If we take into consideration the semantic principle then it is impossible to distinguish between Subjunctive I and the Suppositional Mood because they both serve to express a problematic action.

As to the Conditional Mood and Subjunctive II they both express an unreal action. Thus, we may see that both principles structural and semantic won't do in connection with the classification suggested by Professor A.I. Smirnitsky. That is why some grammarians as Ilvish. Zhigadlo. Ivanova. Irtenyeva suppose that the degree of probability, improbability, unreality of an action should be looked upon as this or that shade of one and the same meaning namely that the action is not regarded by the speaker as a matter of fact. Hence to be more precise it is more correct to consider that there is only one oblique mood in Modern English - The Subjunctive Mood as all the forms both synthetical and analytical serve to express different shades of one and the same meaning, e.i. that an action is not taken as a real fact. In support of this point of view it is necessary to mention the fact that the analytical forms which developed much later than synthetical forms very often render the same shade of meaning as the corresponding synthetical forms. The so-called Suppositional Mood in our days is freely used instead of the so-called Subjunctive I.

So the problem of moods is not yet solved and the questions arising are:

1. Must we consider the Suppositional Mood and Subjunctive I as one mood or two different moods?

2. As a result of historical development of new forms, mostly analytical replacing the old ones or sometimes with one form expressing different meanings, as in I knew this man and If I knew this man, I should ask him about this matter, shall we consider the forms of the verb knew belonging to the same group or there are different moods?

3. The next point of difficulty is to distinguish the grammatical form of

49

mood from free combinations with modal verbs, e.g. It is possible that he may come.

Some authors say that may come is an analytical mood form and the modal verb may is considered to be an auxiliary. We think this point of view is wrong and the modal verb here preserves its modal meaning.

4. Some grammarians do not consider the Suppositional Mood to be a grammatical mood. They think the verb should in this case is not an auxiliary but a modal one. Yet we think that this verb is devoid of its modal meaning and becomes an auxiliary verb.

Lecture V The Verbals (Non-Finite Forms of the Verb)

1. The Infinitive, the Gerund, the Participle, their double character.

2. Morphological categories of the Infinitive and the Gerund. The category of voice and aspect.

3. The category of tense or correlation in the verbals.

4. The problem of categories in the second participle.

5. Secondary predication and predicative constructions with the verbals.

6. The adjectivization of a Participle.

The Verbals in Modern English (Non-Finite Forms)

The verbals (the Infinitive, the Gerund, the Participle) form the system of non-finite forms of the English verb. They do not express predication and lack some grammatical forms characterizing the verb. These forms have no categories of mood, person, number. They name the action but it is presented as a thing or as characteristic of a thing. This accounts for the fact that the verbals combine the characteristics of a verb on the one hand and a noun, an adjective, and an adverb on the other. Their syntactical functions also differ from the finite forms. The Infinitive and the Gerund, for example, can be used as a Subject, an Object, and a Predicative in the sentence. The Participle may be used as an attribute and as a predicative. In these functions the participle acquires the same syntactical characteristics as the adjective and the adverb. The double nature of the verbals makes some grammarians think that they should not be regarded as the forms of the verb. They think that the verbals must be included into other parts of speech (Infinitive and Gerund into nouns and Participle into adjectives).

These opinions are based on the syntactical functions of the verbals. But the features of the finite and non-finite forms of the verb having much in common leave this point of view to be groundless. The general meaning of the finite and the non-finite forms coincides. Though the non-finite forms lack some verbal categories, the categories possessed by the verbals (relativity, voice and aspect) are purely verbal and they are not to be found in any part of speech but the verb. The finite forms and ••non-finite forms (Gerund and Infinitive) take the same objects, e.g.

I read books. I like to read books. I like reading books.

The process expressed by the Infinitive or Gerund is characterized by an adverb.

50

E.g. He reads aloud. Reading aloud is useful. To read aloud is useful.

There are some more things of importance, for example, the participation of the Infinitive and the Participle in building up some verbal forms. Even when we name the verb we give it in the form of the Infinitive. This proves that the verbals cannot be referred to any other parts of speech but the verb.

The Infinitive entered the verbal system much earlier than the Gerund and therefore it is further removed from the noun while the Gerund entered the verbal system at the time of the transitional period from Middle English to New English. It has more noun features. The Infinitive cannot be used with a preposition; the Gerund can fulfil the syntactical functions:

1) The prepositional object: I succeeded in doing it.

2) As an attribute: There is a little hope of seeing her.

3) As an adverbial modifier: On entering the hall I saw my friend.

The only preposition the Infinitive is connected with is the preposition lo which is no longer felt as such. It is a formal sign of the Infinitive, a kind of a particle.

