to both living beings and inanimate things.
- •§ 184. As an indefinite or generalizing personal pronoun one indicates only a person. It is a pro-noun. It has a case opposite one's and is correlated with the reflexive pronoun oneself.
- •§ 186. Summing up, we may say that the pronouns are hot united by any morphological categories, or syntactical functions. So they cannot be regarded as a part of speech.
- •§ 188. As a part of speech the verb is characterized by the following properties:
- •§ 194. Semantically verbs divide into notional and semi-notional (see § 50).
- •§ 196. Modal verbs are characterized:
- •§ 198. Verbs are divided into subjective and objective, depending upon their combinability with words denoting the subjects and the objects of the actions they name (see § 191).
- •§ 200. As usual, variants of a verb lexeme may belong to different subclasses (see § 62).
- •§ 201. Verbs can be classified in accordance with the aspective nature of their lexical meanings into terminative and non-terminative.
- •§ 202. As usual, variants of the same lexeme may belong to different subclasses. When meaning '(to) engage in physical or mental activity', the verb (to)work is non-terminative.
- •§ 208. Participle II may have left-hand connections with link-verbs.
- •The Category of Order (Time Correlation)
- •§ 213. Linguists disagree as to the category the 'perfect' belongs to.
- •§ 216. Let us take an extract from j. Galsworthy's novel To Let:
- •§ 219. The problem of aspect is controversial in English grammar. There is but little consensus of opinion about this category in Modern English.
- •§ 222. Besides those properties that characterize the verb as a whole, the finites possess certain features not shared by the verbids.
- •§ 224. Mood is the grammatical category of the verb reflecting the relation of the action denoted by the verb to reality from the speaker's point of view.
- •§ 229. The indicative mood is the basic mood of the verb. Morphologically it is the most developed system including all the categories of the verb.
- •§ 233. The correlation of time and tense is connected with the problem of the absolute and relative use of tense grammemes.
- •§ 236. In Modern English the category of person has certain peculiarities.
- •§ 240. The development of the modal verbs and that of the subjunctive mood — the lexical and morphological ways of expressing modality1 — have much in common.
- •§ 243. The 'passive voice' and 'continuous aspect' meanings are expressed much in the same way as in the indicative mood system.
- •§ 245. The difference between the two sets of opposemes
- •Verb Grammemes in Speech
- •§ 252. The systems of different moods, as we know, contain different grammemes. We shall therefore discuss the grammemes of the indicative, subjunctive and imperative moods separately.
- •Indicative Mood Grammemes
- •§ 254. The action it denotes may either coincide with the moment of speech or cover a more or less lengthy period of time including the moment of speech.
- •§ 255. In a context showing that reference is made to the past, the present non-continuous non-perfect may be used to denote past events, mostly presented as the speaker's reminiscences.
- •§ 274. The present non-continuous perfect is regularly found in adverbial clauses of time and condition when the connotation of priority is implied.
- •§ 275. What makes the present non-continuous perfect fundamentally different from the past non-continuous non-perfect can be briefly summarized as follows:
- •§ 276. As a unit of the language system it presents an act in the past (past tense) unspecified as to its character (non-continuous aspect) and preceding some situation (perfect order).
- •§ 277. When used with terminative verbs it may acquire a distinct connotation of resultativity, as in
- •§ 278. The past non-continuous perfect may be inclusive in meaning if supported by the context.
- •§ 280. As a part of the verb system it presents a future action (future tense), unspecified as to its character (non-continuous aspect) and prior to some situation in the future (perfect order).
- •§ 285. The past continuous perfect has much in common with the present continuous perfect, the main difference between them being that of tense.
- •§ 286. Like the present continuous perfect it may be inclusive if supported by the context or else exclusive as in
- •§ 287. The future perfect continuous is actually nonexistent.
- •Voice Grammemes
- •§ 292. It has often, been claimed that passive structures can be regarded as transforms of certain active structures 1.
