Смекни!
smekni.com

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar (стр. 6 из 9)

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar Det NP

NP VP A N

It is obvious that dividing a sentence into ICs does not provide much information. Nevertheless, it can sometimes prove useful if we want to account for the ambiguity of certain constructions. A classic example is the phrase old men and women which can be interpreted in two different ways. Ambiguity of this kind is referred to as syntactic ambiguity. By providing IC analysis we can make the two meanings clear:

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammarold men and women old men and women

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar

c) Oppositional analysis.

The oppositional method in syntax means correlating different sentence types: they possess common features and differential features. Differential features serve the basis for analysis.

E.g. two member sentence :: one member sentence (John worked:: John! Work! Or: I speak English :: I don’t speak English.

d) Constructional analysis.

According to the constructional approach, not only the subject and the predicate but also all the necessary constituents of primary predication constitute the main parts because they are constructionally significant. Therefore, the secondary parts of the sentence are sometimes as necessary and important as the main ones. If we omit the object and the adverbial modifier in the following sentences they will become grammatically and semantically unmarked: Bill closed the door; She behaved well.

The structural sentence types are formed on the basis of kernels (basic structures). Three main types of propositional kernels may be distinguished: N V, N is A, N is N. However, if we take into account the valent properties of the verbs (their obligatory valency) the group will become larger (8 kernels), e.g. N1 V N2 N3: John gave Ann the book, N1 V N2: I see a house.

The kernel sentences form the basis for syntactic derivation. Syntactic derivation lies in producing more complex sentences

Syntactic processes may be internal and external. Internal syntactic processes involve no changes in the structure of the parts of the sentence. They occur within one and the same part of the sentence (subject, etc.). External syntactic processes are those that cause new relations within a syntactic unit and lead to appearance of a new part of the sentence.

The internal syntactic processes are:

Expansion Compression

The phone was ringing and ringing They were laughing and singing

Complication Contamination

(a synt. unit becomes complicated) (two parts of the sentence are joined

I have seen it – I could have seen it together – e.g. double predicate)

The moon rose red

Replacement – the use of the words that have a generalized meaning: one, do, etc, I’d like to take this one.

Representation – a part of the syntactic unit represents the whole syntactic unit: Would you like to come along? I’d love to.

EllipsisWhere are you going? To the movies.

The external syntactic processes are:

Extension - a nice dress – a nice cotton dress.

Ajoinment - the use of specifying words, most often particles: He did it – Only he did it.

Enclosure – inserting modal words and other discourse markers: after all, anyway, naturally, etc.

4. The utterance. Informative structure of the utterance.

The utterance as opposed to the sentence is the unit of speech. The

main categories of the utterance from the point of view of its informative structure are considered to be the theme and the rheme. They are the main components of the Functional Sentence Perspective (FSP) – actual division of the sentence (most language analysts stick to the term “sentence” but actually they mean “utterance”).

In English, there is a “standard” word order of Subject + Verb + Object: The cat ate the rat – here we have a standard structure (N1 + V + N2). However, there are numerous other ways in which the semantic content of the sentence can be expressed:

1. The rat was eaten by the cat.

2. It was the cat that ate the rat.

3. It was the rat that the cat ate.

4. What the cat did was ate the rat.

5. The cat, it ate the rat.

Which of these options is actually selected by the writer or the speaker will depend on the context in which the utterance occurs and the importance of the information. One important consideration is whether the information has already been introduced before or it is assumed to be known to the reader or listener. Such information is referred to as given information or the theme. It contrasts with information which is introduced for the first time and which is known as new information or the rheme.

