Лекции по теоретической грамматике

The IC Method (method of immediate constituents)

     This method was elaborated by the head of American Descriptive Linguistics Leonard Bloomfield.The IC method aims at describing any complex form ranging from long sentences to multi-element words in terms of their  constituents. The form is divided into two parts, the remaining parts are also divided into parts until ultimate indivisible pieces are arrived at:

un][gent]le][man][ly.The main requirement on the morphological level is that ultimate constituents (or at least one of them) should be recognizable as morphemes: book||let; let is a diminutive suffix. The word ham||let (a small village) can also be divided into 2 parts , though we do not know what ham here means.

     Proceeding from the intuition of a native speaker, L.Bloomfield analyzed the sentence  Poor John ran away in the following way Poor ][ John// ran ][ away.

     The main requirement of the method on the syntactical  level is that ultimate constituents should be words.

     There are several varieties of diagramming of this analysis. We can represent the candelabra division (1) and the derivation tree division (2).

Poor John ran away  (1) (candelabra diagram)

└---------┘    └------┘

          └--------┘

             S 

               /       \

         NP         VP            (2) This is a derivation tree division.

         /     \       /     \

       A       N    V      D

  Poor      John  runs    away    

                    S         

               /       \

         NP         VP

         /     \       /     \

      T       N     V       D

The        rain  falls   greyly

     The word greyly semantically refers to the noun rain, but the diagram doesn’t show it..

     The method shows the derivation of a sentence, but it’s formalized, mechanistic, it disregards meanings and can’t be employed to analyze polysemy, homonymy, ambiguity, implicit syntactic relations, syncretism.

The Transformational Method

  This method is based on the  notions of  a kernel , which is the simplest elementary subject-predicate structure with explicit grammatical relations, transformation which is a process of rearranging elements in syntactic structures with meanings being  kept unchanged, transformation rules (addition is adding  elements, deletion is cutting elements out, substitution is replacing  one element by another one in the same position , permutation is replacing elements (putting from the beginning into the end and vice versa) : John drank his beer => the beer was drunk by John. Recategorization consists in changing the category of an element (verbalization of a noun, nominalization of a verb, etc).

     The transformational method rearranges syntactic structures keeping their meanings unchanged. Its postulates are : if two or more structures are transformed identically, their meanings are identical; if two or more structures are transformed differently, their meanings are different.

     This method has a broad sphere of application. We can clarify relations between structures, reveal semantic similarities and differences between structures disambiguate ambiguous structures, reveal covert information from implicit relations, etc. Transforming identical Genitives we reveal their internal differences: Napoleon’s victory => Napoleon won a victory over someone (subjective genitive). Napoleon’s defeat => Somebody has won the victory over Napoleon (objective Genitive). A Soldier’s uniform => a uniform habitually worn by a soldier (descriptive genitive). Children’s bedroom => the room for children (destination Genitive). John’s arrival => John arrives, John arrived, will arrive (temporary Genitive)

     Transformational method is more powerful as it reveals hidden implicit relations between the constituents of a sentence (The rain falls greyly => the rain is falling and it is grey).

     By this method we can interpret double predicates: The moon rose red => the moon rose and it was red. Rose is an explicit predicate and is red is an implicit one. We can also describe a predicate of double orientation:  He is said to have come; he to have come is a Subjective with the infinitive construction, he is a subject; is said to have come is a predicate of double orientation as to have come refers to the subject and is said refers to a subject beyond the border of the sentence => they say that he has come.

     By means of this method we can analyze neutralization between coordination and subordination: He married early which surprised everybody => Him married early and that surprised everybody (a complex sentence with an attributive clause is transformed into a compound sentence, the semantic difference between them being neutralized).

     By means of this method we can analyze predicative constructions with infinitives, gerunds, participles.

      A simple sentence carrying a predicative construction with a non-finite form of the verb can be analyzed into a complex sentence with a subordinate clause where the formerly non-finite form is presented as a finite form functioning as a simple verbal predicate: He heard music coming from the room inside => he heard that the music was coming from the room inside.

