- •The reflexive voice. Non-traditional voices.
- •Clause-sentence-utterance-logical proposition
- •Informative type of sentence
- •Communicative & structural types of sentences
- •The article.
- •Category of modality in the sentence
- •Modal words
- •Statives
- •The category of mood. Indicative. Imperative.
- •Terminative/non-terminative, transitive/intransitive verbs Grammatical categories of the verb
- •The verb – meaning, form, function. Principles of classification.
- •The Theory of parts of speech in prenormative &classical gr-s.
- •The theory of parts of speech in American Descriptive Grammar.
- •The Theory of Progress, the Functional Theory.
- •Origin of the structure of Modern e-sh: Phonetic Approach, the Theory of Substratum.
- •Phonetic approach
- •The Theory of Substratum
- •Basic features of English syntax
- •Analytical features ofword-building
- •Prenormative eg
- •Prescriptive eg
- •Classical scientific grammar of e-sh
- •American descriptive grammar of eng
- •Transformational grammar
- •Noun. Number.
- •Noun. Case.
- •Scientific Principles for the Classification of Parts of Speech in Native Grammars of English. The Notion of Grammatical Category.
- •The adjective
- •Tense & Aspect of the verb
- •Numeral
- •Notional and formal words
- •Predicativity of the s-ce.
- •The verb: person and number. Other morphological categories
- •Syntax of classical scientific grammar
- •Quotation groups
- •Grammatical trends in word-changing noun adj PrN
- •Trends in Modern English word-changing verb
- •Generative semantix/syntax
- •The category of Voice
- •The Reflective Voice (rv)
- •Pronoun
- •Phrases (Ps)
- •Sentence definitions
- •Principles of clause-classification
- •Complex sent. As a syntactic unity
- •The subjunctive mood
Syntax of classical scientific grammar
Syntax deals with phrases & sentences. The classical scientific G there was adopted trichotomic sentence division: simple, compound, complex sentences.
E.Kruisinga excluded compound system because complex sentence clauses which are coordinated to each other are of an equal rank & each of them can function as a simple sentence. E.g. The ball has gone, the students are leaving the classroom.
The Phrase Theory.
Kruisinger subdivided the phrases into 2 kinds :1) close (the words are connected by the mode of subordination “These books”, “Saw him”. 2) loose syntactic group. The words are connected by means of coordination “Men and women”. In classical scientific G one can observe a great of terms for denoting secondary parts of the sentence. For example R. Zandvoort used the term adjunct & subdivided them into: 1)adnominal. E.g. Mary’s book. 2)attributive adjunct. E.g. A nice girl. 3) objective adjunct. E.g. wrote a letter. 4) predicative adjunct. E.g. to be angry.
G. Curme used the term modifier. & M. Bright used complement to denote all the secondary parts connected with the verb. 1)adjective complement, 2)predicative complement, 3)adverbial complement.
O. Jesperson tried to work out his original system of syntactic analysis which is known as the “Theory of Ranks”—in word groups they are combined words of different ranks which he called:
1st rank—a primary
2nd rank—a secondary
3rd rank—tertiary
4th—quartenary
5th—quintenary
Primaries are absolutely independent but they subordinate secondaries. Secondaries subordinate 3rd rank. The theory seems quite logical when it’s applied for the analysis of phrases. Successive subordination but if we apply the Theory of ranks to sentence analysis we reveal a contradiction here because the predicate as a word of the 2nd rank is subordinated to the subject expressed by a primary but this relation is wrong because subject & predicate as principle parts of the sentence are of unequal rank. & they can’t be subordinated to each other. That’s why the theory of ranks fails to work on the level of a sentence. Later in his work “The Philosopher of G” he managed to overcome the contradiction having introduced 2 different terms to denote 2 kinds of relation: 1) junction. E.g. offensive smell (one of the words leading syntactically).
2) nexus (the words are of an equal rank & equal importance for the structure. This relation exists between subject & predicate. E.g. dog barks. The dog is white.
C.T. Onions introduced the Theory of sentence structure. His idea was that all the number of E-sh simple sentences can be reduced to 5 patterns. The difference of patterns was based on the quality of a word used as a predicate.
Patterns:
P.1. Subj. |
Pred. |
|
Verb (intransitive) E.g. The day dreams |
P.2. Subj. |
Pred. |
|
V.(linking)+ Pred. E.g. Mary lay dead |
P.3. Subj. |
Pred. |
|
V(trans)+ obj.(direct) E.g. Cats catch mice (if this construction is converted to the Passive we’ll get Pattern 1) |
P.4. Subj. |
Pred. |
|
V.(trans)+ obj.(indirect)+obj.(direct) E.g. tom gave Mary the money (convert-get Pattern 3) |
P.5. Subj. |
Pred. |
|
V(trans.)+obj.(dir)+ Pred.(adjunct) E.g. Tom called Mary a tomato |
In these patterns we see the attempt to formalise the study of sentence structure. The same kind of attempt was made by O. Jesperson in “Analytic Syntax”. He introduced a number of syntactic terms to describe the sentence structure. S—subject, O—indirect object, V—finite verb, v—non-finite verb, M—modifier, N—negotion,
I—infinitive, P—predicative.
Mary wants to come here.
S V v M
Summary: the main contribution of classical scientific G into the theory of G can be traced in syntax while in morphology they simply reproduce the ideas of prescriptive G. In syntax E. Kruisinger revised the trichotomic sentence division excluding compound sentences from this system. The problem of sentence structure & sentence patterns was discussed by Onions & Jesperson. This formal approach to G because the creed of structural G which originated in the 40s of the 20 th c.