.

Struinscture of sentence

Язык: русский
Формат: курсова
Тип документа: Word Doc
79 1582
Скачать документ

12

Contents

Introduction

1. The Sentence

2. Structure of English Sentence

3. Parts of the Sentence

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The theme of my course paper sounds as following: «Structure of Sentence
in English». Before beginning of investigation in our theme, I would
like to say some words dealt with the theme of my course paper.

When studying the structure of a unit, we find out its components,
mostly units of the next lower level, their arrangement and their
functions as parts of the unit. Many linguists think that the
investigation of the components and their arrangement suffices. Thus
Holliday writes: «Each unit is characterized by certain structures. The
structure is a syntagmatic framework of interrelated elements, which are
paradigmatically established in the systems of classes and stated as
values in the structure…. if a unit ‘word’ is established there will be
dimensions of word-classes the terms in which operate as values in
clause structures: given a verb /noun/ adverb system of word classes, it
might be that the structures ANV and NAV were admitted in the clause but
NVA excluded».

Standing on such ground, I would like to point out tasks and aims of my
work

1. The first task of my work is to give definition to term «sentence».

2. The second task is to describe the structure of sentences in English.

3. The last task of my work is to characterize types of parts of the
sentence.

In our opinion the practical significance of our work is hard to be
overvalued. This work reflects modern trends in linguistics and we hope
it would serve as a good manual for those who want to master modern
English language. Also this work can be used by teachers of English
language for teaching English grammar.

The present work might find a good way of implying in the following
spheres:

1. In High Schools and scientific circles of linguistic kind it can be
successfully used by teachers and philologists as modern material for
writing research works dealing with English verbs.

2. It can be used by teachers of schools, lyceums and colleges by
teachers of English as a practical manual for teaching English grammar.

3. It can be useful for everyone who wants to enlarge his/her knowledge
in English.

After having proved the actuality of our work, I would like to describe
the composition of it:

My work consists of four parts: introduction, the main part, conclusion
and bibliography. Within the introduction part we gave the brief
description of our course paper. The main part of the work includes
several items. There we discussed such problems as the types of
sentences in English, their construction, parts of the sentence, and
etc. In the conclusion to our work we tried to draw some results from
the scientific investigations made within the present course paper. In
bibliography part we mentioned some sources which were used while
compiling the present work. It includes linguistic books and articles
dealing with the theme, a number of used dictionaries and encyclopedias
and also some internet sources.

1. The Sentence

The notion of sentence has not so far received a satisfactory
definition, which would enable us by applying it in every particular
case to find out whether a certain linguistic unit was a sentence or
not.

Thus, for example, the question remains undecided whether such shop
notices as Book Shop and such book titles as English are sentences or
not. In favour of the view that they are sentences the following
consideration can be brought forward. The notice Book Shop and the title
English Grammar mean ‘This is a book shop’, ‘This is an English
Grammar’; the phrase is interpreted as the predicative of a sentence
whose subject and link verb have been omitted, that is, it is
apprehended as a unit of communication. According to the other possible
view, such notices as Book Shop and such titles as English Grammar are
not units of communication at all, but units of nomination, merely
appended to the object they denote. Since there is as yet no definition
of a sentence which would enable us to decide this question, it depends
on everyone’s subjective view which alternative he prefers. We will
prefer the view that such notices and book titles are not sentences but
rather nomination units.

We also mention here a special case. Some novels have titles formulated
as sentences, e. g. The Stars Look Down, by A. Cronin, or They Came to a
City, by J.B. Priestley. These are certainly sentences, but they are
used as nomination units, for instance, Have you read The Stars Look
Down? Do you like They Came to a City?

With the rise of modern ideas of paradigmatic syntax yet another problem
concerning definition of sentence has to be considered.

In paradigmatic syntax, such units as He has arrived, He has not
arrived, Has he arrived, He will arrive, He will not arrive, Will he
arrive, etc., are treated as different forms of the same sentence, just
as arrives, has arrived, will arrive etc., are different forms of the
same verb. We may call this view of the sentence the paradigmatic view.

Now from the point of view of communication, He has arrived and He has
not arrived are different sentences since they convey different
information (indeed, the meaning of the one flatly contradicts that of
the other).