The Method of Deep and Surface Structures

      This method is primarily associated with the name of N. Chomsky. It is based on the notions of deep and surface structures. A surface structure is observable, while a deep structure is unobservable. It is a purely logical structure, underlying   a surface structure. Deep structures are revealed transformationally. These are   simple, subject- and- predicate structures, roughly    comparable with kernels. Underlying surface structures, they convey semantic relations which are deeply hidden.

     The sphere of the application of the method is as large as that of the transformational method. One surface structure can be analyzed in terms of several deep structures to reveal explicit and implicit predicative lines. (The invisible Got has created the visible world => The God is invisible. The world is visible. The God created the world).

     With the help of it we can analyze 1. Identical structures, feeling their semantic differences (John is eager to please => John pleases somebody; John is easy to please => Somebody pleases John); 2. the nature of the double predicate (The moon rose red =>The moon rises. The moon is red. In the second transform  the formerly implicit predicate red is made explicit; 3. the nature of the predicate of double orientation ( He is said to come => They say. He comes. We see that the two parts of this predicate refer to different subjects, one of which being beyond the borders of the sentence under analysis); 4. semantic and syntactic syncretism  (It is dark and raining => It is dark. It is raining . The former is is an  explicit link- verb and the latter is is an implicit auxiliary, forming a continuous form); 5.  the mechanism of ambiguity (Flying planes can be dangerous =>A plane flies. It is dangerous. I fly  a plane. It is  dangerous;  The king’s portrait =>  The king has a portrait of somebody, The king has a portrait of himself, The  King  draws a portrait of somebody,      Somebody draws a portrait of the king, etc.).

The Functional Sentence Perspective Method (FSP)

     The syntactic structure of a sentence is in part determined by the communicative function of its constituents, that is the FSP. The FSP method studies an objective distribution of information among the elements of the sentence, the actual division of a sentence (актуальное членение предложения) into the theme and the rheme. The Greek terms “the theme” and “the rheme”, which replaced the earlier terms “the logical subject” and “the logical predicate”, allow  scholars  to avoid  wrong associations. The FSP method also describes the interrelations between the grammatical structure of a sentence and  its functional organization, its communicative dynamism.  This method also distinguishes the system of means to thematize and rhematize sentence elements and varieties of word order.

     The first element of a sentence, which is usually the subject, carries thematic, i.e. known, familiar information, the final elements (predicates, objects, adverbial modifiers, carry rhematic, i.e. new or important  information. In other words, the thematic elements tend to the beginning of the sentence, while the rhematic elements strive to the end.

     We distinguish several communicative varieties of word order: 1. thematic word order, which can be rendered by the model theme – transition – rheme (John has written a letter, where John is the theme and a letter is the rheme); 2. rhematic non-emotive word order , rendered by the model rheme – transition - theme (A woman entered the room).  The indefinite article is a signal of new information); 3. rhematic emotive word order,  also rendered by the model rheme –transition – theme  (Strange his wife was to him). Normally the predicate and predicatives  do not precede the subject, but if they do,  they become rhematic.

     We can rhematize the subject 1. by putting it in the final position by inversion (Followed a complete silence.);2. by turning  an active construction into a passive one ( A letter was written by John); 3. by ttransforming a simple sentence into a complex one with a complement clause( It’s John who has written a letter).

The Componential Method

     It a logico-linguistic method of decomposing the semantic content of a word or a grammatical form into the smallest units of sense (semantic components, semantic markers, semes, or SCs).

     A semantic component is the smallest indivisible unit of sense comparable to elementary particles in physics. The content of the word  “bachelor” can be described in terms of  such semantic components as  a human being, a male,  maturity, in a state of being unmarried. The content of the verb “to giggle” can be described in such semes as  an action, a female,  young,  a concrete emotional reaction associated with young females.