Informative structure of the utterance is one of the topics that still attract the attention of language analysts nowadays. It is well recognized that the rheme marking devices are:

1. Position in the sentence. As a rule new information in English generally comes last: The cat ate the rat.

2. Intonation.

3. The use of the indefinite article. However, sometimes it is impossible (as in 1): A gentleman is waiting for you.

4. The use of ‘there is’, ‘there are’. There is a cat in the room.

5. The use of special devices, like ‘as for’, ‘but for’, etc.: As for him, I don’t know.

6. Inverted word order: Here comes the sun.

7. The use of emphatic constructions: It was the cat that ate the rat.

However, sometimes the most important information is not expressed formally: The cat ate the rat after all. The rheme here is ‘the rat’. At the same time there is very important information which is hidden or implicit: the cat was not supposed to do it, or – it was hard for the cat to catch the rat, or – the cat is a vegetarian (this hidden information will depend on the context or situation). In other words, we may say that this sentence contains two informative centres, or two rhemes – explicit and implicit.

5. Functional typology of utterances.

Actional utterance: N + Vact. + Complement – actional predicate

Performative utterance: I + Vperf./Vsay – performative predicate

Characterizing utterance: N + Vbe + A/Q – characterizing predicate

(See the book by E.Morokhovskaya ‘Fundamentals of Theoretical English Grammar’, pp.254-268)

LECTURE 10: THE TEXT, TEXTLINGUISTICS

1. Text as a syntactic unit.

Text is the unit of the highest (supersyntactic) level. It can be defined as a sequence of sentences connected logically and semantically which convey a complete message. The text is a language unit and it manifests itself in speech as discourse. Textlinguistics is concerned with the analysis of formal and structural features of the text. Textual basic integrative properties can be described with the help of the notions of coherence (цілісність), cohesion (формальна складність) and deixis.

2. The notion of coherence.

Coherence is a semantic or topical unity of the spoken or written text – that is, the sentences within the text are usually connected by the same general topic. Generally speaking, a coherent text is the text that ‘sticks together’ as a whole unit. Coherence is usually achieved by means of the theme and rheme progression. There exist various types of the theme and rheme progression, e.g.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammara) T1 R1 Once there lived an old man.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar T2 R2 The old man lived in a hut.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar T3 R3 The hut was near a wood.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammarb) T1 R1 Michael is a student.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar T1 R2 He lives in Boston.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar T1 R3 He has a cheap car.

c) T The general topic is Ukraine. Subtopics are its

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammarclimate, industry, population, etc.

M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar
M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical GrammarT1 R1 T2 R2 T3 R3

Naturally, in the process of text development different types of theme and rheme progression are combined.

3. The notion of cohesion. Text connecting devices.

Cohesion is a succession of spoken or written sentences. Sometimes the sentences may even not coincide topically. The connection we want to draw between various parts of the text may be achieved by textual and lexical cohesion. Textual cohesion may be achieved by formal markers which express conjunctive relations and serve as text connectors. Text connectors may be of four different types:

a) additive – and, furthermore, similarly, in addition, etc.

b) adversative – but, however, on the other hand, in fact, anyway, after all, nevertheless, etc.

c) causal – so, consequently, for this reason, thus, etc.

d) temporal – then, after that, finally, at last, in the long run, etc.

The full list of text connectors is very long. Some of them do not possess direct equivalents in the Ukrainian language. At the same time it is impossible to speak and write English naturally without knowing for sure when and how to use text connectors of the English language.

Lexical cohesion occurs when two words in the text are semantically related in the same way – in other words, they are related in terms of their meaning. Two major categories of lexical cohesion are reiteration and collocation. Reiteration includes repetition, synonym or near synonym use and the use of general words. E.g. (1) You could try driving the car up the slope. The incline isn’t at all that steep. (2) Pneumonia arrives with the cold and wet conditions. The illness can strike everyone from infants to the elderly.

Collocation includes all those items in text that are semantically related. The items may be related in one text and not related in other. For instance, the words ‘neighbour’ and ‘scoundrel’ are not related at all. However, in the following text they are collocated: My neighbour has just let one of his trees fall into my garden. And the scoundrel refuses to pay for the damage he has caused.

Cohesive ties within the text are also formed by endophoric relations. Endophoric relations are of two kinds – those that look back in the text for their interpretation are called anaphoric relations; those that look forward in the text are called cataphoric relations:

Look at the sun. It is going down quickly. ‘It’ refers back to ‘the sun’.

It is going down quickly, the sun. ‘It’ refers forwards to ‘the sun’.