- •§295. Representatives of subjunctive I grammemes can be distinguished from their indicative and imperative mood homonyms as follows.
- •§ 296. Following are some types of clauses in which should grammemes and their synonyms are regularly used.
- •Imperative Mood Grammemes in Speech
- •§ 303. Besides the features common to the English verb as a whole (see § 188) the verbids have certain features of their own distinguishing them from the finite verb.
- •§ 306. The verbids do not possess many of the categories of the finite verb, such as number, person, tense and mood.
- •§ 307. Here is a table presenting the paradigms of the verbids.
- •§ 308. The combinability of the verbids is of mixed nature. Partly, as we have seen, it resembles that of a finite verb. But some models of combinability are akin to those of other parts of speech.
- •§ 311. The infinitive is a verbid characterized by the following features:
- •§ 317. The participle is a verbid characterized by the following properties:
- •§ 319. As we have already mentioned, the adjectival and the adverbial features of the participle are connected with its combinability.
- •§ 321. The gerund is a verbid characterized by the following features:
- •§ 324. The gerund, which is a peculiarity of the English language, is very extensively used as the centre of complexes (nexuses) synonymous with subordinate clauses. Compare:
- •§ 326. In compliance with the system adopted we shall now work out the comparison of the basic features of the English verb with those of the Russian verb.
- •The adlink (the category of state)
- •§ 327. In Modern English there exists a certain class of words such as asleep, alive, afloat, which is characterized by:
- •The modal words (modals)
- •§ 329. As a part of speech the modals are characterized by the following features:
- •§ 331. The relatively negative combinability of modal words manifests itself in various ways.
- •§ 332. Functioning as a parenthetical element of a sentence, a modal word is usually connected with the sentence as a whole.
- •§ 333. The usage of modals depends upon the type of sentence. They are found almost exclusively in declarative sentences, very rarely in interrogative and almost never in imperative sentences.
- •§ 334. The response-words yes and no are characterized as a separate class by
- •§ 335. Practically every notional word can alone make a sentence in a certain situation of speech.
- •§ 336. Their lexical meanings are those of 'affirmation' and 'negation'. Their lexico-grammatical meaning is that of 'response statement'. They confirm or deny a previous statement.
- •§351. The combinability of at in the last example resembles, to some extent, that of an adverb. Cf. To be laughed away (off).
- •§ 359. The combinability of subordinating conjunctions is somewhat different from that of coordinating ones.
- •§ 360. The division of conjunctions into coordinating and subordinating ones is chiefly based on their lexical meanings and the types of units they connect.
- •§ 361. According to their meanings coordinating conjunctions are divided into
- •§ 362. Though for and so are considered coordinating conjunctions, they are in fact intermediate between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions.
- •§ 363. The conjunctions are not numerous, but of very frequent occurrence in speech.
- •§ 364. The two words a(n), the form a separate group or class characterized by
- •§ 367. Some grammarians speak of the 'zero article' 1 or the 'zero form of the indefinite article' 2. We are definitely against these terms.
- •§ 369. In accordance with its meaning 'one of many' the indefinite article is used to denote one thing of a class and is therefore a classifying article.
§ 144. The personal pronouns are the nucleus of the class. They are: I (me), thou (thee)1, he (him), she (her), it, we (us), you, they (them).
The personal pronouns serve to indicate all persons and things from the point of view of the speaker who indicates himself or a group of persons including him by means of the personal pronouns of the first person — /, we. He indicates his interlocutor or interlocutors by means of the pro-. nouns of the second person — thou (archaic) and you. All other persons or things are indicated by him with the help of the pronouns of the third person — he, she (for persons), it (for things), they (for both).
_________________________________________
1 Archaic.
§ 145. Though all the personal pronouns are said to be noun pronouns or pro-nouns, it is only the pronouns of the third person that can be used anaphorically, instead of a noun mentioned previously.
