Grammar in the systemic conception of language

LECTURE 1

1. The definition of language. The distinction between language and speech. Language as a semiotic system: its functions, elements and structure. Lingual elements (units) as signs. Segmental and supra-segmental lingual units.
2. The levels оf lingual units, their structural and functional features. Hierarchical relations between units of different levels. Language and speech levels. Primary and secondary levels.
3. General principles of grammatical analysis.
4. The systemic character of grammar. Morphology and syntax - the two main sections of grammar. The main unit of morphology. Theoretical and practical grammar. Other types of grammar (indep. work, addit. inf-n).
5. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations in grammar.
6. The plane of content and the plane of expression; synonymy and homonymy in grammar.
7. The notions of diachrony and synchrony; diachronic and synchronic relations in grammar.
8. Grammatical meaning. Grammatical category. Grammatical form. (+definitions)
9. From the history of grammar, morphology in particular (indep. work, addit. inf-n)

Key terms: language, speech, sign, lingual unit, system, subsystem, systemic approach, segmental lingual units, supra-segmental lingual units, hierarchy, hierarchical (hierarchic) relations, phoneme, morpheme, word (lexeme), word-combination (phraseme), denoteme, sentence (proposeme), supra-sentential construction (supra-phrasal unity, dicteme), nomination, predication, corteme, signeme, plane of content, plane of expression, synonymous relations (synonymy), homonymous relations (homonymy), paradigm, paradigmatic relations, syntagma, syntagmatic relations, synchrony, synchronic relations, diachrony, diachronic relations

1. Language is a multifaceted, complex phenomenon which can be studied and described from various points of view: as a psychological or cognitive phenomenon, as a social phenomenon, from the point of view of its historic changes, etc. But first and foremost language is treated as a semiotic system (system of signs). A system is a structured set of elements united by a common function. Language is a system of specific interconnected and interdependent lingual signs united by their common function of forming, storing and exchanging ideas in the process of human intercourse.

A systemic approach prevails in many spheres of linguistics, and it is particularly relevant and important in the sphere of grammar. The foundations of systemic language description were formulated at the turn of the 20th century in the works of many linguists, among them the Russian linguists I. A. Baudoin de Courtenay, A. A. Potebnya and others. The originator of the systemic approach in linguistics is considered to be a Swiss scholar Ferdinand de Saussure. He was the first to divide the phenomenon of language in general into two sides: an ‘executive’ side (‘parole’), concerned with the production, transmission, and reception of speech, and an underlying language system (‘langue’). This is one of the basic postulates of modern systemic linguistics, according to which language in general comprises two aspects: the system of special lingual units, language proper, and the use of the lingual units, speech proper. In other words 1) language in the narrow sense of the term is a system of means of expression, while speech is the manifestation of the system of language in the process of intercourse. 2) The system of language comprises the lingual units and the rules of their use, while speech includes the act of producing utterances and the result of it (the text). 3) Speech is individual, personal while language is common for all individuals. 4) Language is abstract and speech is concrete. 5) Language is stable, less changeable while speech tends to changes. 6) Language is a closed system, its units are limited while speech tends to openness and infinity (безкінечність).

Other terms are used in linguistics by different authors to denote the two basic aspects of language (which, however, do not always coincide with the ‘language – speech’ dichotomy): ‘language competence’ and ‘language performance’ (N. Chomsky), ‘linguistic schema’ – ‘linguistic usage’, ‘linguistic system’ – ‘linguistic process’ (‘text’) (L. Hjelmslev), ‘code’ – ‘message’ (R. Jacobson), etc. Still, the terms ‘language’ and ‘speech’ are the most widely used.

Language is opposed to speech and accordingly language units are opposed to speech units. The language unit phoneme is opposed to the speech unit – sound: phoneme /s/ can sound differently in speech - /s/ and /z/. The sentence is opposed to the utterance; the text is opposed to the discourse.

Ferdinand de Saussure was also among the first scholars who defined lingual units as specific signs - bilateral (two-sided) units that have both form and meaning. Ferdinand de Saussure spoke about a link between a phonetic ‘signifier’ (те, шо позначає), and a ‘signified’ (позначуване). In the system of language a lingual sign has only a potential meaning; in speech, in the process of communication, this potential meaning is “actualized”, connected with a particular referent. That is why a lingual sign is graphically presented in the form of a triangle, including the material form, the meaning and the referent. For example, the word ‘elephant’ is a sign, consisting of a signifier, or form – the sequence of phonemes (or, in written presentation, of letters), and a signified, or meaning – the image of the animal in our mind; the referent is the ‘real’ animal in the outside world, which may or may not be physically present.

