The problems of subjunctive

,4, Interrelation of the categories of mood, tense and order.

 

1. The category of mood denotes modality, or the relation of the contents of the utterance to reality as viewed by the speaker. Modality is a wide notion which characterises every sentence and which maji be expressed by different means: lexical (modal verbs), lexico-grammatical (modal words), morphological (mood), syntactic (structure of the sentence), phonetic (intonation). Linguists distinguish between objective modality (expressed by mood-forms) and subjective modality (expressed by lexical and lexico-grammatical means).

The category of mood is proper to finite forms of the verb and is closely connected with the syntactic'function of the predicate. The category is revealed both in the opposition of forms and syntactic structures. So the category of Mood has a strong syntactic significance.

Mood is one of the most controversial categories — linguists distinguish from 2 to 16 moods in Modem English. The reasons for the divergence of views are as follows:

1) The category of mood is in the state of development. Some fonns have a limited sphere of use (he be), new fonns are coining into the system (let).

2) There is no direct correspondence of meaning and form. In Modern English there are no special forms for expressing unreal actions (with' the exception of the fonns he be, he were). The same forms are used to express facts and non-facts: should/would do, did. They are treated either as homonymous or as polysemantic.

3) It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between mood auxiliaries and modal verbs: may, let.

2. Practically all the scholars recognize the opposition of 2 moods:' indicative and imperative.

Indicative is represented by a system of categories (tense, order, aspect, voice, etc.). It is a fact-mood or a direct mood. Imperative is represented by one form, which is used in sentences with implied subject.

Some scholars (G.N.Vorontsova) recognize the analytical form of the imperative, expressed by let+ infinitive.

 

In the sentence Let us let him do it.the first let is devoid of the lexical meaning and can be treated as part of the analytical form. However, the use of two negative forms (Don't let us and Let us not) shows that this structure takes an intermediary position between modal phrases and analytical forms.

3. Problematic and unreal actions are expressed in Modern English by 4 sets of forms:

(he) be/come/ (he)should be/ (he) were/ should, would

talie --. come/take; came/took;- be/come/take;

(he)should have (he)had been/ - should/would

been/come/taken; come/taken; have been/come/taken;

The form (he) be/come/take, expressing a problematic action, is the only form which differs from the forms of the indicative. There is one more form of the verb to be, different from the forms of the indicative: (he) were. But this difference disappears in all other verbs, and besides, fhe form (he) were is now being replaced by the form (he) was. The combinations (he) should be, (he) should hai>e been do not differ from modal phrases.

Forms expressing unreal actions, are the same as the forms of the past indicative: (I) They were here.

(2) I wish they were here.

(3.) I said I should do it.

(4) In your place I should do it.

These forms are often treated as polysemantic, i.e. forms of the indicative, which express unreal actions in certain syntactic structures (R.Quirk, L.S.Barkhudarov). Forms of the past indicative denote actions, not connected with the moment of speaking, not "relevant" for the speaker, "not real" now. That is why they may be used to denote unreality. In this case

subjunctive will be represented by 2 forms of the verb to be: (he) be, (he), were and I form of other verbs: (he) do, come, go.

2. The opposite view is based on the recognition of the homonymy of forms, denoting real and unreal actions (A.I.Smirnitsky):

They were ... — real, past If they were ... — unreal, non-past

According to this approach, subjunctive is represented by 4 sets of forms (see above).

In this system of 4 sets of forms, denoting different degree of unreality, there is no direct correspondence of meaning and form:

a) one meaning — different forms:

1) I suggest you do (should do) it.

b) one form — different meanings:.

1) I suggest you should do it.

2) In your place I should do it.

The number of oblique moods will depend on the basic principle for distinguishing between them: a) meaning; b)' form; c) both meaning and form. a) Many scholars treat these 4 sets of forms as forms of one mood -subjunctive (B.A.Ilyish).

