Survey of the linguistic literature on the problems of morphology in Present Day Linguistics - Английский язык - Рефераты

Survey of the linguistic literature on the problems of morphology in Present Day Linguistics

Загружено в:

20.09.2019

Скачано:

0

Размер:

97.5 KB

Survey of the linguistic literature on the problems of morphology in Present Day Linguistics Plan: 1 The problem of Morphology as the study of the word structure in Modern English 2 The study of the notional parts of speech in Modern English Grammar 3 The problem of the adjective as a notional part of speech in Modern English

1 The problem of Morphology as the study of the word structure in Modern English Morphology is the study of the structure of words. The name comes from Greek morphos (=shape or form). The smallest units of meaning may be whole simple words (e.g. man, run, big ) or parts of complex words (e.g. un-, -faith- and - ful in unfaithful) which are called morphemes . Some morphemes, such as faith in un-faith-ful or dream in dream-ing can stand alone as words which make sense. These are known as free morphemes. You will see how very many simple words are free morphemes, but can combine with other morphemes, both free and bound to form complex words 1 . Where two simple words are joined together to form a new complete word, this is called a compound word . Examples include teapot, starlight and careworn . When these terms are first coined, they are shown in some dictionaries with a hyphen, as light-house or fish-finger . Other morphemes, such as prefixes and suffixes (collectively called affixes ), cannot stand alone - they need to be part of a complex word to make sense. Examples are dis- in dis-miss, dis-pute or dis-grace , -ing in dream-ing , -ness in happi-ness or sad-ness and even -s used to form plurals, as in boy-s or horse-s . These morphemes are said to be bound morphemes. Bound morphemes are traditionally divided into two further classes. Sometimes a word is changed in its form to show the internal grammar of a sentence. Examples would be plural forms of nouns ( dog + s → dog-s ) or past (imperfect) tenses of regular verbs ( want + ed → want-ed ) 2 . The study of such changes is inflectional morphology (because the words in question are inflected - altered by adding a suffix). Other compound or complex words are made by adding together elements without reference to the internal grammar of a sentence. For example, the verb infect suggests a new verb dis infect (=to undo the action of infecting). New words are often formed by noun + -ize , noun + ism , or verb + able ( scandal ize , Stalin ism , dispos able ). The study of such words, "derived" from existing words or morphemes is derivational morphology . 1 Chomsky N. “Morphological Structures of English” The Hague 1957 2 Francis W.N. The structure of American English. New York, 1958, 600 р

The elements of which the word is made may have a grammatical relationship within the word (you may find this idea difficult), but their formation is independent of the syntax of the clause or sentence in which they occur. If you find this puzzling, two things may help: Inflectional morphology is much easier to recognize. A relatively small number of types of inflection (showing number or tense, say) covers most cases. All compound and most complex words show derivational morphology. If a complex word does not show inflection it will show derivation. But note: a complex word may show both inflection and derivation! A derived word may be inflected to show, for example, tense or number: deport ed or disposable s (as in nappies or diapers) 3 . This table shows how the most common kinds of inflection are found in three word classes: Inflection of nouns, verbs and qualifiers Nouns Verbs Adjectives and adverbs Addition of terminal s to show plural ( one cat; two cats ); Addition of 's to show possession ( Henry's cat ). Ending shows tense ( want ed ) or person ( [she] want s ). Addition of -er → comparative ( hotter; likelier ); Addition of -est → superlative ( coldest; soonest ). This table illustrates how derivation can occur: Derivational morphology in complex words Prefix Base of Word Suffix Complex Word Bi cycl(e) ing Bicycling Dis grace ful Disgraceful In tolera(te) able Intolerable Re vision ist Revisionist Un, co operat(e) ive, ly Uncooperativel y Un likely (y becomes i) hood Unlikelihood Remember that morphology is the study of the structure of words. The structure of words can also be studied to show how the meaning of a given 3 Fries Ch.C. The Structure of English. N.Y., 1 9 5 2 , 2 4 8 p