2. Structure of English Sentence

When studying the structure of a unit, we find out its components,
mostly units of the next lower level, their arrangement and their
functions as parts of the unit.

Many linguists think that the investigation of the components and their
arrangement suffices. Thus Holliday writes: «Each unit is characterized
by certain structures. The structure is a syntagmatic framework of
interrelated elements, which are paradigmatically established in the
systems of classes and stated as values in the structure…. if a unit
‘word’ is established there will be dimensions of word-classes the terms
in which operate as values in clause structures: given a verb /noun/
adverb system of word classes, it might be that the structures ANV and
NAV were admitted in the clause but NVA excluded».

Now ‘a syntagmatic framework of interrelated elements’ may describe the
structure of a combination of units as well as that of a higher unit, a
combination of words as well as a sentence or a clause. The-important
properties that unite the interrelated elements into a higher unit of
which they become parts, the function of each element as part of the
whole, are not mentioned.

Similarly, Z. Harris thinks that the sentence The fear of war grew can
be described as TN1PN2V, where T stands for article, N for noun, P for
preposition and V for verb.

Such descriptions are feasible only if we proceed from the notion that
the difference between the morpheme, the word and the sentence is not
one of quality but rather of quantity and arrangement.

Z. Harris does not propose to describe the morpheme (as he calls it) is
as VC, where V stands for vowel and C for consonant. He does not do so
because he regards a morpheme not as an arrangement of phonemes, but as
a unit of a higher level possessing some quality (namely, meaning) not
found in any phoneme or combination of phonemes outside the morpheme.

Since we assume that not only the phoneme and the morpheme, but also the
word and the sentence are units of different levels, we cannot agree to
the view that a sentence is merely an arrangement of words.

In our opinion, The fear of war grew is a sentence not because it is
TNPNV, but because it has properties not inherent in words. It is a unit
of communication and as such it possesses predicativity and intonation.
On the other hand, TNPNV stands also for the fear of war growing, the
fear of war to grow, which are not sentences.

As to the arrangement of words in the sentence above, it fully depends
upon their combinability. We have TN and not NT because an article has
only right-hand connections with nouns. A prepositional phrase, on the
contrary has left-hand connections with nouns; that is why we have TNPN,
etc.

The development of transform grammar (Harris, Chomsky) and tagmemic
grammar (Pike) is to a great extent due to the realization of the fact
that «an attempt to describe grammatical structure in terms of morpheme
classes alone – even successively inclusive classes of classes – is
insufficient».

As defined by Harris, the approach of transformational grammar differs
from the above-described practice of characterizing «each linguistic
entity… as composed out of specified ordered entities at a lower level»
in presenting «each sentence as derived in accordance with a set of
transformational rules, from one or more (generally simpler) sentences,
i.e. from other entities of the same level. A language is then described
as consisting of specified sets of kernel sentences and a set of
transformations».

For English Harris lists seven principal patterns of kernel sentences:

1. NvV (v stands for a tense morpheme or an auxiliary verb, i.e. for a
(word-) morpheme containing the meanings of predicativity).

2. NvVPN

3. NvVN

4. N is N

5. N is A (A stands for adjective)

6. N is PN

7. N is D (D stands for adverb)

As one can easily see, the patterns above do not merely represent
arrangements of words, they are such arrangements which contain
predicativity – the most essential component of a sentence. Given the
proper intonation and replaced by words 4hat conform to the rules of
combinability, these patterns will become actual sentences. Viewed thus,
the patterns may be regarded as language models of speech sentences.

One should notice, however, that the difference between the patterns
above is not, in fact, a reflection of any sentence peculiarities. It
rather reflects the difference in the combinability of various
subclasses of verbs.

The difference between ‘NvV and ‘NvVN’, for instance, reflects the
different combinability of a non-transitive and a transitive verb (He is
sleeping: He is writing letters. Cf. to sleep, to write letters). The
difference between those two patterns and ‘N is A’ reflects the
difference in the combinability of notional verbs and link verbs, etc.

A similar list of patterns is recommended to language teachers under the
heading These are the basic patterns for all English sentences:

1. Birds fly.

2. Birds eat worms.

3. Birds are happy.

4. Birds are animals.

5. Birds give me happiness.

6. They made me president.

7. They made me happy.

The heading is certainly rather pretentious. The list does not include
sentences with zero predications or with partially implied predicativity
while it displays the combinability of various verb classes.