Referent

Elephant

Form meaning

The units of language are divided into two types: segmental and supra-segmental. Segmental lingual units consist of phonemes, which are the smallest material segments of the language; segmental units form different strings of phonemes (morphemes, words, sentences, etc.). Supra-segmental lingual units do not exist by themselves, their forms are realized together with the forms of segmental units; nevertheless, they render meanings of various kinds, including grammatical meanings; they are: intonation c΄ontours, accents, pauses, patterns of word-order, etc.

Cf., the change of word-order and intonation pattern in the following examples: He is at home (statement). – He is at home? (question). Supra-segmental lingual units form the secondary line of speech, accompanying its primary phonemic line.

2. Segmental lingual units form a hierarchy of levels. The term ‘hierarchy’ denotes a structure in which the units of any higher level are formed by the units of the lower level; the units of each level are characterized by their own specific functional features and cannot be seen only as a mechanical composition of the lower level units.

The linguists distinguish basic and nonbasic (or primary and secondary) levels. This distinction depends on whether a level has got its own unit or not. If a level has its own unit then this level is qualified as basic or primary. If a level doesn't have a unit of its own then it is a non - basic or secondary. Thus the number of levels entirely depend on the number of language (or speech) units. There's a number of conceptions on this issue: some scientists say that there are four units (phoneme/phone; morpheme/morph; lexeme/lex and sentence), others think that there are five units like phonemes, morphemes, lexemes, word -combinations (phrases) and sentences and still others maintain that besides the mentioned ones there are paragraphs, utterances and texts.

As one can see there's no unity in the number of language and speech units. The most wide - spread opinion is that there are five language (speech) units and respectively there are five language (speech) levels, they are: phonetic/phonological; morphological; lexicological, syntax - minor and syntax - major. Their units are as follows:

1. phonological/phonetical level: phoneme/phone

2. morphological level: morpheme/morph

3. lexicological level: lexeme/lex

4. Syntax - minor: sentence

5. Syntax - major: text

Thus, non - basic or secondary level is one that has no unit of its own. Stylistics can be said to be non-basic (secondary) because this level has no its own unit. In order to achieve its aim it makes wide use of the units of the primary (basic) levels. The stylistics studies the expressive means and stylistic devices of languages. According to I.R. Galperin "The expressive means of a language are those phonetic means, morphological forms, means of word -building, and lexical, phraseological and syntactical form, all of which function in the language for emotional or logical intensification of the utterance. These intensifying forms of the language have been fixed in grammars, dictionaries".

The 1^st level. The lowest level in the hierarchy of levels has two special terms: phonology and phonetics. Phonology is the level that deals with language units and phonetics is the level that deals with speech units. The lowest level deals with language and speech units which are the smallest and meaningless. So, the smallest meaningless unit of language is called phoneme; the smallest meaningless unit of speech is called phone. Phonemes differentiate the meanings of morphemes and words. E.g.: man – men, там – дам. The language units are abstract and limited in number which means that phonemes are abstract and that they are of definite number in languages. The speech units are concrete, changeable and actually endless. This means that language units (phonemes) are represented in speech differently which depends on the person that pronounces them and on the combinability of the phoneme. Phonemes when pronounced in concrete speech vary from person to person, according to how he has got used to pronounce this or that sound. In linguistic theory it is explained by the term "idiolect" that is, individual dialect. Besides, there may be positional changes (combinability): depending on the sounds that precede and follow the sound, the pronunciation of it may be different, compare: low and battle. The sound "1" will be pronounced differently in these two words because the letter “l" in the first word is placed in the initial position and in the second word it stands after the letter "t". So we face "light" (in the first word) and "dark" version (in the second case). These alternants are said to be in the complimentary distribution and they are called allophones (variants, options or alternants) of one phoneme. Thus allophone is a variant of a phoneme.