morpheme, or its relation to the rest of the word, varies from one complex word to another. Consider how sun works in the following words: sunbeam, sunburnt, sundial, sunflower, sunglasses, sunlight, sunrise, sun-spot (scientific sense), sun- spot (tourist sense), suntan . Inflection does not really yield “new” words, but alters the form of existing ones for specific reasons of grammar. Derivation, on the other hand, does lead to the creation of new words. David Crystal lists four normal processes of word-formation, of which three are examples of derivation: Four kinds of word-formation Prefixation (derivational) Suffixation (derivational) Compounding (derivational) Conversion (not derivational) Affix placed before base of word, e.g. dis obey Affix placed after base of word, e.g. kind ness Two base forms are added together, e.g. blackbird Word changes class, without any change of form, e.g. (the) pet (n) becomes (to) pet (vb.) Words considered as wholes can be categorized according to how they work within phrases, clauses or sentences. These categories, traditionally called parts of speech are now more usually known as word classes . Parts of speech are labels for categories in which words are usually placed. But in a given sentence a word from one category may behave as if it were in another. A dictionary will only record established or standard usage. The traditional parts of speech were of eight kinds, excluding the two articles ( a/an, the ). These were nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs, prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, and interjections. Modern linguists prefer to list words in classes that are coherent - all the words in them should behave in the same way. But if this principle were applied rigidly, we would have hundreds of classes, so irregularities are tolerated! Some classes of words are called closed because they contain a relatively small number of items to which no new words can normally be added. These are words (prepositions and conjunctions) which make connections ( connectives or connectors ), pronouns and words (including articles) like the, some, each that co- occur with nouns - these are called determiners .

Other classes of word are constantly being added to. Each contains a vast number of terms already. They are open to new words being introduced. The open classes are nouns, verbs and the words which qualify them, adjectives and adverbs. These form the bulk of a language's vocabulary or lexis (also lexicon, though this sometimes refers to a published version). These classes may be called lexical whereas the closed-class words are structural or functional 4 . These tables illustrate the two kinds of word class. Closed word classes Determiner Pronoun Preposition Conjunction A, the, any, my, those, which She, them, who, that, himself In, across, at, by, near, within And, but, if, or, while, unless Open word classes Noun Verb Adjective Adverb Abstract: fear, joy Concrete: chair, mud Common: boy, town Proper: Fred, Hull Transitive: bite, steal Intransitive: live, cry Modal: can, will, may Auxiliary: be, have, do Descriptive: lazy, tall Comparative: lazier Superlative: tallest Manner: reluctantly, keenly, easily, softly Time: soon, often Place: here, there Some words are difficult to classify. Not all grammatical descriptions will place them in the same word class. This, these or those are sometimes classified as demonstrative (or distinctive) adjectives or pronouns. Possessives, like my, his, their , are sometimes classified as pronouns (showing the word from which they are formed), sometimes as adjectives, showing their grammatical function of qualifying nouns: usually they are pronouns when alone ( I like that ) and adjectives when they precede a noun ( I like this weather ). Traditional lists of adverbs contain words like very which qualify other adverbs or adjectives. This word class is sometimes called a "dustbin" class, 4 Ilyish B.A. The structure of Modern English. M,L., 1971, 380 р

because any word which defies classification will be put in it! Among words which have sometimes been classified as adverbs are the following: however, just, no, not, quickly, tomorrow and when . This incoherence has long been recognized by grammarians who subdivide adverbs into further categories, such as adverbs of time, place or manner . In trying to organize words into coherent classes, linguists will consider any or all of the following: what they mean (semantics), their form (morphology), provenance (historical origin) and function in a phrase, clause or sentence (syntax) 5 . Some words, such as numbers, do not fit in any of the word classes given above. They can behave as adjectives ( one loaf or two? ) or pronouns ( I want one now! ). And no one description of word classes is regarded as finally authoritative. Some classes (such as verbs or conjunctions) are fairly coherent. You should be able to discuss the problems of how or where to classify words which seem not to "fit". Also note that a dictionary does not (or should not) prescribe, but indicates the word class or part of speech where a word is usually placed. But in a given sentence, if the speaker or writer has used it as if it were in a different class, then this is where it should be placed 6 . For example, toilet is usually classified as a noun. But UK primary school teachers often speak of toileting children ( I had to toilet John twice today ). In describing such a sentence, you should be guided by the internal grammar of the sentence (syntax) rather than the dictionary. Here toilet is a transitive verb. If this usage becomes standard, lexicographers will record it. This kind of word formation is called conversion , a self-explanatory name. Every statement is a combination of words, and every statement says something to communicate information. The simplest possible kind of statement - for example, Dogs bark - has two kinds of words in it. It has a what word, dogs, and a what happens word, bark. These kinds of words are the most basic parts of any statement. If a person only says dog , no statement is made, and no information 5 Ilyish B.A. The structure of Modern English. M,L., 1971, 380 р 6 M.T.Iriskulov, A.M.Kuldashev. Theoretical English Grammar. T., 2008, 210 p.