S. Potter reduces the number of kernel sentences to three: «All simple
sentences belong to one of three types:

A. The sun warms the earth;

B. The sun is a star; and

C. The sun is bright.»

And as a kind of argument he adds: «Word order is changeless in A and B,
but not in C. Even in sober prose a man may say Bright is the sun.»

The foregoing analysis of kernel sentences, from which most English
sentences can be obtained, shows that «every sentence can be analysed
into a centre, plus zero or more constructions… The centre is thus an
elementary sentence; adjoined constructions are in general modifiers». S
In other words, the essential structure constituting a sentence is the
predication; all other words are added to it in accordance with their
combinability. This is the case in an overwhelming majority of English
sentences. Here are some figures based on the investigation of modern
American non-fiction.

NoPattern

Frequency of occurrence

(per cent)as sole patternin combination1.

2.

3.

4.

5.Subject + verb

Babies cry.

Subject + verb + object

Girls like clothes.

Subject + verb + predicative

Dictionaries are books.

Dictionaries are useful.

Structural subjects + verb +

+ notional subject

There is evidence.

It is easyo learn knitting.

Minor patterns

Are you sure?

Whom did you invite?

Brush your teeth. What a day2.51

32.9

20.8

4.3

7.95.3

5.9

6.4

0.9

Some analogy can be drawn between the structure of a word and the
structure of a sentence.

The morphemes of a word are formally united by stress. The words of a
sentence are formally united by intonation.

The centre of a word is the root. The centre of a sentence is the
predication.

Some words have no other morphemes but the root (ink, too, but). Some
sentences have no other words but those of the predication (Birds fly.
It rains. Begin.).

Words may have some morphemes besides the root (unbearable). Sentences
may have some words besides the predication (Yesterday it rained
heavily.).

Sometimes a word is made of a morpheme that is usually not a root (ism).
Sometimes sentences are made of words that are usually not predications
(Heavy rain).

Words may have two or more roots (blue-eyed, merry-go-round). Sentences
may have two or more predications (He asked me if I knew where she
lived.).

The roots may be co-ordinated or subordinated (Anglo-Saxon, blue-bell).
The predications may be co-ordinated and subordinated (She spoke and he
listened. He saw Sam did not believe).

The roots may be connected directly (footpath) or indirectly, with the
help of some morpheme salesman. The predications may be connected
directly (7 think he knows) or indirectly, with the help of some word
(The day passed as others had-passed.).

The demarcation line between a word with more than one root and a
combination of words is often very vague (cf. blackboard and black
board, brother-in-law and brother in arms). The demarcation line between
a sentence with more than one predication and a combination of sentences
is often very vague.

Cf. She’d only to cross the pavement. But still she waited. (Mansfield).

As we know, a predication in English is usually a combination of two
words (or word-morphemes) united by predicativity, or, in other words, a
predicative combination of words. Apart from that the words of a
predication do not differ from other’ words in conforming to the general
rules of. Combinability. The rules of grammatical combinability do not
admit of *boys speaks or *he am. The combination *the fish barked is
strange as far as lexical combinability is concerned, etc.

All the other words of a sentence are added to those of the predication
in accordance with their combinability to make the communication as
complete as the speaker wishes. The predication Boys play can make a
sentence by itself. But the sentence can be extended by realizing the
combinability of the noun boys and the verb play into the three noisy
boys play boisterously upstairs. We can develop the sentence into a
still more extended one. But however extended the sentence is it does
not lose its integrity. Every word in it is not just a word, it becomes
part of the sentence and must be evaluated in its relation to other
parts and to the whole sentence much in the same way as a morpheme in a
word is not just a morpheme, but the root of a word or a prefix, or a
suffix, or an inflection.

Depending on their relation to the members of the predication the words
of a sentence usually fall into two groups – the group of the subject
and the group of the predicate.

Sometimes there is a third group, of parenthetical words, which mostly
belongs to the sentence as a whole. In the sentence below the subject
group is separated from the predicate group by the parenthetical group.

That last thing of yours, dear Flora, was really remarkable.