The 2nd level in the hierarchy of strata is called morphological. There's only one term for both language and speech but the units have different terms: morpheme for language and morph for speech. This level deals with units that are also smallest but in this case they are meaningful. So the smallest meaningful unit of language is called a morpheme and the smallest meaningful unit of speech is called a morph. The shortest morpheme can consist of one phoneme, e.g.: step-s; -s renders the meaning of the 3rd person singular form of the verb, or, the plural form of the noun. The meaning of the morpheme is abstract and significative: it does not name the referent, but only signifies it. The morphs that have different forms, but identical (similar) meanings are united into one morpheme and called "allomorphs". The morpheme of the past tense has at least three allomorphs, they are. /t/, /d/, /id/ - Examples: worked, phoned and wanted. The variant of the morpheme depends on the preceding sound in the word.

The 3rd level is lexicological which deals with words. Word may be a common term for language and speech units. Some linguists offer specific terms for language and speech: " lexeme" for language and “lex ” for speech. The correlation between "lexeme" and "lex" is the same as it is between “phoneme” and “phone” and “morpheme” and “morph”. “Lexeme” is a language unit which has a nominative function. "Lex" is a speech unit which also has a nominative function. Thus, both lexeme and lex nominate something or name things, actions phenomena, quality, quantity and so on. Examples: tree, pen, sky, red, worker, friendship, ungentlemanly and so on. An abstract lexeme " table" of language is used in speech as lex with concrete meaning of " writing table ", " dinner table ", " round table ", " square table ", and so on. There may be "allolexes" like allophones and allomorphs. Allolexes are lexes that have identical or similar meanings but different forms, compare: start, commence, begin.

To avoid confusion between "morpheme" and "lexemes" it is very important to remember that morphemes are structural units while lexemes are communicative units: morpheme are built of phonemes and they are used to build words - lexemes. Lexemes take an immediate part in shaping the thoughts, that is, in building sentences. Besides, lexemes may consist of one or more morphemes. The lexeme " tree " consists of one morpheme while the lexeme " ungentlemanly " consists of four morphemes: un - gentle - man - ly. Lexemes or words, nominative lingual units, express direct, nominative meanings: they name, or nominate various referents. The words consist of morphemes, and the shortest word can include only one morpheme, e.g.: cat.

The 4th level is formed by word-combinations, or phrasemes, the combinations of two or more notional words, which represent complex nominations of various referents (things, actions, qualities, and even situations) in a sentence, e.g.: a beautiful girl, their sudden departure. In a more advanced treatment, phrases along with separate words can be seen as the constituents of sentences, or notional parts of the sentence, which make the fourth language level and can be called “denotemes”.

The 5th level is the level of sentences, or proposemes, lingual units which name certain situations, or events, and at the same time express predication, i.e. they show the relations of the event named to reality - whether the event is real or unreal, desirable or obligatory, stated as a fact or asked about, affirmed or negated, etc., e.g.: Their departure was sudden (a real event, which took place in the past, stated as a fact, etc.). Thus, the sentence is often defined as a predicative lingual unit. The minimal sentence can consist of just one word, e.g.: Fire!

The term "Syntax - minor" is common one for both language and speech levels and their unit "sentence" is also one common term for language and speech units. Example: "An idea of writing a letter” on the abstract language level can have its concrete representation in speech: John writes a letter. A letter is written by John.

The 6th level is formed by sentences in a text or in actual speech. Textual units are traditionally called supra-phrasal unities (надфразові єдності); we will call such supra-sentential constructions, which are produced in speech, «dictemes» (from Latin ‘dicto’ ‘I speak’). Dictemes are characterized by a number of features, the main one of which is the unity of topic. As with all lingual units, dictemes may be reducаble to one unit of the lower level; e.g., the text of an advertisement slogan can consist of just one sentence: Just do it!; or, a paragraph in a written text can be formed by a single independent sentence, being topically significant: …began…, began long ago…

"Syntax- major" represents both language and speech levels due to the absence of separate term as well as "text" is used homogeneously for both language and speech units.

The language and speech units are interconnected and interdependent. This can easily be proved by the fact that the units of lower level are used to make up or to build the units of the next higher level: phones are used as building material for morphs, and morphs are used to build lexes and the latter are used to construct sentences. Besides, the homonyms that appear in the phonetical level can be explained on the following higher level, compare: - "er" is a homonymous morph. In order to find out in which meaning it is used we’ll have to use it on the lexicological level; if it is added to verbs like "teacher", "worker" then it will have one meaning but if we use it with adjectives like “higher”, “lower” it will have another meaning.