The Gerund which expresses an action may have a doer of its own. This doer may be expressed by a noun in the possessive case or a possessive pronoun which are in attributive relation to the Gerund, e.g.

Ann's coming. His going there.

In a similar case when the Infinitive has a doer of an action the noun is in the Common case or the pronoun in the objective case. e.g. I sav\ the boy (him) run.

Here the boy or him are not grammatically subordinated to the verb run. It is usually accepted that the noun features of the Infinitive and the Gerund reveal themselves in their functions of the subject, object and predicative, e.g.

To swim is pleasant. Swimming is pleasant, (subject)

He likes riding (object). He learned to dance, (object)

His wish was to enter the college (predicative). Deciding is acting (predicative).

The Gerund may be used both as prepositional and prepositionless objects, e.g.

He is fond of reading. He likes reading.

Unlike the noun, the Infinitive enters combinations with modal verbs. Here the question arises whether we can consider the Infinitive as a direct object or not. Its connection with a verb is of a different nature. Sometimes it approaches an object.

E.g. I can do it. I want to do it. I learned to do it.

Sometimes the Infinitive is used as an adverbial modifier, e.g. I came to speak to you.

Morphological Categories of the Infinitive and the Gerund

Both the infinitive and the Gerund have the morphological categories of correlation and voice. The category of correlation is expressed by perfect and non-perfect forms of the Infinitive and the Gerund. The non-perfect forms to write and writing do not show themselves the time of an action while the perfect forms to have written and having written do not show whether the priority expressed by them has to do with present, past or future.

E.g. I am glad to see you. I was glad to see you. I shall be glad to see you.

Special attention must be paid to the present Infinitive which may have different modal functions.

E.g. He intended to do it.

He intended to have done it.

The realization of the action in the first sentence is in no way indicated. The second sentence shows that the action was not carried out. The perfect Infinitive has this modal functions after such verbs as: to hope, to mean, to expect, to intend, and others.

The Infinitive has also the category of aspect, e.g. to speak, to be speaking, to have spoken, to have been speaking.

With the Gerund and the Participle things are different though some authors use such forms as being dancing, being writing, etc. These forms as a rule are not found in English Grammars.

The Category of Voice of the Infinitive and the Gerund

The category of voice does not differ in any way from that of a finite verb: to write - writing (active voice)

to be written - being written (passive voice) E.g. He does not like being praised.

There's nothing to be done.

Since voice is a recent category the active form is sometimes still preserved while the meaning is clearly passive. E.g. There is no time to lose. The book is worth reading.

The Category of Aspect

The Gerund has no aspect distinctions. Only the Infinitive possesses this category: the common and the durative or the continuous (and the non-continuous). The forms to write and to have written are the forms of the common aspect while the forms to be writing and to have been writing are the forms of the durative aspect.

E.g. He is said to be playing football with his children. Here the action is presented as a process. I want him to play with the children. Here we merely state a fact in the sentence.

The Participle has the morphological categories of relativity and voice. The category of relativity is expressed by the perfect and non-perfect forms of the Participle.

E.g. writing - having written

being written - having been written

The perfect form indicates priority while non-perfect one shows simultaneousness.

E.g. He left the room singing a song.

Having sung this song he asked whether we liked it or not.

The existence of Participle II presents some difficulty. If we take such a sentence as I found the article written. Participle II is an equivalent to the form having being written or having written in the active voice. Sometimes Participle II may lose its perfective meaning and does not indicate any priority, e.g. There are words written with capital letters in English.

Participle II here indicates being written, there are ... .

This difference in meaning lists in the lexical character of the verb from which Participle II is formed. From this point of view there are two classes of verbs:

1) conclusive or terminative verbs:

2) non-conclusive or durative verbs.

In the case of terminative verbs the action is either confined to one single moment (to catch, to surprise) or it may imply a final aim (to make, to construct). Participle II of such verbs denotes a result of an action in the past. It denotes an action which is already completed and the action expressed by Participle II is prior to the action expressed by the finite form of the verb. e.g. The letters written yesterday are lying on the table.

Written expresses an action prior to the action expressed by the finite verb are lying.

With durative verbs denoting feelings, states of mind (to love, to hate, to blame), i.e. verbs which do not denote a final aim in view. Participle II has

54

no perfective meaning and denotes an action which is simultaneous with an action expressed by a finite form, e.g. This is a teacher loved by her pupils.

However depending on the contents Participle II of the terminative verbs may lose this perfective meaning and indicate simultaneousness. e.g. There are two words pronounced differently.

In some constructions the Participle and the Gerund approach very near in their functions, e.g. On arriving there we found out that we were late. When arrived there we found out that we were late.

If we take away the preposition on in the first sentence we shall have a Participle with exactly the same meaning.

Such constructions as / was surprised at John coming so late are cases of much argument.

