Учебное пособие 1876

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

same time, as the analysis shows, for the editor's letter, despite its originality and author's style, the fundamental criteria of the text are also significant. So, its complexity is expressed in a set of interrelated sentences, which are a coherent sequence. It is important that the architectonics in the text always corresponds to the logic and has grammatical alignment. This shows the cohesion criterion. The editor's letter reflects thematic unity. Even in the most original copyright materials, seemingly detached from the issue, there is a connection with the subject matter of the entire publication and of a single issue. Both of the above criteria are closely related to the following - completeness. Of course, the author-editor can use various techniques to create an emotional hue and a certain mood, changing the structure of the letter, but more often than it has an introduction, a main part, a conclusion. An important element is the appeal to the reader, which can both play a key role in the letter of the editor, and have shifted accents. In any of these cases, it is the recourse to the recipient that is one of the main ways to reflect the communicative criterion of the text of the letter of the editor, with which the author can realize the goals, objectives and motives set for him. Having considered the editor's letter in glossy magazines in English, we came to the conclusion that this type of text can be considered special and independent, since it has a whole set of unique features, implicit and explicit characteristics, meets the tasks of both the author and the entire team, while remaining text in the broadest sense.

References

[1] Argashokova S.H. Diskursivno-lingvisticheskie harakteristiki zhanra "pis'mo redaktoru": na materiale angloyazychnogo publicisticheskogo diskursa : dissertaciya ...

kandidata filologicheskih nauk : 10.02.04 / Argashokova Svetlana Hazrail'evna.- Pyatigorsk, 2010.- 175 s.

[2]Leech G.N. - Principles of Pragmatics, London: Longman, 1983.- 250p.

[3]Hein H. The Role of Feminist Aesthetics in Feminist Theory // The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticizm. - 1990. - №4. - R. 238.

[4]Unger R. O redefinicii ponyatij pol i gender: Monografiya: per. s angl. / R. Unger. – M.: ACT, 2003. – 197 s.

[5]Hein H. The Role of Feminist Aesthetics in Feminist Theory // The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticizm. - 1990. - №4. - R. 238.

[6]Schulz M. The semantic derogation of women // Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance / ed. by B. Thorne, N. Henley. Rowley (MA) : Newbury House, 1975. – R.64—75 r.

[7]Gricenko E.S. YAzyk kak sredstvo konstruirovaniya gendera. Dissertaciya na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni doktora filologicheskih nauk. NGLU im. N.A. Dobrolyubova. — Nizhnij Novgorod, 2005. — 405 s.

[8]Kirilina A.V., Tomskaya M.V. Lingvisticheskie gendernye issledovaniya // Otechestvennye zapiski. 2005, № 2. EHlektronnaya versiya (URL: http://www.strana- oz.ru/2005/2/lingvisticheskie-gendernye-issledovaniya ) (data obrashcheniya: 22.01.2019).

[9]Fix Ulla. Texte und Textsorten - sprachliche, kommunikative und kulturelle

Phänomene. Frank & Timme GmbH, 2008. — 506 c.

[10]Grishaeva L.I. Osobennosti ispol'zovaniya yazyka i kul'turnaya identichnost' kommunikantov. Voronezh: Voronezhskij gosudarstvennyj universitet, 2007.

[11]Babicheva, E.L. Semantika dialoga v pis'mah redaktora v sovremennyh zhenskih zhurnalah/ E.L. Babicheva// Filologicheskie nauki.-№7, 2010.

74

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

Analysed sources

[1*] Men’s Health, January 2016 (URL: https://vk.com/doc16929061_437135861?hash=381df0 d444eb119386&dl=35e85e87c16f9bcafb) (vremya obrashcheniya: 22.01.2019).

[2*] Men’s Health, July 2017 (URL: https://vk.com/doc16929061_445276399?hash=175272b16 94dbe298f&dl=fcf1cb3fb9b1b4f292) (vremya obrashcheniya: 22.01.2019).