As already mentioned, the distribution and the function of a
word-combination in a sentence are usually determined by its head-word:
by the noun in noun word-combinations, by the verb in verb
word-combinations, etc.

The adjuncts of word-combinations in the sentence are added to their
head-words in accordance with their combinability, to develop the
sentence, to form its secondary parts which may be classified with
regard to their head-words.

All the adjuncts of noun word-combinations in the sentence can be united
under one name, attributes. All the adjuncts of verb (finite or
non-finite) word-combinations may be termed complements. In the sentence
below, the attributes are spaced out and the complements are in heavy
type.

He often took Inene to the theatre. Instinctively choosing the modern
Society plays with the modern Society conjugal problems. (Galsworthy).

The adjuncts of all other word-combinations in the sentence may be
called extensions. In the sentences below the extensions are spaced out.

You will never be free from dozing and dreams. (Shaw).

She was ever silent, passive, gracefully averse. (Gals-worthy).

The distribution of semi-notional words in the sentence is determined by
their functions – to connect notional words or to specify them.
Accordingly they will be called connectives or specifies. Conjunctions
and prepositions are typical connectives. Particles are typical
specifies.

3. Parts of the Sentence

Traditionally the subject and the predicate are regarded as the primary
or principal parts of the sentence and the attribute, the object and the
adverbial modifier – as the secondary parts of the sentence. This
opposition primary – secondary is justified by the difference in
function. While the subject and the predicate make the predication and
thus constitute the sentence, the secondary parts serve to expand it by
being added to the words of the predication in accordance with their
combinability as words. Thus the sentence combines syntactical and
morphological relations, which, in our opinion, it is necessary to
discriminate more rigorously than it is usually done.

The traditional classification of the parts of the sentence is open to
criticism from the point of view of consistency.

The name attribute really shows the subordinate nature of the part of
the sentence it denotes. The double term adverbial modifier shows not
only the secondary character of the corresponding part of the sentence
(modifier), but also refers to a certain part of speech (adverbial). The
term object does not indicate subordination, it only refers to the
content.

Many words of a sentence, such as prepositions, conjunctions, articles,
particles, parenthetical words, are traditionally – not considered as
parts of the sentence, even as tertiary ones But as we know, the parts
of a unit are units of the next lower level, in our case words. The
function of each word in the sentence is its relation to the other words
and to the sentence as a whole. So each word is as much a part of the
sentence as each morpheme is a part of the word (its root, prefix,
inflexion, etc.)

The infinitive to find in the sentence Your task is to find it is
regarded as a part of the predicate and is named predicative. The same
infinitive in the sentence Jane is to find it is also considered as a
part of the predicate, but it is not called ‘predicative’. It has no
name at all, as well as the infinitives in We ought to find it., We
cannot find it, etc.

When a noun or an adjective is attached to a finite link-verb it is
called a ‘predicative’ (He is a, teacher), but when it is attached to a
overbid link-verb (To be a teacher is my dream), it has no name. With
objects it is different. The noun letter is an object both in He writes
a letter and in He wants-to write a letter.

Many of these inconsistencies can be done away with if we discriminate
between the syntactical and the morphological relations within the
sentence.

As already noted, only the words containing the structural meanings of
predicativity are regarded as the structural subject and predicate. The
chief criterion for the division of all the other words of a sentence
into parts of the sentence is their combinability. Thus combinability is
the property that correlates parts of speech and parts of the sentence
as well as the functions of notional and semi-notional words.

Those notional words in a sentence which are adjuncts of certain
head-words will be divided in accordance with their head-words into
attributes, complements and extensions.

Those semi-notional words which serve to connect two words or clauses
(prepositions, conjunctions) will be regarded as a separate part of the
sentence, connectives.

Those semi-notional words that are used to specify various words or word
combinations (articles, particles) will be called specifies.

Finally, words in a sentence, with zero connections, referring to the
sentence and known as parenthetical elements, are a distinct part of the
sentence.

The Subject

The subject is the independent member of a two-member predication,
containing the person component of predicativity. Both members of the
predication he sleeps contain the meaning of ‘person’. But in sleeps
this meaning depends on that of he and is due to grammatical
combinability. This accounts for the fact that sleeps cannot make a
sentence alone, though it contains all the components of predicativity.
Sleeps likewise depends on he as far as the meaning of ‘number’ is
concerned. The meanings of ‘person’ and ‘number’ in h? are
lexico-grammatical and independent.