Max Deutschbein considers Uie-ing form in the construction the Gerund and he calls the whole constructionAccusative with the Gerund while Fowler considers it Fused Participle and Sweet - half-Gerund.

Professor Ilyish also tackles this problem. He gives such an example: He was glad of her coming so early. We are to define here whether her is a personal pronoun in the objective case or a possessive pronoun. In the former case he thinks coming is a Participle while in the later case it is a Gerund.

Participle I in its non-perfect form coincides with the Gerund and this makes some grammarians think that there is only one form and they call it the -ing form (Kruisinga). Such an opinion is hardly grounded because the Participle and the Gerund have different syntactical functions which cannot be neglected. The Participle is an adjectival form in the verbal system and sometimes approaches the adjective very closely and easily turns into it. This process is called the adjectivization of the Participle which is typical of both Participle I and Participle II.

E.g. Standing water. Charming woman. Written work.

The nearness of the Participle to the adverb when it is used as an adverbial modifier gives rise to a certain doubt among some grammarians. Thus. Professor Smimitsky is of the opinion that in English there is such a form which corresponds to "деепричастие". According to him in the sentence He said it standing at the window it would be better to understand the word standing as corresponding to "деепричастие" in Russian and standing at the window is a kind of an attribute to the word he. The same is true of He came smiling.

Professor Ilyish shows that the Participle being in no way formally connected with a noun is sometimes attracted by a verb thus assuming a

55

force of an adverbial modifier. In this particular case it corresponds to the Russian "деепричастие".

Secondary Predication and Predicative Constructions with the Verbals

If we take the sentence He studies hard we shall see that it contains the subject and the predicate. The relations between the subject and the predicate are usually expressed grammatically and first of all it is expressed in grammatical agreement: He studies but they study. In the sentence He studies hard we observe the whole complex of relations between the subject and the predicate (person, number, tense, mood, voice, correlation!. So the whole complex of relations between the subject and the predicate expressed grammatically in a sentence is called predication.

Predication is found in any sentence. In the above given sentence as in all other sentences we deal with grammatical predication because the relations between the subject and the predicate are expressed grammatically. But sometimes we may find sentences which contain not only grammatical predication but the phenomenon which is called secondary predication. e.g. He expects her to study hard.

The relation between the subject he and the predicate expects is that of the relation of grammatical or primary predication. But in the sentence there is another construction her to study in which the relations between the components are very much similar to the relations between the subject and the predicate because the nominal purther is the doer of the action expressed by the Infinitive to study. But the relations between these pans are not expressed grammatically. That is why we may speak here only of logical predication and therefore the nominal part of this construction may be called only the secondary subject while the verbal part - the secondary predicate and the relations between them are called the relations of secondary predication. The constructions which are based on the relations of the secondary predication are called predicative constructions.

Predicative constructions are usually built up with the help of verbals and they are used in different syntactical functions. Their peculiarities consist in the fact that they serve to express not simple parts of a sentence but complex ones.

There are the following predicative constructions with the verbals in Modern English:

1) The Accusative with the Infinitive (or Participle). Some grammarians call it the Objective with the Infinitive (or Participle) Construction. The

56

syntactical function of this construction is that of a complex object.

E.g. I want you to do it.

I heard him speaking something.

2) The Nominative with the Infinitive (or Participle) or the Subjective with the Infinitive (or Participle) Construction.

E.g. The plane was reported to have been shot down. The girl was seen entering the hall.

Some grammarians think that this construction performs the function of a complex subject, it is a traditional point of view.

Zhigadlo. Ivanova. Yoffic. Kaushanskaya and some others do not agree with such an opinion. They say that this construction is a peculiar construction. It does not serve as one part of a sentence. One of its component pans has the function of a subject, while the second is a part of a modal compound verbal predicate. For example, in the sentence The writer was seen going away the subject is the writer and was seen going awav is a modal compound verbal predicate.

5 i An Infinitive construction introduced by the preposition/or and called fnr-to Infinitive Construction. Some grammarians call itthefor-phrase. This construction may be used in different syntactical functions in the sentence: as the subject, object, predicative, attribute, adverbial modifier, e.g. It is for you to decide.

4) The Nominative Absolute Participial Construction expressing adverbial relations.

My eyes being very heavy. I lay down again and slept. Weather permitting, we shall start tomorrow. Dinner over, they went to the college. - Nominal absolute construction.

51 The Prepositional Absolute Participle Construction introduced by the preposition with (or without). Usually this is a complex adverbial modifier of attending circumstances.

E.g. He fell asleep with a candle lit.

At a distance was a neat hamlet, with the smoke from the cottage chimneys hanging over it.