[3*] Cosmopolitan, January 2018 (URL: https://vk.com/doc391492909_479792389?hash=be930 6bef8213895be&dl=b85af26100389cb9c6) (vremya obrashcheniya: 22.01.2019).

[4*] Cosmopolitan, June 2017 (URL: https://vk.com/doc16929061_442946121?hash=4954e36f89 1 5ff1808&dl=a26b218d4102257572) (vremya obrashcheniya: 22.01.2019).

[5*] Cosmopolitan, July 2017 (URL: https://vk.com/doc16929061_437757208?hash=5b6e8f620c d00fb9ec&dl=be742185d8f1c6803a) (vremya obrashcheniya: 22.01.2019).

75

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

METHODS AND DIDACTICS

UDC 811.112.2.2:81'366.5(075.8)

CAUSATIVE VERBS IN MODERN GERMAN LANGUAGE: SYSTEMATIC,

STRUCTURAL AND DIDACTIC INTERPRETATION

Yu.V. Kobenko, E.V. Shitkova, A.V. Moreva, E.S. Riabova

National Research Tomsk State University

DSc, Professor of the Department of German Language Yuriy Viktorovich Kobenko

e-mail: serpentis@list.ru

National Research Tomsk State University

PhD, Head of the Department of German Language Elena Viktorovna Shitkova

e-mail: eshi@inbox.ru

National Research Tomsk State University PhD, Associate Professor

of the Department of German Language Anastasia Vladimirovna Moreva e-mail: stasija@mail.ru

Samara National Research University

Ph.D., associate professor of the Department of Foreign Languages and Russian as the Second Language

Elena Sergeevna Ryabova e-mail: es.ryabova@mail.ru

Statement of the problem. The article aims at providing teachers of the German language with the necessary information of the causative verb rows organization and the ways of their optimal presentation in the German language classes for students of the B1-C2 language proficiency levels.

Results. The system-structural interpretation precedes the linguodidactic one and is related to it in the same way as the system to the function. The core issue of the system-structural interpretation is the systematization of the knowledge about the category of causation in the German language, its place in the system of the given language and the patterns of the corresponding verb stems use in literary German speech. The causative verbs form binary modular oppositions and implement the logical algorithm “action initiation → action result”. The initiative part is represented by transitive verbs in the introductory meaning, and the resultative one – by intransitive verbs, varying within the semantic opposition “statality vs. liquidity” (condition vs. its change). In the early origins, the typological relation to the corresponding part of the algorithms was expressed by an internal inflection: the phoneme [e] marked the verbs of the left row, and the phoneme [i] marked the right row. Due to the trend of the German literary language development according to the analytical type, the internal inflection of the causation lost its productivity. It was replaced by a composite mechanism mainly expressing transitivity (zum Lachen bringen, jemanden lachen machen). Linguodidactic interpretation is aimed at ways of implementing the structural and systematic properties of causative verb rows for intermediate and advanced learners. The leading methodological principle of the causative rows presentation should be recognized as an oral activity as it provides the pragmatic orientation of the communicative practices of students and realizes the natural need for the implementation of the verbal rows in

_________________________________________________________

© Kobenko Yu.V., Shitkova E.V., Moreva A.V., Riabova E.S., 2019

76

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

everyday communication. The main forms of organization of such education are role-playing games, problem situations and spontaneous communication.

Conclusions. The assimilation of the category of causation in modern German literary language is promoted by the presentation of elements of this functional-semantic category in strict parceling of transitive (introductory) and intransitive (static/liquidative) verbs correlating with the binary-opposed nature of causation in the system of the given language. The functional features of causation, on the contrary, should emphasize the modulative side of this phenomenon according to the model “I produce an action on an object, as a result of which it acquires a new state or changes the old one”. The binary and modulative sides of causation are its complementary features.

Key words: modern German language, causative verbs, category of causation, weak and strong verbs, binary oppositions, verb classes, structural and system features, linguodidactic interpretation.