3. According to the Bible: ‘In the beginning was the Word’. In fact, the word is considered to be the central (but not the only) linguistic unit (одиниця) of language. Linguistic units (or in other words – signs) can go into three types of relations:

a) The relation between a unit and an object in the world around us (objective reality). E.g. the word ‘table’ refers to a definite piece of furniture. It may be not only an object but a process, state, quality, etc.

This type of meaning is called referential meaning of a unit. It is such a language level as semantics which studies the referential meaning of units.

b) The relation between a unit and other units (inner relations between units). No unit can be used independently; it serves as an element in the system of other units. This kind of meaning is called syntactic. Formal relation of units to one another is studied by syntactics (or syntax).

c) The relation between a unit and a person who uses it. When we are saying something, we usually have some purpose in mind. We use the language as an instrument for our purpose (e.g.), so one and the same word or sentence may acquire different meanings in communication. This type of meaning is called pragmatic. The study of the relationship between linguistic units and the users of those units is done by pragmatics.

Thus there are three models of linguistic description: semantic, syntactic and pragmatic (Students are students).

The first part of the XXth century can be characterized by a formal approach to the language study. Only inner (syntactic) relations between linguistic units served the basis for linguistic analysis while the reference of words to the objective reality and language users were actually not considered. Later, semantic language analysis came into use. However, it was surely not enough for a detailed language study. We discover our identity as individuals and social beings when we acquire it during childhood. It serves as a means of cognition and communication: it enables us to think for ourselves and to cooperate with other people in our community. Therefore, the pragmatic side of the language should not be ignored either. Functional approach in language analysis deals with the language ‘in action’. Naturally, in order to get a broad description of the language, all the three approaches must be combined.

4. The term “grammar” goes back to a Greek word that may be translated as the “art of writing”. But later this word acquired a much wider sense and came to embrace the whole study of language. Now it is often used as the synonym of linguistics. A question comes immediately to mind: what does this study involve?

The study of grammar may be either practical (practical grammar), which describes grammar as a set of rules and regulations to follow, or theoretical (theoretical grammar), aiming at the explanation of how and why the grammatical system works.

Each sub-system distinguishes not only its own set of elements, but its own structural organization. For example, within the grammatical system we single out parts of speech and sentence patterns. The parts of speech are further subdivided into nouns, verbs, adjective, adverbs, functional parts of speech; this subdivision of grammar is known as morphology. Morphology deals with the internal structure of words, peculiarities of their grammatical categories and their semantics while traditional syntax deals with the rules governing combination of words in sentences (and texts in modern linguistics). So, the main objectives of Morphologyare:– to study the internal structure of the word and means of word form building inrelation to the abstract meanings they express;– to study general grammatical characteristics of words which enable them tomake up sentence;– to classify words into a few basic classes.

Sentences are further subdivided into simple and composite: composite sentences are subdivided into complex and compound, etc.; this subdivision of grammar is known as syntax.

The grammatical signals have a meaning of their own independent of the meaning of the notional words. This can be illustrated by the following sentence with nonsensical words: Woggles ugged diggles. According to Ch. Fries, the morphological and the syntactic signals in the given sentence make us understand that “several actors acted upon some objects”. This sentence which is a syntactic signal, makes the listener understand it as a declarative sentence whose grammatical meaning is actor - action - thing acted upon. One can easily change (transform) the sentence into the singular (A woggle ugged a diggle.), negative (A woggle did not ugg a diggle.), or interrogative (Did a woggle ugg a diggle?) All these operations are grammatical. Then what is the main issue of grammar - structure.

Let us assume, for example, a situation in which a man, a boy, some money, the man the giver, the boy the receiver, the time of the transaction - yesterday... are involved

Any of the units man, boy, money, an act and time of giving could appear in the linguistic structure as subject.

The man gave the boy the money yesterday.

The boy was given the money by the man yesterday.

The money was given the boy by the man yesterday.

The giving of the money to the boy by the man occurred yesterday.

Yesterday was the time of the giving of the money to the boy by the man.

"Subject" then is a formal linguistic structural matter.