Predicative Constructions with the Gerund

While speaking of the predicative constructions with the Gerund and Participle it is necessary to take into consideration that sometimes the difference between the Gerund and the Participle tends to be obliterated and it is difficult to say whether we deal with a gerundial or a participial construction.

We have already mentioned previously that in the sentence Do vow mind

her smoking':1 the construction her smoking is called Accusative with the Gerund by Max Deutschbem, Fowler considers it Fused Participle and Kruisinga calls it simply the ing-form. B.A. Ilyish adduces three examples:

Do you mind my smoking0 (my is a possessive pronoun hence the gerundial construction).

Do you mind me smoking9 (participial construction). Do you mind her smoking9

H. Sweet suggests that in the third example we deal with the phenomenon which he calls half-gerund. B.A. Ilyish. however, strongly objects to the term because in his opinion it does not express the nature of the phenomenon. He suggests that in such cases we should speak of the neutralization of the lexico-grammatical difference between the Gerund and the Participle. So there are two separate predictive constructions:

1. I'm against Marry's sitting with the open window.

2. I'm against Marry sitting with the open window.

The Adjectivization of a Participle

The adjectivization of a Participle depends upon the lexical meaning of the verb and some other factors.

P.H. Poutsma points out that the adjectival nature of the Participle is quite visible when the temporal meaning of it weakens. There are three main groups of such words:

a) Intransitive verbs denoting passing into a new state (to retire, to fade, to wither).

b) Verbs of emotion (to devote, to hate, to love. etc.).

c) Verbs of mental ability (to determine, to perplex, etc.).

Their adjectivization is clearly manifested by the following facts:

1) The participles formed from the above mentioned words may have the degrees of comparison, e.g. It is the most amusing thing.

2) Like adjectives they may be used in the function of the predicative, e.g. She grew frightened.

3) Like adjectives they mav be modified by an adverb, e.g. It was a slightly embarrassing moment. (A very good boy.)

4) They may be combined with adjectives, e.g. He continued to look at her with a dull frightened expression.

5) The adjectival nature of these participles is manifested also by the fact that they like adjectives may be modified by the words too and yen-while the participles which are not adjectivized are modified by such words as verv much, too much.

58

.NO	Word combination	very	too	very much	too much
i.	good boy a determined resolution a read book	_u -f	+ +	-	-f-
i	a bad horse a bewildered look a spread cloth	-t-	+	+	+
i j.	an old man an excited discourse a reading boy	_J_ 4-	+ 4-	+	4-
4.	a small girl a devoted mother an excercized horse	-f-	4-	-	-*~

Formal Indications

a) The suffix -en (Participle II).

b) The negative prefix un-.

There are many verbs which have two forms of Participle II. One with the suffix -en. the other form without it. e.g. to drink, drank, drank (drunken); to sink. sank, sunk (sunken). The adjectival nature of Participles II with the suffix -en is clearly manifested in the formation of analytical tense forms, e.g. The sweater has shrunk (but not has shrunken).

Participle II with the suffix -en is not used in the formation of analytical tense forms.

Participle II with the suffix -en is used in the function of an attribute, e.g. sunken eyes (not sunk eyes), drunken man (not drunk man).

The negative prefix un- clearly shows the adjectival nature of the Participle because such negative verbs do not exist in Modern English. For example, we may say unsold paper, unheard news, while such verbs as to unsell, to unhear do not exist.

Some participles are not adjectivized. Professor Ilyish says that the participle sold cannot be used in the function of a prepositive attribute. For example, we cannot say the sold bride, we say Bartered Bride.

59

Lecture VI The Noun

1. Its definition, lexical meaning, syntactical and morphological characteristics. Grammatical categories of the noun.

2. The problem of Gender in English.

3. The category' of number and its peculiarities in the English language. Mutual relations between the grammatical category of number and lexical meanings of nouns. Nouns acquiring some additional lexical meaning in the plural ucxicalization of plural forms). Collective nouns. Plural forms apprehended as singular. Nouns having no plural (Singularia Tantum).

4. The category of case. The notion of case. Different approaches to the category of case in English nouns. Cases and prepositional groups. A two-case system of English nouns. Definition of the genitive (possessive case). The scope of its meaning. Different uses of this case. Views of some scholars denying the existence of cases in the English noun (G.N. Vorontsova and others). Treatment of the -'s-form according to this approach. The use of the -'s-form with phrases and interpretation of this use.

The Noun

The noun is one of the oldest parts of speech used to denote substances. it expresses the idea of substantivity. As any part of speech it is characterized from three sides: lexical, morphological, and syntactical.

The lexical meaning of the noun is that of a thing. This is the general meaning of the class. Most nouns denote concrete things: a book, a table, an elephant. Here belong also nouns denoting abstract ideas: love, pleasure: actions: laughter, qualities: kindness.