For citation: Kobenko Yu.V., Shitkova E.V., Moreva A.V., Riabova E.S. Causative verbs in modern German language: systematic, structural and didactic interpretation / Yu.V. Kobenko, E.V. Shitkova, A.V. Moreva, E.S. Riabova // Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-didactic Researches”. – 2019. - №1 (24). –

P. 76-86

Introduction

One of the most complex phenomena of the German grammar is causative verbal oppositions (Kausativa) – these are rows that are consisting, without exception, of paired verbal lexemes due to their binary modulative semantic correlation, for example: legen → liegen (something / someone is put, and, therefore, he / she / it lies) tränken → trinken (giving someone / something to drink, and, therefore, he / she / it is drinking). Causality (Latin causa – reason) as a functional semantic category explicates a causal relationship between the elements of such binary verbal oppositions and due to this can be the object of both grammar [1, p. 206] and lexicology [2, p. 106]. Linguists classify the verb as the most complex and capacious part of speech [3, p. 70]: even as an unproductive verb class in modern German, the causative verb pairs remain connected with different levels of the language, intraand extra-linguistic. The intra-linguistic level, first of all, includes the following sections of grammar – morphology (together with word formation according to the tradition of Russian linguistics) and syntax, sections of semantics and/or lexicology – onomasiology and semasiology, and the field of lexicology – etymology. The extralinguistic texture of causation is understood through the connection with the historical and cultural environment of the Nostratic (presumably Pra-Germanic) language in which vocal modulation [e] vs. [i] [4, p. 6] originated and it implements, on the one hand, the antinomic counterradiational character of the causative rows in their paradigmatic meaning (left / right row verbs, see below), and, on the other hand, outlines the boundaries of the grammatical subcategory of causation within the category genera verbi [5, p. 32]. Despite the synchronous unproductiveness, causative verbs neither semantically nor morphologically tend to be a closed class: having evolved mainly in the verb category (cf .: fallen → mhd. mnd. mnl. ml. vallen, asächs. fallan, aengl. feallan, fallan, engl. to fall, anord. schwed. falla [1*]), they contributed to the formation of a significant number of nouns of agential (nomen actionis: Fall) and resultative (nomen acti: Sprung) meaning by transposition, as well as to the appearance of factitive verbs (Faktitiva), derived from the stems of adjectives (scharf machen → schärfen, lahm legen – lähmen) [6, p. 20].

The multi-level and multi-factor character of German causation raises the question of the ways and forms of its optimal linguodidactic presentation and interpretation in the German language class, which, therefore, implies the teacher's comprehensive knowledge of the systemstructural features of the causative verb pairs in modern German. Thus, the logic of this article is built according to the well-known Plato's theory: from knowledge to learning, where the knowledge component is presented as a system-structural (substantive) interpretation preceding the didactic (formal, heuristic) interpretation. Hence, the objective of this article is to provide German teachers with the necessary information about the organization of causative verb rows and the ways of their successful presentation in German lessons for levels B1 – C2 according to the European CEFR system.

77

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

Research methodology

The object of the research is the functional-semantic category of causativeness in the modern German language; the subject is the system-structural characteristics and linguodidactic features of the interpretation of verbs and verb forms constituting the category mentioned above.

The actual corpus of the research material includes 26 pairs of causative verbs in modern German in the amount of 52 lexical units selected and semantically conjugated empirically. Etymological analysis was conducted using the universal explanatory dictionary of the German language “Duden. Universalwörterbuch”(2015) and the lemmatical articles of the DWDS electronic card file (Das Wortauskunftssystem zur deutschen Sprache in Geschichte und Gegenwart) of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science (Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften).

