- •Теоретическая грамматика английского языка
- •Introduction
- •§ 381. Within a sentence, the word or combination of words that contains the meanings of predicativity may be called the predication.
- •§ 384. The main parts of the sentence are those whose function it is to make the predication. They are the subject and the predicate of the sentence.
- •§ 389. In the sentence Birds fly, as we have seen, the syntactical and the lexical meanings of the subject and the predicate go together. But English has a system of devices to separate them.
- •§391. Let us now consider the grammatical word-morphemes do, does, did in sentences like Does she ever smile? We do not know him, etc.
- •§393. Every predication can be either positive or negative.
- •§ 396. As defined (§ 3), 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.
- •§ 399. Some analogy can be drawn between the structure of a word and the structure of a sentence.
- •§ 401. 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 1.
- •§ 403. Sentences with only one predication are called simple sentences. Those with more than one predication have usually no general name 1. We shall call them composite sentences.
- •§ 409. Not all interrogative sentences are syntactical opposites of declarative sentences.
- •§ 411. The sentences below form opposemes of some syntactical category.
- •§ 415. Let us compare the following pairs of sentences:
- •I'll see him I shall see him
- •It's raining It is raining
- •§ 418. We find no predication in the second sentence of the following dialogue.
- •§ 419. The sentence-words yes and no are regularly used as adjuncts of some head-sentences.
- •§ 421. The traditional classification of the parts of the sentence is open to criticism from the point of view of consistency.
- •§ 425. The subject of a simple sentence can be a word, a syntactical word-morpheme or a complex.
- •§ 426. We may speak of a secondary subject within a complex. In the following sentence it is the noun head.
- •§ 429. If we compare the subject in English with that of Russian we shall find a considerable difference between them.
- •§ 430. The predicate is the member of a predication containing the mood and tense (or only mood) components of predicativity.
- •§ 431. 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.
- •Objective Complements (Objects)
- •§ 448. Like other parts of a simple sentence (clause), objective complements may be expressed by complexes and are then called complex objects.
- •Adverbial Complements (Adverbials)
- •§ 454. Below are some specimens of quantitative adverbial complements.
- •§455. Circumstantial adverbials, or as a. I. Smirnitsky calls them, adverbials of situation, comprise:
- •§ 457. As follows from the string of examples given above, in simple sentences adverbial complements are usually adverbs, nouns (mostly with prepositions), verbids and verbid complexes.
- •§458. Comparing English adverbials with those in Russian one can see that despite some common features (meaning, types), they are in a number of points different.
- •§ 459. Attributes are secondary parts of the sentence serving to modify nouns or noun-equivalents in whatever functions they are used in the sentence.
- •§ 460. Attributes are formally indicated only by the position they occupy, save the demonstrative pronouns this, these, that, those which, besides, agree in number with the word they modify.
- •§469. Connectives are linking-words considered as a secondary part of the sentence. They are mostly prepositions and conjunctions.
- •§ 472. The articles resemble particles in being semi-notional and in functioning as specifiers. But they specify only one part of speech, nouns. In this they resemble attributes.
- •§ 473. Parenthetical elements are peculiar parts of the sentence.
- •§ 474. In accordance with their meanings parenthetical elements fall into four major groups:
- •§ 475. In a simple sentence parenthetical elements may be expressed by individual words (modal words, adverbs, nouns) and word-combinations of different nature.
- •§ 476. In most cases parenthetical elements are connected in sense with the sentence as a whole, that is why they have no fixed position in the sentence.
- •I. The Position of the Subject and the Predicate in the Sentence
- •§ 477. We have already dwelt upon the fact that in Modern English syntactical relations of words in the sentence are very often indicated by the position the words occupy in the sentence.
- •II. The Position of the Object
- •§ 479. The direct object is usually placed after the verb unless the indirect object precedes it.
- •§ 480. Sometimes the object is pushed to the front of the sentence. It occurs:
- •§ 482. The indirect object cannot be used in the sentence without the direct object. The indirect object is regularly put before the direct object as in That gave me a new idea.
- •§ 483. In most cases they follow the direct object, though for stylistic purposes, I. E. For emphasis and expressiveness, they may be placed at the head of the sentence.
- •§ 487. The position of an attribute depends both on the head-word and on the attribute. If the head-word is a pronoun, the attribute is, as a rule, postpositive.
- •§ 488. In postposition attributes often acquire what we might call a 'semi-predicative' connotation.