The subject is generally defined as a word or a group of words denoting
the thing we speak about. This traditional definition is logical rather
than grammatical. In the sentence This pretty girl is my sister’s friend
the definition can be applied to the whole group This pretty girl, to
say nothing of the fact that «the thing we speak about» is so vague that
it practically covers any part of the sentence expressing substantives.

The subject of a simple sentence can be a word, a syntactical
word-morpheme or a complex.

As a word it can belong to different parts of speech, but it is mostly a
noun or a pro-noun.

E.g. Fame is the thirst of youth. (Byron).

Nothing endures but personal qualities. (Whitman). To see is to believe.

A word used as a subject combines the lexical meaning with the
structural meaning of ‘person’. So it is at the same time the structural
and the notional subject.

The syntactical word-morphemes there and it are only structural subjects
because as word-morphemes they have no lexical meaning. But they are
usually correlated with some words or complexes in the sentence which
are regarded as notional subjects. In such cases it and there are also
called anticipatory or introductory subjects.

In There is somebody in the room the notional subject is somebody. In It
requires no small talents to be a bore (Scott) the notional subject is
to be a bore. In It is raining there is no notional subject and it is
not anticipatory. In It is necessary for him to come the notional
subject is the complex for him to come. But a complex may also be used
as the only subject.

E.g. For him to come would be fatal.

We may speak of a secondary subject within a complex. In the following
sentence it is the noun head.

Several thousand people went to see the headless statue ~ yesterday
before it was removed for a new head to be cast from the original
plaster moulds. (Daily Worker).

The syntactical word-morphemes there and it may also function as
secondary subjects.

It being cold, we put on our coats. I knew of there being no one to help
him.

The analysis of sentences like He was seen to enter the house is a point
at issue. Traditionally the infinitive is said to form part of the
‘complex subject’ (He…to enter). B.A. Ilyish maintains that though
satisfactory from the logical point of view, this interpretation seems
to be artificial grammatically, this splitting of the subject being
alien to English. Accordingly B.A. Ilyish suggests that only he should
be treated as the subject of the sentence, whereas was seen to enter
represents a peculiar type of compound predicate.

The traditional analysis, however, seems preferable, for it admits of
treating the sentence as a passive transform of They saw him enter the
house with the ‘complex object’ him enter becoming a ‘complex subject’
he… to enter. As to the splitting of the subject, it is another device
to bring the structural parts of the subject and predicate together (he
was), which is so typical of English.

Some authors as, for example, A. Smirnitsky, M. Ganshina, and N.
Vasilevskaya speak of definite-personal, indefinite-personal and
impersonal sentences in Modern English. We see no syntactical ground
whatever for this classification since definite-personal,
indefinite-personal, etc. sentences have no structural peculiarities
typical of these classes. It is a semantical classification of subjects,
not sentences.

If we compare the subject in English with that of Russian we shall find
a considerable difference between them.

1. In Modern Russian the subject is as a rule characterized by a
distinct morphological feature – the nominative case, whereas in English
it is for the most part (unless it is expressed by a personal pronoun or
the pronoun who in the nominative case) indicated by the position it
occupies in the sentence.

2. In Modern Russian the subject is much less obligatory as a part of
the sentence than in English. One-member sentences are numerous and of
various types, among them sentences like nude flume. In English a finite
verb (barring the ‘imperative mood’ finites) does not, as a rule, make a
sentence without a subject.

3. In English the subject may be a syntactical word-morpheme, a gerund
or a complex, which is, naturally, alien to Russian.

The Predicate

The predicate is the member of a predication containing the mood and
tense (or only mood) components of predicativity.

E. g. This dictionary employs a pronunciation that is easy to learn.
(Thorndike).

I was thinking that Dinny has probably had no lunch. (Galsworthy).

I should hate to make you cry. (lb.).

The predicate can be a word or a syntactical word-morpheme. When it is a
notional word, it is not only the structural but the notional predicate
as well.

E. g. A picture often shows the meaning of a word more clearly than a
description. (Witty).

When the predicate is a semi-notional verb or a syntactical
word-morpheme, it is only a structural predicate and is usually
connected with a notional word which makes the notional predicate.