The leading approach in the study of grammatical categories as systems of closed grammatical meanings that are in opposition to each other is supposed to be a system-functional one, that aims at fixing the features of the functioning of language systems and subsystems in evolutionary dynamics. The practical use of such methodological grounds is understood when studying structural-functional formations in areas of diachrony that surpass formations and even the entire glottogenesis of individual linguistic idioms, for example, derivatives of word families identified in the original language by reconstruction. The system-dynamic approach also serves as a competing approach, which makes it possible to study the system properties of languages in the context of continuous change. The dynamic concept of the language system has received initial development in the works of theorists of the Prague Linguistic Circle and is based on the thesis about the open character of the language system and its constituent elements and the fundamental incompleteness of development processes. However, due to the synchronous unproductiveness of the category of causation, i.e. the inability to fill it with new verb pairs (oppositions), it is appropriate to limit the dynamic aspect with the help of the semantic framework: despite the limited verb forms, causation can be expressed explicitly and, therefore, analytically, i.e. using the verbs machen and bringen, cf.: jemanden weinen machen → jemand weint; jemanden zum Lachen bringen / jemanden lachen machen → jemand lacht, and also implicitly: jemanden lächern → jemand lacht. The last opposition is not included in the corpus of the research material due to its dialect character. Thus, the epistemological basis for the research of the system-structural features of causative verbs in modern German is the synthesized approach, in which the formal side of causation involves the implementation of system-functional bases and the content side – system-dynamic ones.

The methodological foundation for the research of the forms and methods of linguodidactic interpretation of causative verbs is the speech approach, the scientific foundations of which are prepared by the foreign tradition of functional linguistics. Language learning with this approach is based on speech patterns used in real communicative situations. In modern pedagogical practice, a synthesized version of the speech approach, the theory of activity and communicative linguistics, known as the speech-activity approach, is widely used. This kind of speech approach involves the organization of classes as learning process aimed at setting and solving students' specific tasks of everyday communication, and deals with three types of tasks: role-playing games, problem situations and spontaneous communication.

To achieve the research objective a group of general and specific scientific methods and approaches was used. General scientific methods include: 1) logic methods: analysis (selecting the phonologic patterns of causative verbs); synthesis (combining the verbs into functionalsemantic groups according to onomasiological features); induction (establishing the connection between the fact extralinguistic reality and its lexical representative; correlation of the distributive properties of the causative verbs with grammatical categories of modern German); deduc-

78

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

tion (specifying grammatical meanings in certain verbal forms); comparison (establishing semantic similarities or differences of verbal units within categorical oppositions); generalization (finding common properties and characteristics of causative verbs, as well as features of their genesis in the system of German literary language); analogy (transferring the properties of one verb to another when modeling oppositive rows); modeling (construction of contradictory registers united by a common onomasiological feature); 2) statistical methods: quantitative methods (using numerical data and standardized methods for processing the empirical corpus of the study); dialectic method (studying the processes of evolution of the causation category elements in the German language in development, interrelation and causality); grouping method (structural, typological, and analytical (factor) separation of empirical research material according to essential features). Specific scientific (linguistic and linguodidactic) methods include: 1) comparative-historical method together with methods of external reconstruction (detection of genetically related morphemic material in the systems of related languages of the West and North German groups), internal reconstruction (simultaneous detection of genetically homogeneous phonemes in the system of causative verb connections); 2) methods of structural linguistics: the method of component analysis (the study of grammatical and lexical meanings of causative verbs); oppositive method (selection of paradigmatic rows); formal-grammatical method (description of the composite forms formation); the traditionally-complex method (part-of- speech attribution and the typology of verbal derivatives); the method of distributive analysis (studying the environment of causative verbs in synchronous German speech and their ability to be lexically or grammatically combined with other units); 3) linguodidactic methods: intensive (aimed at accelerating the formation of the whole set of skills in using causative verbs in German speech), problematic (building a problematic communicative situation, the solution of which involves the use of causative verbs in a grammatically correct form), grammaticaltranslational (translation of causative verbs in quasi-authentic sentences) methods.