- •§ 489. If there are two or more prepositive attributes to one and the same noun their order is dependent upon a number of factors which appear to be semantic and stylistic rather than grammatical.
- •§ 491. As to the position of the other parts of the sentence, see the combinability of the corresponding parts of speech.
- •§ 497. The compound sentence usually describes events in their natural order, reflecting the march of events spoken of in the sequence of clauses.2
- •§ 498. The principal clauses of complex sentences are usually not classified, though their meanings are not neutral with regard to the meanings of the subordinate clauses.
- •§ 502. Subordinate clauses are connected with the principal clause by conjunctions, conjunctive and relative pronouns or asyndetically.
- •§ 506. The mood of the predicate verb of a subordinate clause depends on the principal clause to a greater extent than its tense.
- •§ 507. The subject clause is the only one used in the function of a primary part of the sentence.
- •§ 519. A variety of attributive clauses is the appositive clause, which formally differs from an attributive clause in being introduced by a conjunction (that, if, whether).
- •§ 520. Extension clauses are postpositive adjuncts of adjectives, adverbs and adlinks.
- •§ 521. Most authors who do not regard parenthetical elements as parts of the sentence treat It is past ten, 1 think as a simple sentence. We do not find this view convincing.
- •§ 522. In most cases parenthetical clauses are introduced asyndetically, though now and again the conjunctions as, if, etc. Are used.
- •§ 523. Sometimes subordination and coordination may be combined within one sentence, in which case we may have compound-complex and complex-compound sentences.
- •§ 524. Among the composite sentences of English and other languages we find a peculiar type differing from the rest.
- •§ 525. There is no agreement as to the syntactical nature of a sentence like He said, "I love you".
- •§ 526. Let us compare the two sentences:
- •§ 527. The introductory part of direct speech may precede the quotation, follow it, or be inserted in it.
- •§ 528. The so-called 'indirect speech' does not differ grammatically from the conventional types of sentences.
- •§ 529. The "rules for changing from direct into indirect speech" found in most English grammars are rules for reducing two predicative centres to one — that of the author.
- •Conclusion
- •§ 535. The syntactical system of a language is, as a rule, closely connected with its morphological system. The structure of the sentence and the structure of the word are interdependent.
- •§ 537. The role of grammatical word-morphemes is even greater in English syntax than in morphology.
- •§ 539. It is owing to most of the features described above that Modern English is spoken of as an analytical language.
§ 497. The compound sentence usually describes events in their natural order, reflecting the march of events spoken of in the sequence of clauses.2
E. g. He got the hitcher instead, and reached over, and drew in the end of the tow-line; and they made a loop in it, and put it over their mast, and then they tided up the sculls, and went and sat down in the stern, and lit their pipes. (J. Jerome).
Herein lies the great expressive force of the compound sentence. It is extensively used in colloquial speech and is often resorted to when events are described in a stately or impressive way.
THE COMPLEX SENTENCE
§ 498. The principal clauses of complex sentences are usually not classified, though their meanings are not neutral with regard to the meanings of the subordinate clauses.
Cf. He will come because he needs your help.
He will come if he needs your help.
§ 499. Two criteria are most often used in classifying the subordinate clauses of complex sentences: meaning and combinability. When he came is a clause of time according to the meaning imparted by when.
E. g. When he came, it was already late.
But in the sentence I know when he came the same clause is considered objective owing to its subordination to the objective verb know.
§ 500. There are two ways of using the criterion of combinability. Either subordinate clauses are classified in accordance with their relation to the word of the principal clause they are attached to, or they are likened to some part of speech with similar combinability. In the sentences When he came is of no importance, I remember when he came the combinability of the subordinate clause resembles that of a noun.
Cf. The fact is of no importance, I remember the fact.
Therefore the clause When he came is considered a n о u nclause. If classified in accordance with its relation to the predicate verb, the first clause would be called a s u b j e с t clause and the second an object clause.
Similarly in This is the man who wishes to see you the subordinate clause may be regarded as an adjective clause in accordance with its own combinability, or as an a t t r i b u t i v e clause, since its head-word is a noun.
§ 501. Each of the criteria described has its advantages and disadvantages. But in syntax, it seems, the correlation with the parts of the sentence is preferable to the correlation with the parts of speech. We shall therefore classify the subordinate clauses into groups parallel to the parts of the simple sentence. Accordingly we shall distinguish subject clauses, complement clauses (predicative, objective, and adverbial), attributive clauses, extension clauses and parenthetical clauses.