is conveyed. A sound is made that calls to mind a common, four-footed animal, but nothing regarding it is learned 7 . The what words are called nouns . They tell what is being talked about. They are identifying words, or names. Nouns identify persons, places, or things. They may be particular persons, places, or things: Michael Jackson, Reykjavik, World Trade Center. Or they may be general nouns: singer, town, building . Concrete nouns indicate things that can be seen such as car , teapot , and potato . Abstract nouns denote concepts such as love, honesty, and beauty . It is rather odd that English grammar should retain this abstract-concrete distinction for nouns. It appears to be a survival from the philosopher Plato, who divided the world into mind and matter. If it has any value it is in the philosophical field of epistemology (theory of knowledge). It does not really reveal anything for linguists beyond itself. That is, we can, if we wish, try to place nouns in the sub-categories of concrete and abstract, but once we have done so, this categorization has no further value for the study of language. Moreover, modern science confuses the issue, since it shows that many things we once supposed to belong to mind, are in fact, embodied in matter. A thrill is not only abstract, since it involves matter at the level of biochemistry. The what happens words are called verbs . They are the action words in a statement. Without them it is impossible to put sentences together. It is the verb that says something about the noun: dogs bark, birds fly, fish swim . Verbs are the important words that create information in statements. Although nouns alone make no statement, verbs can occasionally do so. Help! gives the information that someone is in trouble, and Go away! tells someone or something emphatically to leave. Besides nouns and verbs there are other kinds of words that have different functions in statements. They are pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions, articles, prepositions , and a very few words that can be called function words because they fit into none of the other categories. All of these kinds of words 7 Chomsky N. “Morphological Structures of English” The Hague 1957

together are called parts of speech. They can just as well be called parts of writing because they apply to written as well as to spoken language 8 . 2 The study of the notional parts of speech in Modern English Grammar The problem of notional parts of speech is one that causes great controversies both in general linguistic theory and in the analysis of separate languages. We shall have to examine here briefly a few general questions concerning parts of speech which are of some importance for Modern English. The term “ parts of speech ”, though firmly established, is not a very happy one. What is meant by a “parts of speech” is a type of word differing from other types in some grammatical point or points. To take the clearest example of all, the verb is a type of word different from all other types in that it alone has the grammatical category of tense. Thus, while it is perfectly reasonable to ask, “What is the past tense of the word live? (the answer of course is, lived) , it would make no sense to ask, “What is the past tense of the word city? “What is the past tense of the word big? Those words just have not got any past tense or any tense whatever, for that matter: the notional tense can not be applied to them. Tense is one of the distinctive features characterizing the verb as against every other type of word. However, the question is much less simple with reference to some other types of words, and a general definition of the principles on which classification of parts of speech is based becomes absolutely necessary 9 . We cannot here go into the controversy over these principles that has lasted a considerable time now, and we well limit ourselves to stating the principles of our classification and pointing out some difficulties inherent in it. The principles on which the classification is based are three in number, (1) meaning , (2) form , (3) function . Each of these requires some additional explanation. 1. By meaning we don’t mean the individual meaning of each separate word (its lexical meaning) but the meaning common to all the words of the given class and constituting its essence. Thus, the meaning of the substantive (noun) is 8 Khaimovich B.S., Rogovskaya B.I. A course in English Grammar. M ., 1967, 320 p 9 Блох М.Л. Термическая грамматика английского языка. М. 2003. 233ст.