Research results

1. System-structural interpretation.

In modern German, there are 26 fixed codified pairs of causative verbs that function simultaneously in the grammatical category of causality, cf.: (an)heften → (an)haften (Der Falkner heftet seinem Zögling einen Peilsender an. → Dieser Sache haftet ein hohes Risiko an.); löschen → erlöschen (Die Feuerwehrleute löschten den Brand. → Der Vulkan erlosch vor vielen Jahren.).

It is evident from the examples that the causative verbs, while remaining in the function- al-semantic category under analysis, can add stable and unstable verbal components, which in practice are incorrectly denoted by prefixes [see more on this 7]. The ability of causative verbs to form composite forms confirms the stated above thesis about the morphological (wordforming) openness and productivity of the verbs involved in causation. New meanings created in this case can be considered, only from a lexical point of view, as new paired oppositions of verbs, cf.: legen → liegen, erlegen → erliegen. However, from a grammatical point of view, composite verb stems do not form new forms, cf.: löschen (extinguish: löschte, hat gelöscht) → löschen (extinguished: losch, ist erloschen) = erlöschen (erlosch, ist erloschen) / verlöschen (extinguish: verlöschte, hat verlöscht) → verlöschen (extinguished: verlosch, ist verloschen). The form löschen as a strong verb is obsolete in relation to the modern form of erlöschen, and the verb verlöschen is used with a reference “rarely” or “poetically”. In compiling the empirical corpus of the form, löschen and erlöschen, legen and erlegen, etc., were considered to be one unit.

A stable distinctive feature of causation tends to be teleotivity (Greek τέλεος, final), which due to the binary nature of the opposition “cause vs. effect” led to the formation in the German language rows of causative verbs that detect synchronously strong grammatical divergences. In the Indo-European language, the causative pairs were not registered, and the causativeness itself was achieved by changing the root morphemes of strong verbs to [i] [8, p. 28],

79

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

i.e. through internal derivation. Partly this feature, marking strong verbs of the right row, has survived to this day and is found separately in their various forms, cf.: liegt, fiel, dringe, erschrickst, schwimmen. This phoneme is used in the parallel forms of the second and third person singular of the verb in Present Simple erlöschen / verlöschen, better known as Brechung

(interchange), cf .: du erlischst / verlischst, es erlischt / verlischt together with du erlöschst / verlöschst, es erlöscht / verlöscht. The morphological separation of verb forms according to the features “cause” / “effect” occurred approximately in the first century BC in the ProtoGermanic language and had a significant impact on the verb classes in the systems of its descendants – Germanic languages [4, p. 6]. Consequently, the category of causation is significantly older than the language systems of even such outstanding representatives of the Germanic branch as the German and English languages.

Causative semantics is based on initiation that is focused on an object (a patient or an experiencer) and is leading to a change or elimination of its current state. Syntactically initiation is expressed through the transitivity, as a rule, of a verb in an introductory meaning [9, p. 204], cf.: A → (auslösen / bewirken / verursachen) B or A → (beeinflussen) B, where B is the actant with the function of addition in the accusative case. When distributing a verb of a strong row of patients or experiencers (B), they find either a statal (state) or a liquidative (state change) meaning, while in perfect verb forms indicating a state, the auxiliary verb will be haben (except for the upper dialects of the German language that allow the form “ich bin gestanden” instead of “ich habe gestanden”), and verbs of state change – sein (er ist gefahren). Thus, we obtain a causation scheme in modern German:

It goes without saying, that as in any rule there are exceptions that confirm the dynamism of any synchronous linguistic phenomenon, even if it is unproductive: for example, the verb trinken, referring to the phenomena of the right row, is transitive (Wein trinken).