E. g. The dark thing was Ferse ... he was dead. (Galsworthy). The personal pronouns of the first and the second person do not in fact replace any names. In the sentence I am sure of it the pronoun I is not substituted for any noun because no noun can be used with the verb am, no noun can denote the first person.
§ 146. In Modern English the personal pronouns have the category of case represented in two-member opposemes. But these opposemes differ from the case opposemes of nouns. The general meaning of "case" manifests itself in the particular meanings of the "nominative" and "objective" cases.
Ps |
Sg. |
Pl. |
I |
I — me |
we — us |
II |
thou — thee |
you — you |
III |
he — him |
|
she — her |
they — them |
|
it - it |
|
Case, as we know, is a morphological category with syntactical significance. The opposition of the nominative and the objective case is realized syntactically in the opposition of the subject and the object of the sentence.
E. g. She asked her.
With nouns it is different because a noun in the common ease fulfils the functions of both the subject and the object. The pronouns you and it having only one form for both cases seem to resemble nouns in this respect. But by analogy with the majority of the personal pronouns you and it may be interpreted as having two homonymous forms each.
The pronoun of the second person singular (thou — thee) was formerly used in address as a form of endearment and familiarity and so came to imply contempt and has been ousted by you. Thou is no longer used in everyday speech, but still lingers in poetry and elevated prose.
Hail to thee (a skylark), blithe spirit — Bird thou never wert.
(Shelley).
You was formerly the objective case, the nominative being ye. Ye is now used only in appeals and exclamations found in poetry and elevated prose.
Nor ye proud, impute to them the fault.
(Gray).
§ 147. Some Facts point to serious changes in the correlation between the nominative and objective cases taking place in Modern English. The objective case pronouns seem to encroach on their case opposites. We observe a peculiar trend which is steadily gaining ground, to use the objective case instead of the nominative when the pronoun is used predica-tively or when it is separated from the predicate-verb, as in Me and my wife could have fed her anyhow. (Caldwell). It is me (instead of It is I) has established itself as a literary norm. It is him, her, etc. are still avoided by careful speakers 1. I didn't leave little Sheila, it was her who left me (O'Casey).
The nominative case is regularly preserved when an unstressed personal pronoun is used with a verb as the subject of a sentence to show the person and the number of the agent the action of the verb is associated with.
In B. A. Ilyish's opinion, the unstressed personal pronouns in cases like he read, they worked are well advanced on the way towards becoming a kind of verbal prefixes 2 of person and number. B. A. Ilyish is inclined to think that Modern English gradually develops a system of the personal pronouns similar to that of Modern French in which the unsteressed conjoint personal pronouns ('pronoms conjoints') je, tu, il, ils, directly precede the verb, and the stressed absolute personal pronouns ('pronoms absolus') moi, toi, lui, eux are used in all other cases, including the predicative function (c'est moi — it's me) and cases like Moi et mon pere, nous aimons ... — Me and my father, we .....
However that may be, at the present stage the unstressed personal pronouns can hardly be regarded either as being or as tending to become verbal morphemes similar to the -(e)s morpheme of the third person singular3.
1. They may be used, not only as subjects — That was he. It is she. John is taller than I.
2. They can be coordinated with the help of conjunctions, which is not typical of morphemes. Neither he nor I am likely to be present at the meeting (Hornby).
3. They can be coordinated with nouns. Ma and I both ran inside. (Caldwell).
4. They have some freedom of distribution. I forget. Do I ever forget? I do not easily forget, etc.
Neither can they be treated as word-morphemes participating in the formation of analytical words. This is proved by the absence of a personal pronoun when a verb has a noun-subject. Thus we have Tom came, but not * Tom he came, which would be natural, if he came were an analytical word.
Thus it seems in keeping with language facts to treat the unstressed personal pronouns in the nominative case as independent words.