“thingness”. This applies equally to all and every noun and constitutes the structural meaning of the noun as a type of word. Similarly, the meaning of the verb as a type of word is that of “process”, whatever the individual meaning of a separate verb may happen to be. We shall have to dwell on this later in considering every part of speech in detail. 2. By form we mean the morphological characteristics of a type of word. Thus, the noun is characterized by the category of number (singular and plural), the verb by tense, mood, etc. Several types of words (prepositions, conjunctions, and others) are characterized by invariability. 3. By function we mean the syntactical prosperities of a type of word. These are subdivided into two. (a) Its methods of combining with other words, (b) its function in the sentence structure. Taking, as we did previously, the verb as a specimen, we can state that, for example, a verb combines with a following noun (write letters) and also with a following adverb (write quickly). As to (b), i.e . The syntactical function of a verb in a sentence, it is that of a predicate. Two additional remarks are necessary before we proceed to the analysis of parts of speech in detail. In the first place, there is the question about the mutual relation of the criteria. We cannot be sure in advance that all three criteria will always point the same way. Then again in some cases one of them may fail (this especially applies to the criterion of form). Under such circumstances, it may prove necessary to choose between them, i.e. to attach to one of them greater value then to another. We may say provisionally, that we shall treat them in the order in which they have been enumerated, viz. meaning shall come first, from next, and function last. It will also be seen that theory of parts of speech, though considered by most scholars to be a part of morphology, cannot do without touching on some syntactical problems, namely on phrases and on syntactical functions of words (point 3 in our list of criteria). We shall regard the theory of parts of speech as essentially a part of morphology, involving, however, some syntactical

points. 10 Proceeding in the usual order, we start with the noun , or substantive. Its characteristic features are the following. 1) Meaning, thingness. Thus, nouns include not only chair and iron , etc, but also beauty, peace, necessary, journey , and everything else presented as a thing, or object. 2) Form. Nouns have the category of number (singular and plural), though some individual nouns may lack either a singular or a plural form. They also, in the accepted view, have the category of case (common and genitive): see however. 3) Functions. (a) Combining with words to form phrases. A noun combines with a preceding adjective ( large room ), or occasionally with a following adjective (times immemorial, with a preceding noun in either the common case ( iron bar ) or the genitive case father’s room ), with a verb following it (Children play) or preceding it (play games). Occasionally a noun may combine with a following indefinite article. (b) Function in the sentence. A noun may be the subject or the predicative of a sentence, or an object, an attribute, and a adverbial modifier. Next, we come to the adjective . 1) Meaning. The adjective expresses property 2) Form. Adjective in Modern English are invariable. Some adjectives form degrees of comparison ( long, longer , and longest ). 3) Function (a) Adjectives combine with nouns both preceding and (occasionally) following them (large room, times immemorial). They also combine with a preceding adverb (very large). Adjectives can be followed by the phrase “preposition + noun “( free from danger ). (b) In the sentence, an adjective can be either an attribute ( large room ) or a predicative (is large ). It can also be an objective predicative (painted the door green). The meaning of the pronoun as a separate part of speech is somewhat difficult to define. In fact, some pronouns share essential peculiarities of nouns, while others have much in common with adjective. This made some scholars think that pronouns were not a separate part of speech at all and should be distributed between nouns and adjectives. However, 10 . Бархударов Л.С. Штелинг Д.А. Грамматика английского языка. М. 2003. 207ст.

this view proves untenable and entailed insurmountable difficulties. Hence it has proved necessary to find a definition of the specific meaning of pronouns, distinguishing them for both nouns and adjectives. From this angle the meaning of pronouns as a part of speech can be stated as follows: pronouns point to the things and properties without naming them. Numerals . The treatment of numerals presents some difficulties, too. The so-called ordinal numerals (first, two) are somewhat different from the so-called ordinal numerals (first, second). The stative . The next item in our list of part of speech is a controversial one. Such words as asleep, ablaze, afraid, etc. have been often named adjectives, though they cannot (a part of a from a few special cases) be attributes in a sentence, and though their meaning does not seem to be that of property. 11 The verb . The verb as a part of speech expresses a process. The verb is characterized by an elaborate system of morphological categories, some of which are, however. These are: tense, aspect, mood, voice, person and number. The adverb . The meaning of the adverb as a part of speech is hard to define. Indeed, some adverbs indicate time or place of an action (yesterday, here), also while others indicate its property (quickly) and others again the degree of a property (very). Adverbs are invariable. Some of them, however, have degrees of a comparison. Prepositions . The problem of prepositions has caused very heated discussion, especially in the last few years. Both the meaning and the syntactical functions of prepositions have been the subject of controversy. We will treat of this matter at some length in chapter 18, and here we will limit ourselves to a brief statement of our general view on the subject. The meaning of prepositions is obviously the of relations between things and phenomena. Conjunctions . The problem of conjunctions is of the same order as that of prepositions, but it has attracted less attention. We will reserve full discussion of the matter to chapter 19 and we will only state here the main points. Conjunctions 11 Ирискулов М.Т. Лекции потеоретическая грамматика английского языка Т., 2004, 140 с.