Like any system, the functional-semantic category of causation is subject to continuous change. This means that its unproductiveness is compensated by new methods of causation, some of which have already been given above. Thus, the cause-effect relationship can be expressed with the help of one single verb zerbrechen, cf.: Paul zerbrach die Tasse (introduktiv). → Die Tasse zerbrach (liquidativ). The tendency toward homonymic type of causation appeared in German relatively recently, cf.: er fuhr mich zum Bahnhof (instead of: führte, since führen → fahren). → Wir sind zum Bahnhof gefahren. The convenience of expressing many things by one, a kind of polysemy as a symptom of a universal integrative tendency of language development, absolves the native speakers from having to memorize complex differentiated forms of conjugation, such as, for example, schmelzte → schmolz (Die Sonne schmelzte den Schnee. → Der Schnee schmolz in der Sonne.), schwellte → schwoll (Der Wind schwellte die

Segel. → Die Segel schwollen im Wind.), siedete → sott (Der Koch siedete das Wasser. → Das

Wasser sott bei 100 Grad Celsius.), steckte → stak (Die Zofe steckte den Schlüssel ins Schlüsselloch. → Der Schlüssel stak im Schlüsselloch.). Whether the German language return to the morphological integration of causal pairs or not is the area of precognition; synchronously, we can state the coexistence of integrative tendencies with fixed cases of causative homonymy, cf.: erschrecken → erschrecken (Du hast mich aber erschreckt! → Ich bin sehr erschrocken.).

Verb reflexivity is also in the service of alternative causation, for example: Klaudia weitet die Mütze (introduktiv). → Die Mütze weitet sich (liquidativ). Similar phenomena are

80

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

observed in the verbs of the right row that demonstrate contradictory oppositions, cf.: der Wein trinkt sich gut (vs. tränken); er wand sich wie ein Aal (vs. wenden); ich kann mich gut daran erinnern (vs. erinnern).

Other features of causative verbs in modern German language include semantic isolation and duality generated by binarity. As an example of meaning isolation, one can cite the pair of antonyms “versenken → versinken” vs. “Ertränken → ertrinken”, where the first pair is used for inanimate objects (Die Seeräuber versenkten das Schiff. → Das Schiff versank in hohen

Wellen.), while the verbs of the second pair are used only in relation to animated objects

(Gerassim ertränkte Mumu. → Mumu ertrank im Fluss). The second verb opposition allows contexts with abstractions, that manifest human nature, in the function of the patient, for example: Der Mann ertränkte seinen Kummer im Alkohol. → Die Liebe ist im Meer aus Tränen ertrunken.

Binarity also leads to ambiguity when translating. For example, the German interpretation of the name of the novel “May Night, or the Drowned Maiden” by N.V. Gogol may sound

“Mainacht oder die Ertrunkene” or “Mainacht oder die Ertränkte“, if you do not know the content. Experience of working with German adolescents in the sensitive period (7–12 years) shows that they have considerable difficulties in choosing the forms of causative oppositions in sentences like “Der Rettungsschwimmer rettete das ertrinkende / ertränkende Mädchen vor dem Ertrinken / Ertränken”.

Thus, the ancient category of causation is not fixed. At present, one can observe the destruction of old and the creation of new causative connections with a constant number of causative oppositions, which determine its morphological unproductiveness. If in the pair “säugen → saugen” the common root helps to reproduce the functional-semantic link, then in such opposition as “heften → haften”, the causative link is gradually destroyed due to the loss of the onceconnected verbs of the common etymon.

2. Lingvodidactic interpretation.

The optimal linguodidactic interpretation of German causative verbs depends on the following factors: first of all, on the level of students' linguistic competence and the aim of learning a foreign language (everyday communication, studying at the linguistic / non-linguistic department, working as a translator, teacher of a foreign language, etc.); secondly, on the learner’s age and communicative experience.