§ 502. Subordinate clauses are connected with the principal clause by conjunctions, conjunctive and relative pronouns or asyndetically.
E. g. I have been thinking of Cambridge all through dinner, after (a conjunction) Martin had mentioned a friend of mine who (a relative pronoun) had been killed that spring. (Snow).
He seemed to be asking what (a conjunctive pronoun) was the matter with me. (Ib.).
Mauntenay asked me if (a conjunction) I was satisfied with the way (asyndetic subordination) I have spent my life. (Ib.).
§ 503. In connection with the structure of the complex sentence and the means of subordination in it, it is necessary to dwell on the so-called 'sequence of tenses' which is often treated as a formal feature of the complex sentence, a device of subordination. The rule of the sequence of tenses is usually defined as follows: If the predicate verb of the principal clause is in the present or the future tense, the predicate verb of the subordinate clause may be used in any tense required by the sense. If the predicate verb of the principal clause is in the past tense, the verb of the subordinate clause must be used in the past tense too.
The regularity is supposed to be mostly or exclusively characteristic of object subordinate clauses.
As shown in Morphology (§ 233) the so-called sequence of tenses is a morphological problem, not a syntactical one, inasmuch as the past tense forms in the subordinate clauses are used inaccordance with the grammatical meanings they express. The following Russian example will help to see it.
Я тебе все расскажу, когда приеду.
Here the predicate verbs in the principal and in the subordinate clause are both representatives of future tense grammemes. In the corresponding English sentence there would be a future tense verb only in the principal clause. I shall tell you everything when I come.
Now from the point of view of an Englishman the future tense in the Russian subordinate clause might be regarded as depending on the future tense of the principal clause, as a means of subordination, and a certain rule of the sequence of the future tenses in Russian might be formulated.
There is no need, however, to look for any syntactical explanation of the use of the future tense verb in the Russian subordinate clause. It is used there in accordance with its meaning since it denotes an action taking place after the moment of speech.
What does need accounting for is the 'future tense' meaning of the present tense grammeme come in the English subordinate clause. Here we cannot do without syntax. We must state that in certain syntactical surroundings (see § 257) a present tense grammeme may acquire a 'future tense' meaning.
We may see something similar in the following two sentences.
He b e g a n to wonder what she was doing, how his children were getting along. (Dreiser).
Он стал задумываться над тем, что она поделывает, как живут его дети.
In the English sentence each 'past tense' verb refers to the past and is used in accordance with its tense meaning. So there is no need for any theory of the 'sequence of tenses' to account for their usage.
It is not so in the Russian sentence. The 'present tense' verbs поделывает and живут have acquired a 'past tense' meaning under the influence of the past tense of стал in the principal clause. So it is in the Russian sentence that subordination is also shown by the relation of the tense meanings in the subordinate clause to those in the principal one.
§ 504. That the 'sequence of tenses' in English is not merely a formal device, the agreement of the tense in the subordinate clause with that of the principal clause, is proved by numerous deviations from the rules of sequence.
E. g. Did she know that I am her father? (Shaw). Yesterday he learned that he is not a member of the Council, (Daily Worker),
It published a cartoon designed to suggest that Mrs. Knight's teaching will land a young man in the dock. (Ib.).
There is no agreement in tense in the examples given above simply because all the verbs are used in accordance with their tense meanings.
§ 505. However, it cannot be denied that the clauses of a complex sentence are for the most part united by the same time background. Very often it is the tense of the principal clause that shows that background. The events mentioned in the subordinate clause may be presented as unfolding against that background, as valid or important for that period of time. Only in this sense can we speak of the accord of tenses in the complex sentence. This accord can be observed not only in complex sentences with object subordinate clauses, as stated by some linguists, but in complex sentences with various types of subordinate clauses:
That she k n e w of his weakness was not believed for a moment. (Braddon) (a subject clause).
What he т e a n t was that he was sorry. (Dickens) (a subject and a predicative clause).
We were sure he w о и l d understand it when the time came round. (Daily Worker) (an extension clause, and an adverbial clause of time).
She was convinced he w a s failing in his duty as he d i d not possess a great reputation. (Black) (an object clause and an adverbial clause of cause).
They said I could apply for a second week if the doctor sent in a certificate. (Gilbert) (an object clause and an adverbial clause of condition).
Girl or no girl he d i d not want one that was not pretty. (Dreiser) (an attributive clause).