The difference of form and particular meanings is disregarded and only the common component of meaning (unreality) is taken into account.

b) A.I.Smirnitsky takes into account the difference in form and recognizes 4 oblique moods: Subjunctive I (he be). Suppositional (he should be), Subjunctive ll -(he were-) Conditional (should/ would be).

c) As every category is revealed in the opposition of particular meanings and forms of their expression we should take into account both meaning and form. In this case the system of forms, expressing different degrees of unreality, will be subdivided into two parts: 1) forms, denoting problematic actions (he be, should be); 2) forms, denoting unreal actions (were, should/would be).

Forms, denoting problematic: actions, may be treated as forms of one mood (Subjunctive I), the analytical form ousting the synthetic form in British English.

Forms, denoting unreal actions, are traditionally treated as different moods, expressing independent and dependent unreality, or unreal condition and unreal consequence. But their modal meaning is the same and were -should be are not opposed as moods. This opposition reveals the category, which also exists iii the system of the indicative mood. Compare:

1) If he finishes his work he will help you.

2) He said that if he finished his work he would help you.

3) If he finished his work he would help you.

In all the examples the analytical form expresses an action, following another action, i.e. denotes posteriority. The opposition were — should be reveals the category of posteriority (prospect). Were — should be are forms of one mood (Subjunctive II).

So the wide divergence of views on the number of oblique moods can be accounted for:

a) by different approaches to the problem of polysemy/homonymy;

b) by the absence of mutual relation between meaning and form.

4. In the system of the indicative mood time may be denoted absolutely (tense) and relatively (order, posteriority). In the system of the subjunctive mood time may be denoted relatively (order, rospect). Perfect forms denote priority, non-perfect forms — simultaneousness with regard to other actions:

1) You look as if you were ill.

looked

2) You 1ook as if you had been ill for a long time.

looked

But in sentences

1) If I were, in your place I should do it.

2) If I had been in your place I should have done it.

the actions are correlated with the moment of speaking and acquire absolute meanings. So in certain contexts the category of order may acquire the meaning of the category of tense.

TOPIC IX

Syntax. Phrase

1. Introduction.

2. The problem of the definition of the phrase. The phrase and the sentence.

3. Principles of the classification of phrases.

a) Syntactic relations within a phrase.

b) Morphological expression and position of components.

1. Syntax is a part of grammar which studies the combinability of words and the structure of sentences. It also studies means of sentence connection and units larger than a sentence.

Words within a sentence are grouped into phrases (word-groups, word-clusters, word-combinations):

John and Mary saw an old man crossing the street.

So phrases are sentence constituents. But phrases can be also treated as units built by combining words outside the sentence: a man—an old man; old—very old. Thus the combinability of words, or valency, can be studied both under syntax and under morphology.

We should distinguish between grammatical combinability, i.e. syntagmatic relations of classes of words (N+V, Adv.+Adj.); lexical combinability, or collocability; i.e. syntagmatie relations of individual words (green jealousy; not blue jealousy) and lexico-grammatical combinability, i.e. syntagmatic relations of words (a sudden arrival, explosion, arrest, not a sudden table, book, room). Collocability is studied by lexicology.

Lexicology also studies non-motivated word-groups, or phraseological units. Grammar studies free phrases, allowing the substitution of each component.

2. At present there are two approaches to the definition of a phrase. According to a narrower definition a phrase is a unity of two or more notional words. According to a wider definition any syntactic group of words can be treated as a phrase. Consequently, phrases may be built by combining notional words (an old man), notional and functional words (in the corner); functional words (out of). Notional phrases are more independent structurally and semantically, other types function as part of notional phrases.

Like a word, a phrase is a naming unit. Phrases name different phenomena of the outside world: a round table, yesterday morning, to speak fluently.

Like a word, a phrase may have a system of forms. Each component of a phrase may undergo grammatical changes without destroying the identity of the phrase: a young man — younger men.

The naming function of the phrase distinguishes it from the sentence, whose main function is communicative. Therefore the structure "N+V" is traditionally excluded from phrases.

However, another approach is possible. The structure "N+V" can be regarded at two levels of syntactic analysis: the level of combinability (phrase level, pre-functional level) and the level of function (sentence level). At the level of combinability the combination "N4-V" can be treated together with other types of phrases, as it is a syntactico-semantic unity of two notional words, naming certain events or situations. At the level of function it differs essentially from other types of phrases, as it constitutes the unit of communication, whereas other types of phrases are naming units only, functioning as sentence constituents.

