§ 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.

The subject tells us whether the predication involves the speaker (I, we ...), his interlocutor (you ...) or some other person or thing (he, John, the forest ...). The predicate may also tell us something about the person, but it usually does not supply any new information. It merely seconds the sub­ject, corroborating, as it were, in a general way the person named by the subject (I am ..., you are ..., he, John, the fo­rest is ...). Neither does the predicate, add information as to the number of persons or things involved. Here it again seconds the subject. In this sense we say that the predicate depends on the subject. But in expressing the tense and mood compo­nents of predicativity the predicate is independent.

§ 385. Since a person or thing denoted by any noun or noun equivalent (except I , we and you) is a 'third person' (see § 148) and a sentence may contain several nouns, there must be something in the sentence to show which of the nouns is the subject of the predication. The Indo-European languages use the following devices:

a) the nominative case (Встретил зайца медведь),

b) grammatical combinability (Цветы солнце любят, Цветы солнце любит ¹). Two windows has this house. (Nursery rhyme).

с) the position of the noun (Бытие определяет сознание).

In English the nominative case has been preserved only with six pronouns. Grammatical cbmbinability, as shown in the previous paragraph, is important, but it plays a much smaller role than in Russian. It is not observed, for instance, in cases like I (he, she, they, John, the students) spoke ... So the position of the noun or noun-equivalent is of the greatest importance.

E.g. John showed Peter a book of his.

When position and combinability clash, position is usually decisive, as in the sentence George's is a brilliant idea, George's are brilliant ideas. The subject is George's, though the predicates agree in number with the nouns idea, ideas. Similarly in What are those things ², The above are samples of minerals, etc.

^{________________________________________}

¹ A. Martinet writes: "Everything would be simpler if the nomina­tive case were always unambiguously distinguished from the other cases. There would then never be any need to resort to the mark of the plural agreement to indicate which noun is the subject". (A Functional View of Language, Oxford, 1962).

² See § 390

§ 386. It would be wrong to maintain that the only func­tion of the main parts of the sentence is to contain the syn­tactical meanings of predicativity. The latter has been defined as the relation of the thought to the situation of speech. So there must be some thought whose relation to the situation of speech is expressed in the sentence in terms of person, tense, mood. Naturally, the main parts of the sentence contain part of that thought, and if the sentence consists of the main parts alone, they contain all the thought. This is the case in a sentence like Birds fly. The subject birds does not only inform us that it is neither the speaker, nor his interlocutor, but some other person or thing that is involved. It does much more. As a noun it names that thing. The predicate fly does not only show the relation to the act of speech and reality. As a verb it names an action characterizing the thing named by the subject.

Thus we may speak of the (1) predicative (structural) and (2) non-predicative (notional) characteristics of the subject birds.

1. It contains the person component of predicativity,

2. It names the thing about which the communication is made. In other words, birds is both the structural and the notional subject of the sentence.

The predicate fly has similar characteristics:

1. It contains the tense and mood components of predica­tivity.

2. It names an action characterizing the thing denoted by the subject.

So fly is both the structural and the notional predicate of the sentence.

§ 387. In the sentence It rains the notional value of the subject is zero since it does not name or indicate any person, thing or idea. This is why it is (not quite adequately) called an 'impersonal' subject. But its predicative (structural) mean­ing is as good as that of any other subject: it shows that neither the speaker nor his interlocutors are involved.

In the sentence He is a student the notional value of is is next to zero, which prevents it from being recognized as the predicate of the sentence. Though is contains the tense and mood components of predicativity like any other predi­cate, it is regarded as only part of the predicate.

One cannot fail to notice that different criteria are used with regard to the subject and to the predicate. It is assumed that the former can be devoid of notional value, while the latter cannot.

When arguing against the traditional view that is in the sentence He is in Moscow is the predicate, A. I. Smirnitsky writes: "We cannot say that is is the predicate because the lexical meaning of this verb is colourless and indefinite".

The reason why modal verbs and other semi-notional verbs are not regarded as predicates is of the same nature.

§ 388. We think it essential to apply the same principles to the subject and predicate alike. The correlation between the structural and the notional in the principal parts of the sentence may be of four types: 1) The structural and the no­tional are united in one word.

E. g. Birds fly.

2) The structural and the notional are in different units.

E . g. It is necessary to act.

3) Only the structural is given in the sentence. E. g. Is it raining? I t i s.

4) Only the notional is present.

E. g. What is he doing? Writing.

The differentiation of the structural and the notional is not an artificial device. As shown below, it is a characteris­tic feature of the analytical structure of the English sentence.