Lower” and “higher” predicative functions. The notion of “predicative load”

In the predicative system of syntactic paradigmatics, a kernel sentence undergoes transformations connected with the expression of predicative syntactic semantics. Predicative functions, expressed by primary sentence patterns, can be subdivided into “lower” and “higher”.

- Lower functions include the expression of such morphological categories as tense and aspect; these are of “factual”, “truth-stating” semantic character.

- Higher predicative functions are “evaluative”; they are expressed by syntactic categorial oppositions, which make up the following syntactic categories:

1) the category of communicative purpose, or rather two communicative sub-categories: the first sub-category, in which question is opposed to statement: Mary put the book on the table. – Did Mary put the book on the table?; and the second sub-category, in which statement is opposed to inducement: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary, put the book on the table;

2) the category of existence quality (affirmation and negation), in which affirmation is opposed to negation: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary didn’t put the book on the table;

3) the category of realization, in which unreality is opposed to reality: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary would have put the book on the table …;

4) the category of probability, in which probability is opposed to fact: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary might put he book on the table;

5) the category of modal identity, in which modal identity is opposed to fact: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary happened to put the book on the table;

6) the category of subjective modality, in which modal subject-action relation is opposed to fact: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary must put the book on the table;

7) the category of subject-action relations, in which specified actual subject-action relation is opposed to fact.: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary tried to put the book on the table;

8) the category of phase, in which phase of action is opposed to fact: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary started putting her book on the table (though I asked her not to);

9) the category of subject-object relations, in which passive action is opposed to active action: Mary put the book on the table. – The book was put on the table by Mary;

10) the category of informative perspective, in which specialized, reverse actual division is opposed to non-specialized, direct actual division: Mary put the book on the table. – It was Mary who put the book on the table;

11) the category of (emotional) intensity, in which emphasis (emotiveness) is opposed to emotional neutrality: Mary put the book on the table. – Mary did put the book on the table!

All these categories may or may not be represented in an utterance by their strong function members. The total volume of the strong members of predicative oppositions actually represented in a sentence can be defined as its “predicative load”. The kernel sentence, which is characterized in oppositional terms as non-interrogative, non-imperative, non-negative, non-modal-identifying, can be treated as predicatively “non-loaded” (has a “zero predicative load”); sentences with the most typical predicative loads of one or two positive feature expressed can be treated as “lightly” loaded; sentences with intricate predicative semantics of more than two positive predicative features (normally, no more than six) are “heavily” loaded. For example, the sentence Why on earth has Mary failed to put my book back on the table?! can be described as expressing positive predicative semantics of interrogations, subject-action relations and intensity; its predicative load is “heavy”.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11