Thus a phrase is usually smaller than a sentence, but it may also function as a sentence (N+V), and it may be larger than a sentence, as the latter may consist of one word.

3. Phrases may be classified partly by their inner structure (syntactic relations between the components, morphological expression and position of components, or by order and arrangement) and partly by their external functioning (distribution, functions of the components).

The components of the phrase can be connected by different types of syntactic relations. H.Sweet stated that the most general type of relation is that of the modifier and modified (head-word and adjunct), or the relation of subordination. He also distinguished the relation of coordination.

The syntactic theory of O.Jespersen can be applied to phrases and sentences. O.Jespersen's theory of three ranks is based on the principle of determination. In the word-group a furiously 33 barking 22 dog11 1 is independent and is called a primary, 2 modifies 1 and is called a secondary, 3 modifies 2 and is called a tertiary.

A secondary may he joined to a primary in two ways: junction and nexus. These terms are used to differentiate between attributive and predicative relations (relations between the subject and the predicate), or the relations of subordination and interdependence.

The structural theory of word-groups, worked out by the American school of descriptive linguistics, founded by L.Bloomfield, divides word-groups into two main types: endocentric (headed) and exocentric (non-headed). The criteria for distinguishing between them are distribution and substitution. An endocentric group has the same position as its headword:

An old man came in. — A man came. in.

The distribution of an exocentric group differs from the distribution of its components: A man came in.

Thus we may single out 3 types of syntactic relations within word-groups: subordination, coordination, interdependence. Accordingly, phrases are usually classified into subordinate, coordinate and predicative. Sometimes a fourth type, appositive phrases, is mentioned: doctor Brown; Mr.Campbell, the lawyer. Apposition resembles coordination syntactically, liking units of the same level, but appositives are co-referential and semantically their relations are closer to subordination.

Phrases may be also classified according to the morphological expression of their members (N+V, Adv.+Adj., N+and+N), position of the components (A+N, N+A) and the number of components (V+N, V+N+N). Subordinate phrases are classified according to the morphological expression of the headword into noun phrases, verb phrases, adjective phrases, etc. Further division is based on the morphological expression and position of the adjunct (modifier, tail). In noun phrases adjuncts in preposition, or premodifiers, tend to be single words (A+N, N+N, Part+N), adjuncts in postposition, or postmodifiers, tend to be phrases and clauses. There are also phrases with multiple premodification, adjuncts being arranged in a strict order: predeterminers, determiners, postdeterminers, adjectives, nouns: All the ten old red brick houses.

In verb phrases adjuncts usually follow the head-word: V+N, V+Prep+N, V+Verbals.

In adjective phrases pre- and postmodifiers differ morphologically: Adv+Adj, Adj+Inf, Adj+Prep+N.

The syntactic head-word of a subordinate group is not always the semantic one: a problem to solve; to give a smile.

Patterns of combinability of classes and subclasses of words are studied by practical grammar. Their knowledge is essential for effective communication.

 

TOPIC X Sentence

1. General characteristics.

2. Predicativity. Predication. Secondary predication.

3. Classification of sentences. Syntactic categories and the sentence-paradigm.

1. A sentence is the largest and most complicated unit of language and at the same time it is the smallest unit of speech, or the smallest utterance. In speech sentences are not given ready-made, they are created by the speaker. But they are built according to patterns existing in the language. So concrete sentences belong to speech. Patterns, according to which they are built, belong to language.

A sentence has two basic meaningful functions: naming and communicative. Sentences name situations and events of objective reality and convey information, expressing complete thoughts or feelings. So the sentence is a structural, semantic and communicative unity. Accordingly the three main aspects of the sentence are syntactic, semantic and logico -communicative.

The syntactic structure of the sentence can be analysed at two levels: pre-functional (sentence constituents are words and word groups) and functional (sentence constituents are parts of the sentence). There is no direct correspondence between units of these levels.