The whole complex of linguistic means used for grouping words into utterances is called a grammatical structure of the language. All the means which are used to group words into the sentence exist as a certain system; they are interconnected and interdependent. They constitute the sentence structure. All the words of a language fall, as we stated above, under notional and functional words.

Notional words are divided into four classes in accord with the position in which they stand in a sentence. Notional words as positional classes are generally represented by the following symbols: N, V, A, D.

The man landed the jet plane safely

N V A N D

These classes are called grammatical word classes. Thus, in any language there are certain classes of words which have their own positions in sentences. They may also be considered to be grammatical means of a language.

So we come to a conclusion that the basic means of the grammatical structure of a language are: a) sentence structure; b) grammatical word classes.

We can therefore say that the word is the main unit of morphology.

It is difficult to arrive at a one-sentence definition of such a complex linguistic unit as the word. First of all, it is the main expressive unit of human language which ensures the thought-forming function of the language. It is also the basic nominative unit of language with the help of which the naming function of language is realized. As any linguistic sign the word is a level unit. In the structure of language it belongs to the upper stage of the morphological level. It is a unit of the sphere of ‘language’ and it exists only through its speech actualization. One of the most characteristic features of the word is its indivisibility. As any other linguistic unit the word is a bilateral entity. It unites a concept (поняття, ідея) and a sound image and thus has two sides – the content and expression sides (план змісту та план вислову): concept and sound form.

In the history of linguistics, there were attempts to separate grammar, as the description of linguistic forms and structures, from semantics, the description of meanings. This is absolutely impossible, since grammatical forms and regularities are meaningful, though, of course, the quality of grammatical meanings is different from the quality of lexical meanings. Grammatical meanings are connected with the most abstract and general parts of information, rendered by lingual units. For example, the word hands, apart from its immediate lexical meaning (the referent of the word), bears some grammatical meanings, in particular, ‘thingness’ (the categorical grammatical meaning of nouns), ‘plurality’ (more than one objects are denoted) and others.

According to the morphological classification English is one of the flexional languages. But the flexional languages fall under synthetical and analytical ones. The synthetical-flexional languages are rich in grammatical inflections and the words in sentences are mostly connected with each-other by means of these inflections though functional words and other grammatical means also participate in this. But the grammatical inflections are of primary importance. The slavonic languages (Russian, Ukraine…) are of this type. The flectional-analytical languages like English and French in order to connect words to sentences make wide use of the order of words and functional words due to the limited number of grammatical flexions. The grammatical means - order of words – is of primary importance for this type of languages.

Synthetic languages are defined as ones of ‘ internal ’ grammar of the word – most of grammatical meanings and grammatical relations of words are expressed with the help of inflexions (Ukrainian - зроблю, Russian, Latin, etc). Analytical languages are those of ‘ external ’ grammar because most grammatical meanings and grammatical forms are expressed with the help of words (will do). However, we cannot speak of languages as purely synthetic or analytic – the English language (Modern English) possesses analytical forms as prevailing, while in the Ukrainian language synthetic devices are dominant. In the process of time English has become more analytical as compared to Old English. Analytical changes in Modern English (especially American) are still under way.

5. Crucial for the systemic description of language are the two fundamental types of relations between lingual units: paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. The term “ syntagmatic relations” (SR) is derived from the word “syntagma”, i.e. a linear combination of units of the same level. Lingual units form various lingual strings, sequences, or constructions; in other words, lingual units co-occur in the same actual sequences. E.g.: He started laughing. In this sentence we can point out а) syntagmatic, or linear relations between the sounds [h+i:] = [hi:]; [s+t+a:+t+i+d] = [sta:tid]; etc.; в) the morphemes are also connected syntagmatically within words: start+ed = started; laugh+ing = laughing; с) the combinations of words form syntagmas within phrases and sentences: He + started; started + laughing. е) Besides, the sentence can be connected with other sentences by syntagmatic relations in the process of communication, in speech, e.g.: He started laughing. Everybody thought it was rather odd. (Another example - E.g. in the word-group A PINT OF MILK the word PINT contrasts SR with A, OF, MILK; within the word PINT – P, I, N and T are in syntagmatic relations).

Since these relations can be observed in actual utterances, they are also defined by the Latin term “in praesentia” (“in the presence”, present in the same sequence).