Thus, the lexical meaning of a noun is that of a thing or of an abstract idea, action, quality, presented as a thing.

60

- names applied to any individual of a class to distinguish them from other individuals of the same class or a group of individuals: John, Moscow, the Alps.

Concrete

Common	f	Abstract
	\

a) class-nouns (a man, a book)

b) names of materials expressing the whole mass of matter (iron, snow, air, water)

c) abstract nouns turned into concrete (a beauty, a youth)

- names of actions, states or qualities (conversation, reading, love, kindness, strength, time, summer, thunder, day)

regarded as a single object

a) having both numbers (a family, a crew, families. crews; a people, peoples)

b) names of multitude (cattle, poultry, police) -the}' are always plural

c) used always in singular (foliage, leafage, linen, money, crockery, youth)

d) used only in the plural (goods, belongings, clothes, sweepings, tidings)

The syntactical characteristics of a noun arc the following: it ma\ be a subject, an object, a predicative in a sentence. It may also be used in some other functions but they are not characteristic of a noun.

As to its combinability nouns may combine with verbs, adjectives, pronouns. The noun may be associated with articles and governed by

prepositions.

The morphological characteristics of a noun is limited to two categories: the category of number and the category of case.

Gender cannot be regarded as a grammatical category in Modern English because there are no special grammatical means of expressing the category of gender. In English the form of the noun does not show any relations that may be admitted as gender relations.

In Modern English there is no grammatical agreement between nouns and adjectives, e.g. a clever boy, a clever girl, a clever remark, while in Russian we have this grammatical agreement, e.g. умный мальчик, умная девочка, умное замечание. Thus, we may say that in Modern English there are no grammatical indications of the category of gender. But we can speak of the so-called generic notion, which may be expressed in three ways:

1) By means of the lexical meaning of some words: such nouns as man, husband, boy. It goes without saying that these nouns or rather substances expressed by these nouns refer to the male sex and historically these nouns are referred to the group of nouns of the masculine gender.

2) In Modern English there are some pairs of words, such as waiter -waitress, god - goddess, lion - lioness, host — hostess, heir - heiress, tiger - tigress. The suffix -ess serves to express substances of the female sex. However this suffix cannot be treated as a form building suffix. This means that the suffix -ess serves for the formation of new words but not forms of one and the same word. This statement may be proved by the fact that the suffix -ess is typical of very few nouns in Modern English. The same may be said about such pairs of words aswidow-widower, bride-bride-groom. In these words we also deal with the word-building suffixes.

3) Among the words denoting living beings we find a number of words which do not indicate sex: enemv, neighbour, cousin, teacher, etc. Nearly all the nouns derived from words denoting agents (doers of an action) also belong here: reader, professor, engineer, doctor. On account of social tradition many words which may denote at present both male and female beings are practically always used of men only. e.g. shoemaker, baker, lawyer.

r^\A',^r Ar\T~r „;int „;,.„,„„ „1„,-1. P,,t r,,^U ,,-~,-Ло. ос ™~Ъ „,,,•<-"

>wn_iivl. ^Jiiv^i. piivjt, tinman, ^IviiV. J_»WL Ju^n v\ Oi ^ib ub \_w*Jiv. 1аЫ1Лч..

dressmaker are used mostly in connection with women.

In the predicative function a word which is usually used in reference to men may also refer to women, e.g. master, lover (generally considered of a male sex) but

She was master of the situation.

She has always been a lover of art.

When a special indication of sex is wanted with the word which does not express any sex, we use such words as: boy, girl, man, woman, male, female, he, she or some proper nouns, e.g. she-wolf, lady-bird, male-elephant, cock-sparrow, hen-sparrow, jack-ass, jenny-ass, billy-goat, nanny-goat, tom­cat, girl-cousin, maid-servant.

In case of personification, i.e. when sometimes inanimate and abstract notions are personified and the nouns denoting them are referred to as belonging to the masculine or feminine gender there are some traditional associations, e.g. names of vessels and vehicles (ship, boat, steamer, carriage, coach, car), names of countries especial!}' when they are not considered as a geographical territory, the celestial bodies Moon and Earth (not the Sun) are referred to as feminine.

When abstract notions are personified, the masculine gender is given to nouns suggesting such ideas as strength, fierceness, etc. while the feminine is associated with the idea of gentleness, beauty, etc.:

Masculine: anger, death, fear. war. hail.

Feminine: spring, peace, kindness, dawn.

The Category of Number

Number is a grammatical category of the English noun, which shows whether we speak of one substance or more than one. This grammatical meaning of the category of number is expressed by the opposition of two grammatical number forms: the singular form and the plural form. This opposition is true of many nouns: table - tables, man — men, etc. But if we compare such two phrases as four tables and four minutes we may see that in the first case we really deal with four separate substances. Thus, the opposition one table and four tables is that of the opposition of one and more than one. But in the case of four minutes it is rather a certain duration of time that we deal with but not four separate substances as in the case of tables.

