Practical Tasks

I. Analyse the structure of the following sentences in terms of:

1. traditional sentence parsing;

2. immediate constituents analysis.

1. Her brown hand waved us a jaunty salute.

2. A child of five was handing out the flowers.

3. The boy fisted the rice into his mouth.

II. State the nature of the paradigmatic changes in the following sentences:

1.The racegoer considered himself pretty lucky.

2. The racegoer seemed to consider himself pretty lucky.

3. He didn’t consider himself pretty lucky.

4. Pretty lucky he considered himself.

5. The racegoer would consider himself pretty lucky.

6. Pretty lucky.

7. He considered himself pretty lucky?

8. He didn’t appear to consider himself pretty lucky.

SEMINAR 4

Syntax of the simple sentence: alternative approaches Topics for Discussion

1. Verbocentric conception of the sentence.

2. Semantic interpretation of the sentence. The case grammar.

3. The simple sentence structure analysis in the light of the prototypical principle of category structure (P.Hopper and S. Thompson).

Topics for Reports

1. Transformational grammar (from N. Chomsky “Studies on Semantics in Generative

Grammar” in the book by Blokh M.Y., Semionova T.N., Timofeyeva S.V.

Theoretical English Grammar. Seminars. Moscow, 2007, Pp. 343-348; from J. Lyons

“Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics” in the book by Blokh M.Y., Semionova

T.N., Timofeyeva S.V. Theoretical English Grammar. Seminars. Moscow, 2007, Pp.

353-357).

2. Prototypical interpretation of parts of sentence (see: КобринаН.А.,БолдыревН.Н.,

Худяков А.А. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка.

Москва, 2007,С. 219-306)

Literature

1. Blokh M.Y., Semionova T.N., Timofeyeva S.V. Theoretical English Grammar.

Seminars. Moscow, 2007.

2. КобринаН.А.,БолдыревН.Н.,ХудяковА.А.Теоретическаяграмматика

современного английского языка. Москва, 2007.

3. Lectures on syntax (this book).

4. Croft W. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. The cognitive

organization of information. Chicago, 1991.

5. Croft W. and Cruse D.Alan. Cognitive linguistics. – Manchester: University of

Manchester, 2003.

6. Dowty D. “The garden swams with bees and the fallacy of “argument

alteration”. In Ravin Y. and Leacock C (eds). Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches. Oxford: University Press, 2000, pp.111-128.

7. Hopper P.J., Thompson S.A. Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse//Language.

– 1980. – Vol.56. – P.251-299.

8. Болдырев Н.Н. Категория сказуемого с прототипической точки зрения //

На стыке парадигм лингвистического знания в начале XXI века:

грамматика, семантика, словообразование. Мат. межд. конф. Калининград.-

КГУ, 2003.

Practical tasks

I. Analyse the structure of the following sentences in terms of the case grammar by

Fillmore.

1. Her brown hand waved us a jaunty salute.

2. A child of five was handing out the flowers.

3. The boy fisted the rice into his mouth.

II. The subject-verb-complement clause patterns express different event types,

such as action chains, mental interactions or container structures. State the

event type in the following examples:

1. Dad opened the box with a knife.

2. Little Sue wants a mountain bike.

3. Jack brings along the most recent CDs.

4. The bus holds 40 people.

5. She was dreaming of her Italian boyfriend.

6. The village consists of a church and three cottages.

7. Sorry, I have forgotten your name.

8. The area abounds with pubs.

9. This anthology assembles a lot of unknown poems.

10. Diana was sipping her long drink.

III. One can claim that all action chains consist of at least three elements (agent,

instrument, patient). Examine the following two-element structures and try to

find the instrumental that might be added:

1. Susan is picking strawberries.

2. Susan is reading a book.

3. Susan turns the key.

4. Susan kicks the ball.

Explain why the instrument is not expressed in these sentences.