SR exist at every language level. SR are linear relations, that is why they are manifested in speech. They can be of three different types: coordinate, subordinate and predicative.

a) Coordinate SR exist between the homogeneous linguistic units that are equal in rank, that is, they are the relations of independence: you and me; They were tired but happy.

b) Subordinate SR are the relations of dependence when one linguistic unit depends on the other: teach + er – morphological level; a smart student – word-group level; main and subordinate clauses – sentence level.

c) Predicative SR are the relations of interdependence: primary and secondary predication.

The other type of relations, opposed to syntagmatic, are called paradigmatic. The term is derived from the word “paradigm” and denotes the relations between elements in paradigms in the system of language. Ferdinand de Saussure called these relations ‘associative relations’, implying the way different linguistic units are arranged and associated with each other in human minds. Classical grammatical paradigms are those making up grammatical categories of words, or, morphological categories, e.g., the category of number or case of the noun: in Russian – стол – стола – столу – столом – на столе; in English – toy – toys; tooth – teeth; children – children’s, etc.

Paradigm, in most general terms, is a system of variants of the same unit, which is called ‘the invariant’; paradigmatic relations (PR) are the relations between the variants of the lingual unit within a paradigm. Not only words, but all lingual units are organized in the system of language paradigmatically according to their own categories; for example, sentences may be organized in paradigms according to the category “the purpose of communication”, in such paradigms declarative, interrogative and imperative sentence patterns of the same sentence invariant are opposed, e.g.: He laughed. – Did he laugh? – Let him laugh. Since these relations can’t be observed in actual speech they are also described as relations “in absentia” (“in the absence”).

According to different principles of similarity PR can be of three types: semantic, formal and functional.

a) Semantic PR are based on the similarity of meaning: a book to read = a book for reading. He used to practice English every day – He would practice English every day.

b) Formal PR are based on the similarity of forms. Such relations exist between the members of a paradigm: man – men; play – played – will play – is playing.

c) Functional PR are based on the similarity of function. They are established between the elements that can occur in the same position. For instance, noun determiners: a, the, this, his, Ann’s, some, each, etc.

PR exist not only in grammar, but in the phonetical and lexical systems of language as well. For example, PR exist between vowels and consonants, voiced and voiceless consonants, etc.; between synonyms and antonyms, in topical groups of words, word-building models, etc.

As mentioned above, SR may be observed in utterances, which is impossible when we deal with PR. Therefore, PR are identified with ‘language’ while SR are identified with ‘speech’.

6. A lingual unit has been described above as a sign – a bilateral unit, which has its form and its meaning. Thus, two language planes can be distinguished - the plane of content and the plane of expression: the plane of content comprises all the meaningful, semantic elements contained in the language, while the plane of expression comprises all the material, formal units of the language. Each lingual unit, including grammatical units, is a unity of meaning and form, of content and the means of its expression. But the correspondence between the two planes is not one-to-one; the relations between the units of content and the units of expression are more complex.

In cases of polysemy and homonymy two or more units of the plane of content correspond to one unit of the plane of expression, for example, the lexical homonyms: seal, hand, коса etc. In cases of synonymy, just the other way round, two or more units of the plane of expression correspond to one unit of the plane of content, for example, the lexical synonyms: pretty, nice, beautiful, etc. The relations of homonymy and synonymy can be distinguished in the grammatical system too. For example, homonymy in grammar: the grammatical suffix -(e)s denotes the 3rd person singular of the verb, the genitive case of the noun, or the plural of the noun, as in breaks, bird’s, birds; synonymy in grammar: future action can be expressed with the help of the future indefinite, the present indefinite, or the present continuous form of the verb, as in We’ll fly tomorrow; We fly tomorrow; We are flying tomorrow.

7. Another major contribution to the systemic description of language by Ferdinand de Saussure and Beaudoin de Courtenay was the doctrine that the synchronic study of a particular ‘state’ of a language in its development should be separated from the diachronic study of the language changes from one state to another. So, one more fundamental type of relation between language elements is to be distinguished: synchronic relations between language elements coexisting at a certain period of time, and diachronic relations between lingual elements of a certain type at different time periods. Language and each of its subsystems are synchronic systems of co-existing elements; in each system it is also possible to analyze diachronic relations between its elements. For example, synchronic relations in New English: hard – harder – hardest; synchronic relations in Old English: heard - heardra - heardost; diachronic relations: heard– hard; heardra – harder; heardost – hardest.