If we take such plurals as waters, snows nobody will say how many waters or snows we mean. It is quite obvious that the plural form here serves

t^ denote 2 Y2S^ StrCtcb r>^\YCitr*r ОГ SHOW ""^1" ^'"Hv^r^T-jr-o К^>^у^,=»т-> tVin rnor»r*trtrr

of the two numbers may increase to such a degree that the plural form develops a comnletely new mcanme that the singular form has not sot at

all.

Cf: two boys and the snows of the Ar:tic; the blue waters of the

Atlantic: the sands of the Sahara Desert.

If we take such nouns as colour and colours or custom and customs the difference in lexical meaning develops to such a degree that it overshadows

the grammatical meaning of the category of number. That is why we may say that in such cases we deal with the lexicalization of the grammatical meaning of the plural form, the result of which is the existence of two homonymous words.

As for the grammatical opposition of the singular and the plural forms in English the form of the singular is a bare stem with the zero inflection whereas the plural number is built up by means of the inflection -5 for the majority of cases.

Compound nouns usually present difficulties in building up the plural form. A compound noun consists of two or more stems (root-morphemes).

There are several ways of forming the plural number in compound nouns:

1. In compound nouns usually the head-noun takes the plural form (fellow-workers, school-mates, air-raids, editors-in-chief, brothers-in-law).

2. In compound nouns expressing generic notions the plural inflexion as a rule is added to the second element which is usually a noun (she-wolves, lady-birds, tom-cats, billy-goats, cock-sparrows).

3. In a compound noun consisting of a verb and a noun the plura! inflection is added to a noun (pick-pockets).

4. \АЪеп a compound noun does not contain any noun, the plural is formed by adding the inflexion -s to the last word (forget-me-nots, merry-go-rounds, hold-alls, overalls).

5. If the first part of compound nouns is the word man or woman both stems are changed (men-servants, women-journalists).

Foreign Plurals

Among the words constituting the stock of words of the English language there are quite a number of borrowings from different languages. In this connection it is necessary to mention the fact that these words may either preserve the way of wordbuilding typical of the language from which they are borrowed or may accept the forms of the plural which is typical of Modern English.

Т Vv £

\ т тгл

rm гч I п тт» 1 / ( •» т*с* о V

memorandum - memoranda, datum — data, phenomenon -phenomena, crisis - crises, nucleus - nuclei, terminus - termini, stimulus -stimuli, formula -formulae, index - indices, stratum - strata.

Words that arc much used often have an English plural: memorandums, formulas, indexes, terminuses.

While speaking about the category of number we may also consider the nouns which have no usual two numbered forms, but mav be found in one

of them. The nouns which have only the plural form are termed Pluralia Tantum, while the nouns which have only the singular form are called Singularia Tantum.

Among the pluralia tantum there are nouns of two types:

1. Nouns denoting material objects consisting of two similar halves: scissors, trousers, spectacles, scales, eye-glasses, tongs.

2. Nouns which have collective meaning: concrete or abstract.

a) Concrete: stairs, goods, eaves, slums, outskirts, tropics, memoirs, victuals, supplies, clothes, sweepings, slops, presents, parings, sweets, lodgings, suburbs.

b) Abstract: holidays, tidings, goings-on, earnings, contents, wages (also wage), surroundings, doings, politics, tactics, gymnastics, athletics.

The nouns of singular number (Singularia Tantum) are usually called uncountable or mass-nouns. Here belong:

a) Concrete nouns:

1. Names of materials: water, milk, wine, snow, bread, beer, honey, paper, an; butter.

2. Some collective nouns -.foliage, leafage, shrubbery, brushwood, linen, machineiy, furniture, timber.

b) Abstract nouns: friendship, joy, patriotism, love, kindness, weather, courage, information, progress, advice, confusion, noise, laughter, pleasure, beauty.

Note should be made of certain nouns denoting groups of living beings

as party. These nouns either denote such groups as a whole and may be

aken as singular and termed as collective nouns or they may denote this or

:hat group as consisting of individual, separate substances. In this case such

nouns are termed as nouns of multitude.

E.g. My family is large, (a collective noun used in singular)

My family are early rises, (here family indicates a noun of multitude, separate members are meant).

The Category of Case

Case is a grammatical category of the noun which serves to express relations between a substance denoted by a noun and other words in a sentence and which is manifested in some formal sign in a noun itself

In accordance with this definition there is a classification supported by плат- linguists that there are two cases in Modem Englfsh: the Common case and the Genitive or Possessive case.