      The Componential analysis is  not quite adequate by itself and should be superimposed upon other  methods, Superimposing it upon the Transformational method and the contextual analysis we can distinguish  the  following semantic varieties of the genitive case:1. Possessive Genitive  (Mary’s hat => (Mary has a hat); 2.Subjective Genitive (Napoleon’s victory => Napoleon is a victor); 3. Objective Genitive (Napoleon’s defeat => Somebody has won a victory over Napoleon; 4. Genitive of Destination (The women’s magazine => The magazine  is for women; 5. Ambiguous Genitive (It can be interpreted as a Subjective or an Objective Genitive (A mother’s love), etc.

The Contextual Method

     This method is associated with the names of professors V.V. Vinogradov, I.V. Arnold, I.R. Galperin, N. Amosova, N.A. Shekhtman, M. Halliday.

     A context is an immediate environment of a linguistic unit, which  actualizes, semantizes, desemantizes, hypersemantizes or disambiguates it. Actualization can come from an immediate context or from a distant context.

     Scholars  distinguish different   types of context:  extralinguistic (situational) and linguistic contexts, the latter  being subdivided according to their structure  into phrasal, sentential, supraphrasal, the context of discourse; according to the character of constituents into lexical, lexico-semantic, lexico-grammatical; according their  length into macrocontext and microcontext.

     Making use of the contextual analysis, we are to take into consideration semantic agreement / disagreement of semantic components between the semantic structures of the words combined, or the semantic content of a word and that of its form. Semantic agreement / disagreement is based on logical agreement / disagreement. Semantic agreement / disagreement expresses itself in the presence or absence of similar semantic components in the contents of the words or forms combined or juxtaposed.

     None of the methods, taken isolatedly, is   sufficient to produce an adequate linguistic analysis. All the methods covered complement each other. Only a synthesis of them can result in a reliable analysis of linguistic units. 

The Levels  of Language

      Language is a structure, a hierarchy of levels. Each level has a basic unit. The lowest is the phonemic (phonological) level. Its basic unit is a phoneme. It is the smallest meaningless distinctive unit. Phonemes, constituting morphemes, differentiate them (ship – sheep: [i]:: [i:] ).  A morpheme is the basic unit of the morphemic (morphological) unit. A morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit. The classifications and combinations of morphemes are studied by morphology. Next comes the lexemic level. Its basic unit is a lexeme, the smallest meaningful unit on this level. Lexemes realize themselves in words, which constitute   phrases (a beautiful girl, to run quickly, very fast). A phrase is the basic unit of the phrasemic level. A phrase is a non-predicative unit, made up of words. Next comes the syntaxemic level, the basic unit of the level is a syntaxeme. A syntaxeme is a monopredicative unit. Syntaxemes realize themselves in sentences. Sentences, constituted by words and phrases, are united into composite sentences (compound and complex), which are polypredicative units. Sentences, monopredicative and polypredicative, are united into supra-phrasal units. A supra-phrasal unit is the basic unit of the supra-phrasal level.  Sentences of various structure and supra-phrasal units constitute texts. The basic unit of  the textual level, which is  the highest level of language structure, is a texteme.

      This hierarchy of linguistic units can be shown in the following  way. A problem is a word. A complex problem is a phrase (a word combination). It is a complex problem is a  simple sentence.  It is a complex problem and it can’t be sold  is a compound sentence. It is a complex problem which can’t be sold is a complex sentence. It is a complex problem. It can’t be sold by outdated techniques is a supra-phrasal unit.

      There is no impassable borderline between language levels. One and the same unit can refer to several levels. Teach  is a lexical morpheme and a word.  In It is a trial- and –error procedure the element underlined is a phrase and a word (an attribute). In a do-good judge the element underlined is a sentence and a word (an attribute).