In accordance with the speech-activity approach to the teaching of a foreign language, including the grammatical side of the speech, any phenomenon should be studied not as a separate form or structure, but as a means of expressing certain communicative intentions. In this situation, the functional grammar based on the onomasiological principle comes to the rescue:

“from meaning to form”, as opposed to the traditional presentation of material “from form to meaning”. The functional approach allows you to organize grammatical material in such a way that students for the implementation of their communicative intention acquire not only one language means, but a set of tools. The theory of functional syntax by A. Mustayoki implements an approach from the main semantic structures (physical action, movement, possession, etc.), their modifiers (speech functions, phase, causation, authorization) and specifiers (denial, aspectuality, etc.) to the language means that embody the language. This emphasizes the creative attitude to the language, as the student is not limited in the choice of means [cf. 10]

The general focus on the use of the language and the language units in real situations of communication, undoubtedly, brings together the functional approach in linguistics (grammar) and the currently accepted communicative method in teaching foreign languages. In the majority of modern German textbooks, the authors base on speech actions and intentions: for example, starting from A1 level, how, what means can be used “to ask somebody” (fragen) or “to ask for something” (bitten). At the intermediate and advanced levels, students are encouraged to use other communicatively significant speech actions (often in connection with certain lexical topics): describe something, comment, agree with something, come to an agreement with

81

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

the partner, etc., and grammar is not the main goal, it serves the communicative tasks. In essence, in all modern textbooks, the elements of functional grammar, grammar “from meaning to form” are presented in one way or another.

However, as A. Mustayoki notes, the functional approach can and should be used in teaching when students already have basic grammatical skills: “There is no sense in presenting different syntactic constructions that express a semantic category if the students are unfamiliar with the necessary forms, “building materials” for these expressions” [10, p. 409–410]. For example, to become familiar with German causative verbs, the student must know the German verb conjugation paradigm in the present and past tense, know the German cases (at least accusative, since the category of causation is related to transitivity), i.e. have a traditional grammatical minimum level A1 – A2. In this sense, functional-situational grammar training cannot but be supplemented by system-structural and analytical methods. In practice, a combination of approaches is optimal: learning goes “from system to communication” [11, p. 17], from systemdescriptive grammar to communicative-oriented one.

Another important point is the selection of the verbs themselves for presentation and training. In our opinion, for the presentation at the primary level (the goal is everyday communication) it is advisable to select the most frequent and communicatively significant pairs of verbs, like “stellen → stehen”, “legen → liegen”, “setzen → sitzen”, “hängen → hängen”, and offer students a number of communicative exercises (see below). Of course, in the target groups of linguistic students who usually have grammar as a separate subject and whose language level is higher than the beginner, the corpus of grammatical material (pairs of verbs) can and should be expanded, and exercises should be added by exercises for translation, substitution of the correct verb from the pair [cf. 4].

Causative verb pairs cause difficulties for students because of their similarity ("senken → sinken"), which, as was mentioned above, is achieved due to a common etymone and possible causative homonymy ("erschrecken → erschrecken"). Therefore, it is important to have an explication of differences between the verbs within a causative pair at the presentation stage. The ideas expressed above and work experience show that when explaining the differences between the verbs of a pair, it is advisable to base on the feature “presence / absence of transitivity”, cf .: Der Betrieb senkt die Preise. → Die Preise sinken. Transitivity is the visible syntactic criterion by which the verbs of a pair differ in use.

The problem of how causative pairs will be presented to learners for introduction and consolidation (the first stage – presentation) is always solved according to the level of students' language competence. Nevertheless, it seems that, regardless of the target audience and reference level, visualization of the causative verb rows has a positive effect. It goes without saying that out of a rich choice of visual means the teacher should choose those that are the most appropriate to the specific situation of communication and the main aim. Thus, using a number of frequency verbs, the teacher demonstrates the students some particular objects in the classroom and what they can do with them (direct non-translational method), for example, the teacher takes a book, puts it on the table and then draws the students' attention to the result of the action, cf.: Ich lege das Buch auf den Tisch. → Das Buch liegt auf dem Tisch. In this way, students understand the main idea of causation – focus on the object and performing one or another action with it.