However the approach to the nature of the category of case in Modem English is not the only one and the same with all scholars and grammarians.

64

65

AH the points of view connected with the problem of the category of case may be roughly divided into two extreme and contrary assertions:

1) that there are more than two cases in Modern English nouns;

2) that there is no category of case at all in Modern English nouns. The first point of view was expressed by Max Deutschbein and was

supported by some foreign grammarians. He thinks that in Modern English there are four cases: the Nominative, the Genitive, the Accusative, and the Dative. He distinguishes between the Nominative and the Accusative cases with the help of the order of words and syntactical functions in which this or that noun may be found in a sentence. He does not even seek for the formal grammatical suffix of distinction between the two cases.

In his point of view if a noun precedes a predicate verb it is a subject and accordingly is used in the Nominative case. If a noun follows a predicate verb it is an object and is used in the Accusative case.

E.g. The boy reads many books. ( The boy here is the subject used in the Nominative case while books is an object used in the Accusative case)

This consideration may be hardly accepted on account of the fact that in Modern English there are many sentences in which the word-order may be an inverted one. In the Russian language, for example, with its extremely developed case system a noun in one and the same case may be used in different syntactical functions.

Cf. Я читал книгу. Я читал всю ночь.

A noun in different cases may be used in one and the same syntactical functions.

Cf. Дай мне сахару. Дай мне сахара.

According to Deutschbein the Dative case is expressed by the form the preposition to - noun.

If we accept the possibility of expressing cases with the help of prepositions then we may say that in Modem English there are many more than four cases, for example, the Instrumental case which may be expressed by a noun with the preposition by or with or the Locative case (местный

ПС1,ДСуК i, CXpICbSCva u\ 111 ~~~ ПОи_П ullo SO Oil. i »1C GUCStlOn ijCTC QriSCS \Vi"!CtuCr

in all these cases we really deal with the grammatical expression of case relations. If we admit that case as a grammatical category may be expressed by means of prepositions in connection with nouns then we should admit that we deal with analytical forms in which prepositions must be completely devoid of any lexical meaning. The point is that this consideration cannot be accepted because prepositions present quite an independent pan of speech in a sentence having its own lexico-grammatical

meaning. That is why it is impossible to use one preposition instead of another. They are not interchangeable. A preposition cannot be taken as an auxiliary word. Therefore there are not any analytical forms which may express case relations in Modern English.

As distinct from the prepositions case inflexions are completely devoid of any lexical meaning and serve as purely grammatical indicators of case relations in a sentence. That is why in Modern English we may speak only of two case inflexions: the so-called zero inflection and the

-s inflection. In connection with the -s inflexion there are several points of view. The English grammarian Briant doubts strongly that the category of case exists in Modern English as she considers that the structure with - 's should be taken rather as an adjective in the function of an attribute. e.g. A bov's hat in which boy's should be taken as an adjective.

Professor Vorontsova thinks that the -'s can hardly be taken as the case inflexion. She holds that the -'s is rather a certain indicator of some syntactical functions in which a noun may be found, namely it is an indicator of the function of an attribute.

Professor Vorontsova treats of the -'s as a certain syntactical post­position similar to up in stand-up. To support her point of view Professor Vorontsova puts forward several considerations:

1) The use of the -'s is not is not typical of all English nouns and is limited by quite a certain number of nouns (mostly living beings) whereas the use of the -'s with other nouns is as a rule a stylistic device.

2) The - 's form is not completely connected with a noun, it is not inserted in the structure of a word as it must be in the case of inflexions. The

-'s form may be separated from a noun by quite a number of words.

E.g. The woman I saw yesterday's son. I have been reading that fellow

(what is his name)'s attacks in the Sunday Times. The independence of the -'s, its loose connection with the noun is especially clear in the so-called group-possessive where -'s is added only to the last of the nouns:

Helen. Mary and Ann's teacher visited us yesterday. And as it has alrcadv been cited above the -'s may be added to other parts of speech, for example, to adverbs as in

The man who called yesterday's son is my nephew. Or even to a preposition:

The blonde I danced yesterday with's daughter attracted my attention.

In some cases we observe the use of independent possessive when the noun in the possessive has local meaning, e.g. at the baker's, at St.Paul's.

67

at the butcher's, at the florist's, at the hairdresser's, at the chemist's, at the doctor's, at Timothy's, at my brother's where the nouns acquire a new meaning, e.g. the baker's means булочная. Professor Ilyish thinks that the -'s here is a derivative suffix.

The possessive is used with some adverbs of time derived from nouns: today, yesterday, tomorrow, e.g.