_______________________________________
1 But see Deskbook of Correct English by Michael West and P. F. Kim-ber, Л., 1963, p. 130: "It is I" should be used in all formal writing,and where "I" is followed by "who" ("It's I who —"), but "It's me" may be used in conversational contexts where no relative clause follows. So also "It's her, — him, — us, — them!"
§ 148. As to the category of number, it should be observed that strictly speaking, the personal pronouns have no category of number. I and we or he and they cannot be treated as number opposites inasmuch as they differ from each other not only grammatically, but lexically as well. We is not I+I but rather I and you, I and she, I and they, etc. They is not always he + he, it may as well mean he + she. You is said to indicate both the singular and the plural. So it ought to be similar to cases like sheep, deer. But it is not. 2 sheep = 1 sheep + 1 sheep, in other words, sheep pl. = sheep sg. + sheep sg. With you it is different. You pl. does not always indicate you sg. + you sg. It may indicate you sg. + he, you sg. + they, etc.
Since I and we differ lexically, they do not belong to the same lexeme, they do not form an opposeme, and their number meanings are not grammatical. But I, he, she, it form a group of words whose combinability resembles that of "singular" nouns. Cf. I, he, she, it, John, the student ... was (not were)... The pronouns we, you, they, on the contrary, have the combinability of "plural" nouns. We may then regard the pronouns of the first group as singularia tantum, and those of the other group as pluralia tantum 1. In other words, the personal pronouns possess oblique or lexico-. grammatical meanings of number.
Similarly, we may speak of the lexico-grammatical meaning of person. The words I, me, we, us (as well as pronouns of other groups: my, mine, our, ours, myself, ourselves) are united by their reference to the first person, the speaker. Of these only I has grammatical combmability with am. Only the "singulars" (I, me, my, mine, myself) refer to the first person alone. The "plurals" include, besides the first person, reference to the second (I and you), or the third (I and he, she, or they), or both.
The words you, your, yours, yourself, yourselves are united by their reference to the second person, the hearer. But all of them (except yourself) may include reference to the third person as well (you and he, she or they). So in fact they are united negatively by not including reference to the first person.
The words he, him, she, her, it, they, them (also pronouns of other groups) are united by their reference to the third person, the 'spoken-of' l, or negatively by not including reference to the first and second persons, the speaker and the hearer. Of these words he, she and it have explicit grammati-cal combinability (he speaks, she has ..., it is...).
The oblique grammatical meaning of 'third person' does not unite pronouns alone. All the nouns and noun equivalents are associated with this meaning.
Cf. He (she, it, John, Mary, milk) is..., not am.
This is the reason why nouns can be replaced by the pronouns he, she, it, they, but not by I, we, or you.
As to gender it is possible to discuss, for instance, the lexico-grammatical subclass of the masculine gender only in case we include pronouns of other groups, such as his, himself, besides he (him).
The pronoun it is the only "personal" pronoun which indicates lifeless things or "non-persons". Together with its, itself, what, which, something, etc. it forms a subclass opposed to another subclass indicating persons (I, he, she, my, his, myself, herself, who, somebody, etc.).
_____________________________________
1 See "Nouns", § 74.
§ 149. The combinability of the personal pronouns differs from that of nouns. The reference to a particular person or thing makes all descriptions and limitations unnecessary. Such phrases as * The handsome it or * the he sound uncommon. On the other hand, a personal pronoun usually replaces a noun with all its attributes.
You feel ill at ease when your old friend tells you that he can't place his short stories. (Maugham).
When used in speech most of the personal pronouns (we, you, they, he) may acquire a generalizing force, as in the examples We don't kill a pig every day (proverb). You cannot get blood from a stone (proverb). They say she is breathtakingly beautiful. (The Times). He who pays the piper calls the tune (proverb).