E.g. He was strong enough for that. (Galsworthy). We can assist our
oppressed brothers in South Africa in their struggle for freedom. (Daily
Worker). Does anyone know of that but me? (Galsworthy).

Syntactically strong, assist and know are complements to the
corresponding verbs.

Similarly, if we agree with A.I. Smirnitsky that have in I have friends
is a semi-notional verb, we may consider friends as the notional
predicate. But syntactically friends is a complement to the verb have.

As we have seen, predicates may be divided morphologically into words
and word-morphemes, and semantically intonational, semi-notional and
lexically empty (structural).

What is traditionally called a predicate is really the combination of
the structural and the notional predicate. If we had a name for the
combination, that would enable us to make the traditional analysis^ Let
us then call the combination a communicative predicate. We may say then
that communicative predicates are in accordance with their structure
divided into ‘simple’ (consisting of one word) and ‘compound’ (of more
than one word). According to their morphological composition they are
divided into ‘verbal’ (must see’, is to believe) and ‘nominal’ (is a
student, became angry). As we see, the latter division depends on the
complements as well as the division into process and qualifying
predicates, which will be discussed in the corresponding chapter

When comparing the predicates in English and in Russian, we must first
of all note the absence of syntactical word-morphemes used as predicates
and the scarcity of morphological word-morphemes in Russian. So the
division into structural and notional (parts of) predicates is not so
essential in Russian as it is in English.

Secondly, there are many more sentences without finite verbs in Russian
than in English. Он студент. Она больна. Ему холодно.

Thirdly, a Russian predication contains a predicate without a subject
much more often than in English.

Complements

The verb in the sentence forms the greatest number of word-combinations.
The adjuncts of all these combinations are united by the term
complements. But the complements of a verb are so numerous and
variegated that it is feasible to subdivide them into several groups
correlated with the subclasses of verbs. As we know, verbs divide into
notional, semi-notional and structural ones. We shall call the adjuncts
of the latter two groups predicative complements (predicatives).
Notional verbs are subdivided into objective and subjective. The common
adjuncts of both groups will be termed adverbial complements
(adverbials), those of objective verbs alone – objective complements
(objects).

Conclusion

In the conclusion of my work, I would like to say some words according
the done investigation. The main research was written in the main part
of my course paper. So here I’ll give content of it with the description
of question discussed in each paragraph.

The main part of my work consists of following items:

· «The Sentence». Here I gave the definition to the term sentence.

· «Structure of English Sentence», in this paragraph I described the
structure of English sentence.

· In the next paragraph «Parts of the Sentence» I described main parts
of the sentence (subject and predicate), and secondary parts of the
sentence.

Standing on such ground I will add that investigation in the questions
dealt sentences in English and their types is not finished yet, so we
will continue it while writing our qualification work.

I hope that my course paper will arise the sincere interest of students
and teachers to the problem of adjectives in contemporary English.

Bibliography

1. B. Ilyish, The Structure of Modern English.

2. V.N. Zhigadlo, I.P. Ivanova, L.L. Iofik.» Modern English language»
(Theoretical course grammar) Moscow, 1956 y.

3. Gordon E.M. The Use of adjectives in modern English.

4. М.М. Галииская. «Иностранные языки в высшей школе», вып. 3, М., 1964.

5. Г.Н. Воронцова. Очерки по грамматике английского языка. М., 1960

6. O. Jespersen. Essentials of English Grammar. N.Y., 1938

7. Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В.В., Почепцов Г.Г. Теоретическая грамматика
современного английского языка. – М., 1981. – 285 c.

8. Ch. Barber. Linguistic change in Present-Day English. Edinburgh, 1964

9. The Structure of American English. New York, 1958.

10. World Book Encyclopedia Vol.1 NY. 1993 pp.298–299

11. Internet http://madrasati2010.bravehost.com/adj.htm

12. Internet http://www.vestnik.vsu.ru

13. Internet:http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/verbs/theory.htm

14. Inbternet:http://www.englishlanguage.ru/main/verbs_mood.htm

Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter

Похожие документы
Обсуждение

Ответить

Курсовые, Дипломы, Рефераты на заказ в кратчайшие сроки
Заказать реферат!
UkrReferat.com. Всі права захищені. 2000-2020