express connections between things and phenomena. Conjunctions are invariable. They connect any two words, phrases or clauses. Particles . By particles we mean such words as only, solely, even, just , etc. These were traditionally classed with adverbs, from which they, however, differ in more than one respect. The meaning of particles is very hard to define. We might say, approximately, that they denote subjective shades of meaning introduced by the speaker or writer and serving and emphasize or limit some point in what he says. Modal words. Modal words have only recently been separated from adverbs, with which they were traditionally taken together. By modal words we mean such words as perhaps, possibly, certainly. Modal words express the speaker’s evaluation of the relation between an action and reality. Modal words are invariable. Modal words are usually doing not enter any phrases but stand outside them. In a few cases, however, they may be entering into phrases with a noun, adjective etc. Interjections . Interjections express feelings ( ah, alas ). They are not names of feelings but the immediate expression of them. Some interjections represent noises, etc, with a strong emotional coloring (bang). Interjections are invariable. Interjections usually do not enter into phrases. Only in a few cases do they combine with a preposition and noun or pronoun, e.g alas for him ! In a sentence an interjection forms a kind of parenthesis. The original simple verbs stems are not numerous, such verbs as go, take, write . But conversion as means of the ‘noun- verb’ type greatly enlarges the simple stem set of verbs, since it is one of the most productive ways of forming verb lexemes in English a cloud, a house – to house, a park – to park , etc. 3 The problem of the adjective as a notional part of speech in Modern English The adjective expresses the categorial semantics of property of a substance. It means that each adjective used in tile text presupposes relation to some noun the property of whose referent it denotes, such as its material, colour, dimensions,

position, state, and other characteristics both permanent and temporary. It follows from this that, unlike nouns, adjectives do not possess a full nominative value. Indeed, words like long, hospitable, fragrant cannot effect any self-dependent nominations; as units of informative sequences they exist only in collocations showing what is long, who is hospitable, what is fragrant. The semantically bound character of the adjective is emphasized in English by the use of the prop- substitute one in the absence of the notional head-noun of the phrase. E.g.: I don't want a yellow balloon, let me have the green one over there. On the other hand, if the adjective is placed in a nominatively self-dependent position, this leads to its substantivization. Outside it was a beautiful day, and the sun tinged the snow with red . The sun tinged the snow with the red colour. Adjectives are distinguished by a specific combinability with nouns, which they modify, if not accompanied by adjuncts, usually in pre-position, and occasionally in postposition; by a combinability with link-verbs, both functional and notional; by a combinability with modifying adverbs 12 . In the sentence the adjective performs the functions of an attribute and a predicative. Of the two, the more specific function of the adjective is that of an attribute, since the function of a predicative can be performed by the noun as well. There is, though, a profound difference between the predicative uses of the adjective and the noun which is determined by their native categorial features. Namely, the predicative adjective expresses some attributive property of its noun-referent, whereas the predicative noun expresses various substantival characteristics of its referent, such as its identification or classification of different types. This can be shown on examples analysed by definitional and transformational procedures. Cf: You talk to people as if they were a group. —>You talk to people as if they formed a group. Quite obviously, he was a friend. —> His behaviour was like that of a friend. Cf, as against the above: 12 К haimovich B.S., Rogoyskaya B.L.A course in English Grammar. Moscow, 1996