Possessive Pronouns
§ 150. The possessive pronouns are usually treated as adjective pronouns, whereas they are in reality noun pronouns or pro-nouns, but they replace only possessive case nouns with which they are correlated. Cf. This is the teacher's (his, her) bicycle. This bicycle is the teacher's (his, hers).
The combinability and functions of the possessive pronouns and the 'possessive case' nouns are almost identical, which justifies the view that the pronouns in question are possessive case opposites of the personal pronouns. The only argument we can put forward against that view and in favour of the opinion that the possessive pronouns are a separate group, is as follows.
§ 151. Modern English differs from Old English and from other Modern Germanic languages in having two sets of possessive pronouns — the conjoint possessive pronouns my, thy, his; her, its, our, your, their and the absolute possessive pronouns mine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, theirs. :
'Possessive case' nouns, as we know (§ 97) can also be used absolutely (the idea was George's), but with them it is only a matter of. usage in speech, since it is not fixed in any language forms. It is quite different with the pronouns. The pairs my — mine, thy — thine, our — ours, your — yours, etc. can be regarded as opposemes of a grammatical category. It is difficult to find a name.for that category, but it resembles the category of case. As shown (§ 82), a case opposeme belongs to the morphological system of the language, but it reflects speech combinability and syntactical functions. The same can be said about an opposeme like my — mine. The difference between its members is in combinability and function. My has right-hand connections with nouns and functions as an attribute. Mine has other connections and other functions in the sentence. Now if we assume that both my and mine are 'possessive case' opposites of I, we have then to speak of a case opposeme within the possessive case, Therefore, it would, probably, be more in keeping with language facts (a) to treat my (mine), her (hers), our (ours), etc. not as the possessive case of personal pronouns but as a subclass of pronouns; (b) to regard my - mine, her — hersr etc. as a kind of case opposemes. It is obvious that further research is vitally necessary.
§ 152. The possessive pronouns of the first and second persons (as well as the corresponding personal pronouns) do not in fact replace any nouns, but their usage does not dif-fer from that of the third person pronouns. The pronoun its has a much wider application than the possessive case of nouns denoting inanimate things.
Cf. The atmosphere of the room, rarely the room's atmosphere, but its atmosphere.
Its has no 'absolute' opposite. The 'absolute' and 'conjoint' his may be regarded as homonyms.
Cf. Her (his) friend, a friend of hers (his).
§ 153. One of the peculiarities of Modern English is the extensive use of conjoint possessive pronouns. When used in cases like He entered with his eyes shining and his hair in disorder, they add very little information. In fact their function is to specify nouns in the way the definite article does. They might be treated as pro-art icles, but (a) they are correlated only with the definite article, (b) the meaning of the definite article is much more general than that of his or her.
Reflexive Pronouns
§ 154. They are compound noun pronouns whose second element -self expresses the anaphorical relation of the first element, i. e. it shows that the first element refers to the person mentioned previously in the sentence. Thus, I ... myself, thou ... thyself, he (or John) ... himself, she (or Mary) ... herself, it (or bird) ... itself „we ... ourselves, you ... yourself (yourselves), they (or the children) ... themselves, one ... oneself.
§ 155. Like the personal and the possessive pronouns, the reflexive pronouns distinguish the lexico-grammatical meanings of person, number and gender.
Some linguists are of the opinion that in myself—ourselves, yourself — yourselves number is expressed grammatically. But this is an illusion caused by the correlation self — selves. As ourselves is not myself + myself, but myself + yourself or myself + yourselves, or myself + himself, or myself + herself, or myself + themselves, we are to regard myself and ourselves as different lexical units, just as I and we, my and our. As to the so-called reflexive voice, see § 211.
§ 156. The anaphorical use of the reflexive pronouns accounts for the fact that they do not occur in the function of subjects, their usual function being that of prepositionless or prepositional objects.
When I first met Hickson, I could have kissed his beautiful boots. I loved them for themselves. (Cary).
You may be letting yourselves out nicely, but I can't. Nor can mother. (Priestley).