We have a splendid morning after yesterday's rain. Have you today's newspaper0

This element cannot be taken as an inflexion. And even in the simplest examples as in My sister's music or This year's harvest to Professor Vorontsova's point of view the -'s form does not refer directly to the nouns sister, year but to the word combinations /m sister, this vear.

Quite recently one more theory has been advanced by the scientist Professor Muchin who considers that the -'s is not a case inflection but a special form which serves to build up a new grammatical category of an English noun, that is the category of possession.

The majority of our grammarians and a number of foreign grammarians hold to the point of view that there are two cases in Modern English: the common case which is expressed by the zero inflection and the genitive or possessive case expressed by the -'s inflexion. These two forms serve to express grammatically the relation of a substance denoted by a noun to other words in a sentence which is the grammatical meaning of the category of case. The common case is an unmarked member of the opposition of the category of case whereas the genitive case is a marked member, both in form and function.

Some grammarians keep to the point of view in accordance with which the Common case is considered to be a combination of two homonymous forms of the Nominative case and of the Accusative case in Modem English. However this point of view cannot be accepted because if we take the Russian language we may really speak of the forms of the Nominative and Accusative cases as homonymic.

E.g. Мать любит дочь. Дочь любит мать.

In Russian we may compare such examples the forms of which may differ.

E.g. Мать любит сына. Сын любит мать.

In the English language there are no cases that may be compared. That is why we have no ground to acknowledge the common case as the combination of the nominative case and the accusative case in Modern English.

Lecture VII The Article

1. The problem of the essence of the article. The article as a separate word and as a form element in the system of the noun. The number of articles in English. The definite and the indefinite article.

2. The problem of the zero article. The meaningful absence of the article.

3. The meaning of each article. Different theories concerning this problem.

4. The generic article. Lexicalization of articles in some geographical names and other cases.

5. The difference in meaning between the definite and the indefinite article. The indefinite article as a way of expressing the novelty of an idea.

6. Pronouns approaching articles in their use.

The Article

The article is a determinative form-word which serves to specify' a noun. It expresses dcfiniteness or indefiniteness. having no independent syntactical function in the sentence, i.e. it cannot be a part of the sentence as any form-word, it is connected with a noun and morphologically invariable. The article has only phonetical variants which depend wholly on the following sound: The [За. 3i:] and a. an [Э, en].

In languages where there are articles they arc not always the same in their forms and functions though they are invariably connected as a rale with nouns. Articles may express not only definiteness or indefiniteness but also the categories of number, case, gender. In German and French the form of the article expresses the grammatical categories of the noun. e.g.

die Tafcl

der Tafel pi. die Tafeln

der Tafel

die Tafel

This is possible, of course, in the languages where the article is changed. In German the article has the categories of number, case, and gender. In French it has the forms of number and gender. The same is in Italian.

It is not a rule that the article should always be placed before the noun. In some languages it is in fact a suffix added to the end of the noun, as is the case in Swedish. Bulgarian or Rumanian, e.g.

улицата (Bulgarian).

English did not have articles in old times. In O.E. they were only

68

beginning to develop. The definite article has developed from the O.E. demonstrative pronoun, the indefinite article has developed from the numeral an (one).

In Modern English in the system of articles three cases may be distinguished: the definite article, the indefinite article, and the so-called zero article.

The lexico-grammatical meaning of the definite article is that of individualization. It means that the definite article characterizes the substance denoted by a noun as possessing some individual qualities which make this substance distinct from all the other substances of the given class. The context and the situation matter very much in the case of the definite article. Thus, the presence of a limiting attribute is closely connected with the usage of the definite article. The poets of England have created many a masterpiece. The usage of the definite article is explained by an attribute.

The definite article may point out to the fact that the substance under discussion denoted by a noun has already been mentioned in a previous context, e.g. Yesterday I met a woman. The woman told me the story.

The substance which earlier was not mentioned may be taken as a familiar one due to the whole situation. He came up to the window if it is known that there is only one window in the room or if contrast is meant. The definite article may point to the object which is always taken as a well-known one or which is considered as the only one of this kind (so-called unique nouns) and for this reason cannot enter any class: the Moon, the Sim. the North, the horizon, the equator. The definite article may individualize the whole class of substances as distinct from other classes, e.g. The dog is stronger than the cat.

The lexico-grammatical meaning of the indefinite article is that of classifying one. It may also have an old quantitative meaning. When used in the classifying meaning the indefinite article may have either an introductory or generalizing character. The introductory classifying indefinite article refers the object denoted by a noun to a certain class without ascribing any individual characteristic which would make this object distinct

:ts of the same class. By means of the indefinite article we usually introduce a new object in our narration. And in this case the indefinite article is entirely different from the definite article. The use of the indefinite article is always associated with the novelty in our narration. Cf. The door opened and a girl came in.

The door opened and the girl came in.