The verbs in question are well acquired with the help of various illustrations, among which it is important to single out mnemonic pictograms realizing binary-modulative semantic correlation of the verbs of the left and right rows. The teacher can find nice ready-made pictograms illustrating the use of causative verbs legen / stellen / setzen / hängen, which describe the location of objects and the change of their location, usually in combination with another grammar topic “Prepositions of dual control” (Wechselpräpositionen) and the lexical topic “Accommodation, apartment, rearrangement of furniture / objects”. The teacher can create his\her

82

Scientific Journal “Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches” Issue 1 (24), 2019 ISSN 2587-8093

own pictograms, with other verbs as well, or maybe ask for the help of advanced students who have already studied the causative verbs, but now must remember and revise them.

Visualization means also include videos that give information the function and form of the verbs in a certain situation [cf. 3 *]. The advantage of using such visual aids is the ability to hear the authentic speech, i.e. in audiovisual means, given not only by the teacher, but also by a native speaker who (in the video it is a moderator or an animated character) speaks and moves, explaining the meaning of the verbs in action. Students can comment on what they see by answering the teacher's questions, as well as make their own small videos similar to the presented ones (micro-dialogs).

Students of intermediate and advanced level for understanding the German causative pairs can be offered more complicated texts of various styles and genres (art, news, etc.). For the selection of text fragments, the teacher now has numerous linguistic corpuses, as well as the DWDS electronic card file mentioned above, where you can find, for example, the following sentences with a pair of “senken → sinken” from the same newspaper text, cf.: Das senkt die Zahl der Impfspritzen, reduziert Schmerzen für das Kleinkind, spart Zeit und auch Kosten. → Auch wenn in den vergangenen Jahren viel über Risiken von Imprungen gesprochen und berichtet wurde, sinkt die Mindern immunisieren lassen, stetig [2*]. It is possible to illustrate this pair of verbs and the difference between them using different fragments of the article, or you can give the students the entire text with the task to find the causative verb and the main verb, that shows the result of the action. If there are several text fragments, the students continue the analytical work, write out the verbs in pairs or in two columns: “introduktiv” (requiring an object that is directed at him) and the corresponding “liquidativ” (the result of the action directed at the object). In the search for the necessary grammatical material and highlighting its features, the independence and speech activity of students is stimulated

Thus, at the stage of presentation of German causative verbs, students learn about their functioning in speech with the help of the texts (oral and written), and visual aids. At this stage, receptive exercises are widely used, allowing students to interpret the grammatical material. As it was noted earlier, the perception of verb groups is based on mnemonic and thinking skills and is not passive, devoid of creativity. That is why, at this stage, there are also exercises of imitative, reproductive and analytical type.

After introducing the causative verb pairs and systematizing them, a stage of languagebased exercises follows to consolidate the language. The choice of exercises (reproductive, substitution, transformational, etc.) depends on the level of students' language competence. What is more, it is necessary to take into account the goals and conditions of studying (for beginners a limited set of verb pairs is required, as well as the situations of their use). For example, it is possible to use the following tasks:

–creating microdialogs (based on the model in which both verbs of the pair are represented), and the task must be formulated communicatively; the partner agrees, cf.: Hast du Martin in die erste Reihe gesetzt? – Ja, er sitzt in der ersten Reihe; the partner does not agree, cf.: Hast du die Jacke in die Garderobe gehängt? – Nein, sie hängt noch im Schrank; the partners discuss the rearrangement of furniture / objects, express surprise, etc., cf: Oh, du hast den Tisch ans Fenster gestellt! – Ja, der Tisch steht jetzt am Fenster, so gefällt es mir viel besser! etc.;

–choosing (completing) the necessary verb from a pair (in different tense forms), cf .: Wo liegt / legt denn meine Brille? Wer hat das buch ins regal gelegen / gelegt?; in a similar way with other verbs at the intermediate and advanced level, cf.: Der ruinierte Bankier hat sich im Kanal ertrunken / ertränkt. Für dein Projekt habe ich schon viel Geld verschwunden / verschwendet. Der vom Blitz getroffene Baum fiel / fällte um;

–transformation of the sentence with the help of a causative verb, cf.: Die Mutter sorgte dafür, dass ihr Kind auf dem Stuhl saß; intermediate and advanced level, cf.: Ein U-Boot

83