8. Researching l exical and grammatical meaning we are to know that some morphemes are independent and directlyassociated with some object of reality while others are depended and are connected with reality only indirectly. Examples: desk-s; bag-s; work-ed, lie-d; The first elements of these words are not dependent as the second elements. Morphemes of the 1^st type are called lexical and meanings they express are also lexical. The elements like - s, -ed, -d are called grammatical morphemes and meanings they express are grammatical. Thus, lexical meaning is characteristic to lexical morphemes, while grammatical meanings are characteristic to grammatical morphemes. Grammatical meanings are expressed not only by forms of word – changing, i.e. by affixation but by free morphemes that are used to form analytical word-form, e.g. He will study, I shall go.

The word combines in its semantic structure two meanings – lexical and grammatical. Lexical meaning is the individual meaning of the word (e.g. table). Grammatical meaning is the meaning of the whole class or a subclass. For example, the class of nouns has the grammatical meaning of thingness (предметність). If we take a noun (table) we may say that it possesses its individual lexical meaning (it corresponds to a definite piece of furniture) and the grammatical meaning of thingness (this is the meaning of the whole class). Besides, the noun ‘table’ has the grammatical meaning of a subclass – countableness (зчислюваність). Any verb combines its individual lexical meaning with the grammatical meaning of verbiality – the ability to denote actions or states. An adjective combines its individual lexical meaning with the grammatical meaning of the whole class of adjectives – qualitativeness – the ability to denote qualities. Adverbs possess the grammatical meaning of adverbiality – the ability to denote quality of qualities.

There are some classes of words that are devoid of any lexical meaning and possess the grammatical meaning only. This can be explained by the fact that they have no referents in the objective reality. All function words belong to this group – articles, particles, prepositions, etc.

Types of grammatical meaning. The grammatical meaning may be explicit and implicit. The implicit grammatical meaning is not expressed formally (e.g. the word table does not contain any hints in its form as to it being inanimate). The explicit grammatical meaning is always marked morphologically – it has its marker. In the word cats the grammatical meaning of plurality is shown in the form of the noun; cat’s – here the grammatical meaning of possessiveness is shown by the form ‘s; is asked – shows the explicit grammatical meaning of passiveness.

The implicit grammatical meaning may be of two types – general and dependent. The general grammatical meaning is the meaning of the whole word-class, of a part of speech (e.g. nouns – the general grammatical meaning of thingness). The dependent grammatical meaning is the meaning of a subclass within the same part of speech. For instance, any verb possesses the dependent grammatical meaning of transitivity/intransitivity, terminativeness/non-terminativeness, stativeness/non-stativeness; nouns have the dependent grammatical meaning of contableness/uncountableness and animateness/inanimateness. The most important thing about the dependent grammatical meaning is that it influences the realization of grammatical categories restricting them to a subclass. Thus the dependent grammatical meaning of countableness/uncountableness influences the realization of the grammatical category of number as the number category is realized only within the subclass of countable nouns, the grammatical meaning of animateness/inanimateness influences the realization of the grammatical category of case, teminativeness/non-terminativeness - the category of tense, transitivity/intransitivity – the category of voice.

GRAMMATICAL MEANING

EXPLICIT IMPLICIT

GENERAL DEPENDENT

Grammatical categories. Grammatical categories are made up by the unity of identical grammatical meanings that have the same form (volkova) (e.g. singular::plural). Due to dialectal unity of language and thought, grammatical categories correlate, on the one hand, with the conceptual categories and, on the other hand, with the objective reality. It may be shown with the help of a triangle model:

Conceptual reality Conceptual category

Objective reality Lingual reality Objective category Grammatical category

It follows that we may define grammatical categories as references of the corresponding objective categories. For example, the objective category of time finds its representation in the grammatical category of tense, the objective category of quantity finds its representation in the grammatical category of number (H.Sweet, Part 1). Those grammatical categories that have references in the objective reality are called referential grammatical categories. However, not all of the grammatical categories have references in the objective reality, that is do not correspond to anything in the objective reality. Such categories correlate only with conceptual matters:

Conceptual correlate

Lingual correlate

They are called significational categories. To this type belong the categories of mood and degree. Speaking about the grammatical category of mood we can say that it has modality as its conceptual correlate. It can be explained by the fact that it does not refer to anything in the objective reality – it expresses the speaker’s attitude to what he says.

