14. Функції словесного наголосу в англійській мові (English word stress functions)

Word stress in a language performs the following functions:

1. The CONSTITUTIVE function: it organizes the syllables of a word into a language unit having a definite accentual structure, i.e. a pattern of relationship among the syllables. The word does not exist as a lexical unit without word stress. It is thought to help the listener to judge how many individual words the speaker has produced in a given utterance.

2. The IDENTIFICATORY function: correct lexical stress enables the listener to decode the information in verbal communication adequately, while misplaced word stresses prevent understanding.

3 The DISTINCTIVE/CONTRASTIVE function: word stress alone is capable of differentiating the meanings of words or their forms. Most words in most languages that use word stress linguistically do not possess minimal pairs based on stress. But still there are about 135 pairs of words of identical orthography in English which could occur either as nouns (with stress on the penultimate syllable) or as verbs (with stress on the final syllable), with a very small number of cases the location of lexical stress alone being the differentiating factor: 'import (noun) -im'port (verb), 'insult (noun) –in'sult (verb).

15. Граматична категорія числа в системі англійської мови (The category of number in the system of the English language)

The category of number is expressed by the opposition of the plural form of the noun to the singular form of the noun. The strong member of this binary opposition is the plural, its productive formal mark being the suffix -(e)s [-z, -s, -iz] as presented in the forms dog – dogs, clock – clocks, box – boxes. The productive formal mark correlates with the absence of the number suffix in the singular form of the noun. The semantic content of the unmarked form, as has been shown above, enables the grammarians to speak of the zero-suffix of the singular in English.

The other, non-productive ways of expressing the number opposition are: 1) vowel interchange in several relict forms (man – men, woman – women, tooth – teeth, etc.); 2) the archaic suffix -(e)n supported by phonemic interchange in a couple of other relict forms (ox – oxen, child – children, cow – kine, brother - brethren); 3) the correlation of individual singular and plural suffixes in a limited number of borrowed nouns (formula – formulae, phenomenon – phenomena, alumnus – alumni, etc.). In some cases the plural form of the noun is homonymous with the singular form (sheep, deer, fish, etc.).

The semantic nature of the difference between singular and plural may present some difficulties of interpretation. On the surface of semantic relations, the meaning of the singular will be understood as simply “one”, as opposed to the meaning of the plural “many” in the sense of “more than one”. This is obvious for such correlations as book – books, lake – lakes and the like. There also exist plurals and singulars that cannot be fully accounted for by the above ready-made approach. This becomes clear when we take for comparison such forms as tear (one drop falling from the eye) and tears (treacles on the cheek as tokens of grief or joy), potato (one item of the vegetables) and potatoes (food), etc.

The extreme point of the semantic scale of plurality is marked by the lexicalization of the plural form, i.e. by it’s serving as a means of rendering not specificational, but purely notional difference in meaning. Cf. colours as a “flag”, attentions as “wooing”, etc. It means that the plurals of some nouns have two or more meanings, one similar to the singular meaning, the other different from it: colours – 1)hues, 2)regimental flags; customs – 1)habits, 2)taxes on imported goods, etc.

The absolute singular (singularia tantum) is characteristic of the names of: 1) abstract notions (peace, love, joy, courage, friendship, etc.); 2) the names of the branches of professional activity (chemistry, architecture, mathematics, etc.); 3) the names of mass materials (water, snow, hair, etc.); 4) the names of collective inanimate object (furniture, machinery, etc.).

The absolute plural (pluralia tantum) is characteristic of the uncountable nouns which denote: 1) objects consisting of two halves (trousers, shorts, spectacles, etc.); 2) the nouns expressing some sort of collective meaning (supplies, outskirts, clothes, politics; police, cattle, etc.); 3) the nouns denoting some diseases as well as some abnormal states of the body and mind (measles, rickets, mumps, hysterics, etc.).

The absolute plural, by way of functional oppositional reduction, can be represented in countable nouns having the form of the singular, in uncountable nouns having the form of the plural, and also in countable nouns having the form of the plural.

The first type of reduction, consisting in the use of the absolute plural with countable nouns in the singular form, concerns collective nouns, which are thereby changed into ‘nouns of multitude’. Cf.: The family were gathered round the table. This form of the absolute plural may be called "multitude plural".

The second type of the described oppositional reduction, consisting in the use of the absolute plural with uncountable nouns in the plural form, concerns cases of stylistical marking of nouns. Thus, the oppositional reduction results in expressive-transposition. Cf.: the sands of the desert; the snows of the Arctic; the waters of the ocean; the fruits of the toil, etc. This variety of the absolute plural may be called "descriptive uncountable plural".

The third type of oppositional reduction concerns common countable nouns used in repetition groups. The nouns in repetition groups may themselves be used either in the plural ("featured" form) or in the singular (‘unfeatured’ form). Cf.: There were trees and trees all around us. This variety of the absolute plural may be called "repetition plural".