I will be silent as a grave. —> I will be like a silent grave. Walker felt healthy. —> Walker felt a healthy man. It was sensational. —>That fact was a sensational fact. When used as predicatives or post-positional attributes, a considerable number of adjectives, in addition to the general combinability characteristics of the whole class, are distinguished by a complementive combinability with nouns. The complement-expansions of adjectives are effected by means of prepositions. E.g. fond of jealous of curious of suspicious of angry with, sick with, serious about, certain about, happy about; grateful to, thankful to , etc. Many such adjectival collocations render essentially verbal meanings and some of them have direct or indirect parallels among verbs. Cf : be fond of—love, like; be envious of— envy; be angry with — resent; be mad for, about -covet; be thankful to — thank . Alongside of other complementive relations expressed with the help of prepositions and corresponding to direct and prepositional object-relations of verbs, some of these adjectives may render relations of addressee, Cf: grateful to, indebted to, partial to, useful for. To the derivational features of adjectives belong a number of suffixes and prefixes of which the most important are: - ful ( hopeful ) - less ( flawless ) - ish ( bluish ) - ous ( famous ) - ive ( decorative ) - ic ( basic ) - un - ( unprecedented ) - in - ( inaccurate ) - pre - ( premature ). Among the adjectival affixes should also be named the prefix a-, constitutive for the stative sub-class which is to be discussed below. As for the variable (demutative) morphological features, the English adjective, having lost in the course of the history of English all its forms of grammatical agreement with the noun, is distinguished only by the hybrid category of comparison. All the adjectives are traditionally divided into two large subclasses: qualitative and relative. Relative adjectives express such properties of a substance as are determined by the direct relation of the substance to some other substance. wood — a wooden hut mathematics — mathematical precision

history — a historical event table — tabular presentation colour — coloured postcards surgery — surgical treatment the Middle Ages — mediaeval rites The nature of this "relationship" in adjectives is best revealed by definitional correlations. Cf: a wooden hut — a hut made of" wood: a historical event — an event referring to a certain period of history; surgical treatment — treatment consisting in the implementation of surgery ; etc. Qualitative adjectives, as different from relative ones, denote various qualities of substances which admit of a quantitative estimation, i.e. of establishing their correlative quantitative measure. The measure of a quality can be estimated as high or low, adequate or inadequate, sufficient or insufficient. optimal or excessive. Cf: an awkward situation — a very awkward situation: a difficult task — too difficult a task; an enthusiastic reception — rather an enthusiastic reception; a hearty welcome — not a very hearty welcome ; etc. In this connection, the ability of an adjective to form degrees of comparison is usually taken as a formal sign of its qualitative character, in opposition to a relative adjective which is understood as incapable of forming degrees of comparison by definition. Cf: a pretty girl - a prettier girl; a quick look — a quicker look; a hearty welcome — the heartiest of welcomes: a bombastic speech — the most bombastic speech 13 . However, in actual speech the described principle of distinction is not at all strictly observed, which is noted in the very grammar treatises putting it forward. Two typical cases of contradiction should be pointed out here. In the first place, substances can possess such qualities as are incompatible with the idea of degrees of comparison. Accordingly, adjectives denoting these qualities, while belonging to the qualitative subclass, are in the ordinary use incapable of forming degrees of comparison. Here refer adjectives like extinct, immobile, deaf final, fixed , etc. In the second place, many adjectives considered under the heading of relative still can form degrees of comparison, thereby, as it were, transforming the denoted relative property of a substance into such as can be graded quantitatively. Cf: a mediaeval approach—rather a 13 К haimovich B.S., Rogoyskaya B.L. A course in English Grammar. Moscow ,

mediaeval approach — a. far more mediaeval approach; of a military design — of a less military design — of a more military design; a grammatical topic - a purely grammatical topic — the most grammatical of the suggested topics . In order to overcome the demonstrated lack of rigour in the definitions in question, we may introduce an additional linguistic distinction which is more adaptable to the chances of usage. The suggested distinction is based on the evaluative function of adjectives. According as they actually give some qualitative evaluation to the substance referent or only point out its corresponding native property, all the adjective functions may be grammatically divided into "evaluative" and "specificative". In particular, one and the same adjective, irrespective of its being basically (i.e. in the sense of the fundamental semantic property of its root constituent) "relative" or "qualitative", can be used either in the evaluative function or in the specificative function. 14 For instance, the adjective good is basically qualitative. On the other hand, when employed as a grading term in teaching, i.e. a term forming part of the marking scale together with the grading terms bad, satisfactory, excellent, it acquires the said specificative value; in other words, it becomes a specificative, not an evaluative unit in the grammatical sense (though, dialectically, it does signify in this case a lexical evaluation of the pupil's progress). Conversely, the adjective wooden is basically relative, but when used in the broader meaning "expressionless" or "awkward" it acquires an evaluative force and, consequently, can presuppose a greater or lesser degree ("amount") of the denoted properly in the corresponding referent. E.g.: Bundle found herself looking into the expressionless, wooden face of Superintendent Battle (J. Grant). The superintendent was sitting behind a table and looking more wooden than ever. The degrees of comparison are essentially evaluative formulas, therefore any adjective used in a higher comparison degree (comparative, superlative) is thereby 14 Блох М.Л. Термическая грамматика английского языка. М. 2003. 233ст.