There are many conceptions on the problem of grammatical category today. According to B. Golovin “a grammatical category is a real linguistic unity of grammatical meaning and the means of its material expression”. It means that in order to call a linguistic phenomenon a grammatical category there must be a grammatical meaning and grammatical means. M.Y. Blokh explains it as follows: “As for the grammatical category itself, it presents…a unity of form (i.e. material factor), and meanings (i.e. ideal factor) and constitutes a certain signemic system. More specifically the grammatical category is a system of expressing a generalized grammatical meaning by means of paradigmatic correlation of grammatical forms. The paradigmatic correlations of grammatical forms in a category are exposed by the so – called “grammatical oppositions”. The opposition (in the linguistic sense) may be defined as a generalized correlation of lingual forms by means of which a certain function is expressed. The correlated elements (members) of the opposition must possess two types of features: common features and differential features. Common features serve as the basis of contrast while differential features immediately express the function.

The grammatical categories are better to explain by comparing them with logical categories. The grammatical categories are opposed to logical ones. The logical categories are universal for all the languages. Any meanings can be expressed in any language. For instance there's a logical category of possession. The meaning of possession can be expressed in all the languages, compare: My book (English) - Моя книга (Russian). As it is seen from the examples the meaning of possession in English and Russian is expressed, by the possessive pronouns (lexical means). The universal logical categories can be expressed by grammatical and non - grammatical (lexical, syntactic) means. The grammatical categories are those logical ones that are expressed in languages by constant grammatical means. The doctrines mentioned above is one - side approach to the problem. It is a rather complicated issue in the general linguistics. But unfortunately we don't have universally acknowledged criteria to meet the needs of individual languages.

One of the most consistent theories of the grammatical categories is the one that is suggested by L. Barkhudarov. According to his opinion in order to call a linguistic phenomenon a grammatical category there must be the following features:

- general grammatical meaning;

- this meaning must consist of at least two particular meanings;

- the particular meanings must be opposed to each - other:

- the particular meanings must have constant grammatical means to express them.

Thus, any linguistic phenomenon that meets these requirements is called a grammatical category. English nouns have a grammatical category of number. This category has all the requirements that are necessary for a grammatical category:

1. it has general grammatical meaning of number;

2. it consists of two particular meanings; singular and plural;

3. singular is opposed to plural, they are antonymous;

4. singular and plural have their own constant grammatical means: singular is represented by a zero morpheme and plural has the allomorphs like (s), (z), (iz). There are some other means to express singular and plural in English but they make very small percentage compared with regular means. Schematically this can be shown as follows:

Number

0 (s), (z), (iz)

singular plural

Another example. In English adjectives there's one grammatical category - the degrees of

comparison. What features does it have?

1. It has a general grammatical meaning: degrees of comparison;

2. The degrees of comparison consist of three particular meanings: positive, comparative and

superlative;

3. They are opposed to each - other;

4. They have their own grammatical means depending on the number of syllables in the word.

If in the category of number of nouns there are two particular meanings, in the grammatical category of degrees of comparison there are three. Thus, a grammatical category is a linguistic phenomenon that has a general grammatical meaning consisting of at least two particular meanings that are opposed to each - other and that have constant grammatical means of their own to express them (iriskulov) A grammatical category is a set of meanings which are arranged on the principle of opposition to express the same general notion, and which are systematically realised by a paradigm of grammatical word forms (bocharova). (find defenitions by Bloch, Ilyish, Rayevska, Quirk, Chomsky, Crystal, etc. and present them at the seminar).

Grammatical forms (or the notion of opposition). Any grammatical category must be represented by at least two grammatical forms (e.g. the grammatical category of number – singular and plural forms). The relation between two grammatical forms differing in meaning and external signs is called opposition – book::book s (unmarked member/marked member). All grammatical categories find their realization through oppositions, e.g. the grammatical category of number is realized through the opposition singular::plural.

Taking all the above mentioned into consideration, we may define the grammatical category as the opposition between two mutually exclusive form-classes (a form-class is a set of words with the same explicit grammatical meaning).

Means of realization of grammatical categories may be synthetic (near – nearer) and analytic (beautiful – more beautiful).

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11