The Morphological Structure of ME

      To understand what  the morphological structure of a language is we are to know what a morphological type is. It is a set of prevalent features characterizing a group of languages. At present linguists distinguish the following morphological types of languages. : isolated, synthetical, agglutinative, analytical and incorporative. Grammatical relations are expressed differently in them. In isolated languages grammatical relations are expressed without inflexions: by adjoinment, word order, composition (NN, NA). In synthetical languages grammatical relations are expressed by means of inflexions (Slavic, Latin, Old English, etc.). Analysis finds its expression in auxiliaries and prepositions, in notional words turning into semantically empty words. In agglutinative languages unchangeable monosemantic suffixes are glued to the preceding elements to express grammatical relations [(Turkish and Ugra-Finnish languages, Hungarian: kertemben – kertedben (in my garden – in your garden)}. In incorporative languages (the languages of Northern, Central and Southern American Indians, of the peoples inhabiting the coasts of the Arctic Ocean) whole syntactic complexes (phrases and sentences) function as words.

       English is prevalently analytical. Grammatical relations are expressed by such auxiliaries as shall, will, do, have, should, would, more, most. Analytical are degrees of comparison of polysyllabic adjectives, passive forms,  Future tense forms, continuous forms, perfect forms, The Conditional mood and The Suppositional mood forms.. Under certain contextual circumstances some verbs (go, get, come, stand) are coming to lose their meaning (He went mad, Let us get going, The house got burnt, I am coming to understand you, we are finished), turning into newer auxiliaries. Prepositions are also very important to express different relations within a sentence (to rely upon, to arrive at, to refer to, etc.). Still,    we find in ME the features of other morphological types (synthesis, agglutination, isolation and incorporation).

       Isolation in English is expressed by the formation of phrases on the model   NN (college education, a computer specialist, a burn center); the formation of composite words on the models NN, NA (finger-width, spine-chills, Shakespeare-mad, theatre-mad, chalk-white); conversion (NàA, NàV, Vàn: queer – a queer, patientàa patient, I bank no more, etc.); word order (Mother loves her children. There is no external difference between the subject and the object). Isolation is progressing in different genres.

     Synthesis is extremely important in English. Historically English had a synthetical structure. There were external and internal inflexions, sound alternation, etc. Much of it got preserved.  We do find inflexions, vocalic and consonantal interchange, suppletivity (knife – knives, man-men, go-went, I – me, mine, etc).The categories of number and case in  nouns, the category of degrees of comparison of monosyllabic adjectives, the present and the  past forms of regular verbs, participle I, participle II, the gerund are expressed inflexionally (a boy : : boys, a boy:: a boy’s hat; fine::finer::finest; goes, jumped; writing, written, writing).

     Agglutination is insignificant (oxen’s hooves, the children’s room, giantesses, etc). Incorporation, though being exotic, is progressing in different genres (newspapers, journals and magazines, fiction): a father- to – son talk, mouth – to – mouth propaganda,  a don’t care appearance, the do-nothing cops, a name-your –own – price contract, It was a from- the moment- I-saw – you – I – understood – that- there – could- be – nobody- but- you syndrome, etc.)..Incorporative complexes  are structurally  variable  (from a phrase to a supra-phrasal unit). They function  variously in a sentence, their most frequent function  is that of an attribute.

The Classifications of Morphemes

     A morpheme is the smallest meaningful ultimate unit which can’t be further analyzed into immediate constituents. Morphologically words are monomorphic and polymorphic (table; un ] [gent ] [ le ] [ man ] [ ly). A morpheme is an abstract unit comparable with a deep structure, which is unobservable. It realizes itself in allomorphs. The morpheme of plurality, for example, manifests itself in the following allomorphs: tables, crises, phenomena, children, knives, termini, formulae, sheer (a morphemic zero). When analyzing words morphologically, we roughly identify allomorphs with morphemes.

     Morphemes are classified according to different criteria. According to meaning, morphemes are divided into lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical ones (table; table ] [ s; teach ] [ er). According to position, morphemes are divided into opening, and closing, internal and external. According to function, morphemes are divided into root, derivational (affixal) and inflexional. According to self-dependence, morphemes are divided into free (lexical), which build up words, bound (inflexional and derivational), which never occur in isolation, and semi-bound (word-morphemes), which look like words (be, have, shall, will, should, would), but function as inflexions.