made into an evaluative adjective, if only for the nonce (see the examples above). Thus, the introduced distinction between the evaluative and specificities uses of adjectives, in the long run, emphasizes the fact that the morphological category of comparison (comparison degrees) is potentially represented in the whole class of adjectives and is constitutive for it. Among the words signifying properties of a normal referent there is a lexemic set which claims to be recognized as a separate part of speech, i.e. as a class of words different from the adjectives in its class- forming features. These are words built up by the prefix a- and denoting different states, mostly of temporary duration. Here belong lexemes like afraid, agog, adrift, ablaze. In traditional grammar these words were generally considered under the heading of "predicative adjectives" (some of them also under the heading of adverbs), since their most typical position in the sentence is that of a predicative and they are but occasionally used as pre-positional attributes to nouns 15 . Notional words signifying states and specifically used as predicatives were first identified as a separate part of speech in the Russian language by L.V.Shcherba and V.V. Vinogradov. The two scholars called the newly identified part of speech the "category of state" (and, correspondingly, separate words making up this category, "words of the category of state"). On the analogy of the Uzbek 'category of state", the English qualifying a-words of the corresponding meanings subjected to a lexico-grammatical analysis and given the part-of-speech heading "category of slate". This analysis was first conducted by B. A. Ilyish and later continued by other linguists. The term "words of the category of state", being rather cumbersome Rom the technical point of view, was later changed into "stative words", or "sfatives". The part-of-speech interpretation of the statives is not shared by all linguists working in the domain of English, and has found both its proponents and opponents. Probably the most consistent and explicit exposition of the part-of-speech interpretation of statives has been given by B.S.Khaimovich and B.I.Rogovskaya. Their theses supporting the view in question can be summarized as follows. 15 .Ирискулов М.Т. Лекции по теоретическая грамматика английского языка.Тошкент, 2004, 140 б.

First, the statives, called by the quoted authors "adlinks" (by virtue of their connection with link-verbs and on the analogy of the term "adverbs"), are allegedly apposed-to adjectives on a purely semantic basis, since adjectives denote "qualities", and statives-adlinks denote "states". Second, as different from adjectives, statives-adlinks are characterized by the specific prefix a-. Third, they allegedly do not possess the category of the degrees of comparison. Fourth, the combinability of statives-adlinks is different from that of adjectives in so far as they are not used in the pre-positional attributive function, i.e. are characterized by the absence of the right-hand combinability with nouns. The advanced reasons, presupposing many-sided categorial estimation of statives, are undoubtedly serious and worthy of note. Still, a closer consideration of the properties of the analysed lexemic set cannot but show that, on the whole, the said reasons are hardly instrumental in proving the main idea, i.e. in establishing the English stative as a separate part of speech. The re-consideration of the stative on the basis of comparison with the classical adjective inevitably discloses (lie fundamental relationship between the two. — such relationship as should be interpreted in no other Derms than identity on the part-of-speech level, though, naturally, providing for their distinct differentiation on the subclass level. The first scholar who undertook this kind of re-consideration of the lexemic status of English statives was L.S.Barkhudarov, and in our estimation of them we essentially follow his principles, pointing out some additional criteria of argument. First, considering the basic meaning expressed by the stative, we formulate it as "stative property", i.e. a kind of property of a nounal referent. As we already know, the adjective as a whole signifies not "quality" in the narrow sense, but "property", which is eategorially divided into "substantive quality as such" and "substantive relation". In this respect, statives do not fundamentally differ from classical adjectives. Moreover, common adjectives and participles in adjective-type functions can express the same, or, more specifically, typologically the same properties (or "qualities" in a broader sense) as are expressed by statives. Indeed, the main meaning types conveyed by statives are: the psychic state of a person

( afraid, ashamed, aware ); the physical state of a person astir, a foot): the physical state of an object ( afire, ablaze, aglow ); the state of an object lift space ( askew, awry, aslant ). Meanings of the same order are rendered by pre¬positional adjectives. Cf: the lining predecessor — the predecessor alive; eager curiosity — curiosity agog; the burning house — the house afire; a floating raft — a raft afloat; a half-open door — a door adjar; slanting ropes — ropes aslant; a vigilant man — a man awake; similar cases — cases alike; an excited crowd — a crowd astir . It goes without saying that many other adjectives and participles convey the meanings of various states irrespective of their analogy with statives. Cf such words of the order of psychic state as despondent, curious, happy, joyful; such words of the order of human physical state as sound, refreshed, healthy, hungry; such words of the order of activity state as busy, functioning, active, employed, etc. Second, turning to the combinability characteristics of statives, we see that, though differing from those of the common adjectives in one point negatively, they basically coincide with them in the other points. As a matter of fact, statives are not used in attributive pre-position. but, like adjectives, they are distinguished by the left-hand categorial combinability both with nouns and link-verbs. Cf: The household was nil astir. The household was all excited — It was strange to see (the household active at this hour of the day.— It was strange to see the household active at this hour of the day. Third, analysing the functions of the stative corresponding to its combinability patterns, we see that essentially they do not differ from the functions of the common ad¬jective. Namely, the two basic functions of the stative are the predicative and the attribute. The similarity of functions leads to the possibility of the use of a stative and a common adjective in a homogeneous group. E.g.: Launches and barges moored to the dock were ablaze and loud with wild sound 16 . Fourth, from our point of view, it would not be quite consistent with the actual lingual data to place the stative strictly out of the category of comparison. 16 Iriskulov M., Kuldashev A. Theoretical Grammar of the English. Tashkent, 2008,

As we have shown above, the category of comparison is connected with the functional division of adjectives into evaluative and specificative. Like common adjectives, statives are subject to this flexible division, and so in principle they are included into the expression of the quantitative estimation of the corresponding properties conveyed by them. True, Statives do not take the synthetical forms of the degrees of comparison, but they are capable of expressing comparison analytically, in cases where it is to be expressed. Cf,: Of us all, Jack was the one most aware of the delicate situation in which we found ourselves. I saw that the adjusting lever stood far more askew than was allowed by the directions 17 . Fifth, quantitative considerations, though being a subsidiary factor of reasoning, and support the conjoint part-of-speech interpretation of statives and common adjectives. Indeed, the total number of statives does not exceed several dozen ( a couple of dozen basic, "stable" units and. probably, thrice as many "unstable" words of the nature of coinages for the nonce ). This number is negligible in comparison with the number of words of the otherwise identified notional parts of speech, each of them counting thousands of units. Why, then, an honour of the part-of-speech status to be granted to a small group of words not differing in their fundamental lexico-grammatical features from one of the established large word-classes? As for the set-forming prefix a-, it hardly deserves a serious consideration as a "formal basis of the part-of-speech identification of statives simply because formal features cannot be taken in isolation from functional features. Moreover, as is known, there are words of property not distinguished by this prefix, which display essential functional characteristics inherent in the stative set. In particular, here belong such adjectives as ill, well, glad, sorry, worth (while), subject (to), due (to), underway , and some others. 17 Резник Р.В. Грамматика английского языка. М., 2004, 580 стр.

Bibliography 1 . Каримов И.А.. Гармонично развитое поколение – основа прогресса Узбекистана. Ташкент. 1998. стр. 156-168 2 . O’zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidenti I.A. Karimovning 2012 yil 10 dekabrdagi PK-1875 sonli qarorida 3 . Brown C. and Jule “Teaching the spoken language”, Cambridge, 1983 p. 121 4 . Brown H., Douglas ‘Principles of language teaching’, N.Y., 1987 5 . Chomsky N. “Morphological Structures of English” The Hague 1957 6 . Christison, M. (1998). Applying multiple intelligences theory in preservice and inservice TEFL education programs. English Teaching Forum , 36 (2), 2-13 7 . Curme G.O. A Grammar of the English language. Boston- N.Y., 3 rd Ed. 1995, 320 p 8 . Francis W.N. The structure of American English. New York, 1958, 600 р 9 . Fries Ch.C. The Structure of English. N.Y., 1 9 5 2 , 2 4 8 p 1 0 . Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind . New York: Basic Books 1 1 . Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching . Oxford: Oxford University Press

Похожие

Divisions of the subject of lexicology

Etymological survey of the English word-stock

Language and speech levels

The subject matter of the theory of translation

Major Parameters identifying the Branches of Linguistic typology