Report on the Russian language on the topic "service parts of speech". I really need an educational message on the topic: "Parts of Speech" A message about one part of speech
Introduction
Chapter I. From the history of the doctrine of parts of speech
Chapter II. Criteria for the allocation of parts of speech in the works of various scientists
Chapter III. Parts of speech in Russian
Bibliography
Introduction
The question of parts of speech has occupied the minds of scientists since ancient times. Aristotle, Plato, Yaska, Panini were engaged in research in this area; in Russian linguistics, L.V. Shcherba, V.V.
Vinogradov, A. A. Shakhmatov and others.
The most common and necessary categories in the grammar of each language are the parts of speech. With clarification of the question of parts of speech, a grammatical description of any language begins. Speaking of parts of speech, they mean the grammatical grouping of lexical units of the language, i.e. the allocation in the vocabulary of the language of certain groups or categories, characterized by certain features. But on what basis are groupings of words called parts of speech distinguished, what is their role?
The problem concerning the essence of parts of speech and the principles of their allocation in various languages of the world is one of the most controversial problems. general linguistics.
Are separate parts of speech distinguished on the basis of one leading feature inherent in words related to a given grouping of words, or are they distinguished on the basis of a combination of various features, of which not one can be called the leading one? If the first is true, then what is the leading feature? Lexical meaning of the word? The logical category enclosed in it? Its connection with the grammatical category? Its morphological nature? Its syntactic function? His role in speech?
Knowledge in the field of the nature of the word, in particular its grammatical nature, is not yet deep enough to be able to construct a grammatical classification of words in the scientific sense of the word, and the distribution of words gradually emerging and entrenched in the tradition of parts of speech is not yet a classification, but only a statement that among the words there are groupings united by one or another common and more or less significant, but not always clear signs.
There is another problem in determining the role, the essence of parts of speech. This is the problem of the universal nature of parts of speech, i.e. whether parts of speech are distinguished in all languages, whether the set of parts of speech is the same in all languages.
Analyzing research in the field of parts of speech, the purpose of this control work- Determine the role of parts of speech.
Chapter I . From the history of the doctrine of parts of speech
For a very long time, people intuitively, on the basis of a wide variety of criteria, established certain classes of words, which turned out to be convenient to establish when describing languages with a division of the vocabulary into parts of speech. In the history of the science of language, starting with the ancient Indian linguists and Aristotle, there is a constant desire to characterize certain classes of words, to clarify their role.
Yaska and Panini (V - III century BC) established four parts of speech in ancient Indian languages: name, verb, preposition and particle. They were combined in pairs on the basis of the preservation of the meaning outside the sentence (name, verb) or the loss of the meaning outside the sentence (preposition, particle). Name and verb in a sentence, i.e. as word forms of the speech chain, were called "case" and "action"". As a subgroup of names Jaska singled out pronouns. The semantic criterion was the leading one in establishing the parts of speech in ancient Indian linguistics.
Aristotle (IV century BC) established three parts of speech in the ancient Greek language: the name, the verb and conjunctions (which also included articles, pronouns, copulas). Later Alexandrian grammarians established eight parts of speech: noun, verb, participle, article, pronoun, adverb, preposition, conjunction. Roman linguists, removing the article from the parts of speech (there was no article in Latin), added an interjection. In the Middle Ages, the adjective began to be emphasized. The classification of parts of speech in ancient linguistics was compiled in close connection with the development of logic: parts of speech were identified with the members of the sentence and approached the members of the judgment, i.e. with categories of logic. But still, this classification was partially grammatical, since some parts of speech were established by the presence of certain grammatical forms and meanings (for example, verbs are words that change in numbers, tenses, persons, etc. and denote an action).
The grammar of the ancient world, the Middle Ages, and even the Renaissance dealt mainly with Greek and Latin; when developing the grammars of new Western European languages, linguists proceeded from the norms of the Latin language.
In the XIX - XX centuries. the traditional system of parts of speech ceases to satisfy scientists.
In the 19th century In connection with the intensive development of linguistics, in particular morphology, with the study of many new languages, the question arises of what criteria should be used to distinguish parts of speech and whether they are different in different languages. The allocation of parts of speech is beginning to be based on morphological criteria, i.e. on the commonality of grammatical forms inherent in certain categories of words. An example of the allocation of parts of speech from a formal grammatical point of view is the definition of parts of speech by F. F. Fortunatov. F.F. Fortunatov singled out the parts of speech that he called “formal classes” by the presence of certain forms of inflection in the corresponding words: inflected words, words conjugated words inflexible and unconjugated. Proceeding from this, a noun is such a formal class (according to Fortunatov), which has a case form, and an adjective is such a formal class, which is characterized by the form of gender, number and case.
Along with the morphological criterion, the logical-syntactic criterion of approach to the characterization of parts of speech continued to develop. From a syntactic point of view, words that act as the same member of a sentence are combined into the same part of speech. For example, those words that can act as definitions are adjectives. Based on the narrow morphological or syntactic features of words, which are always in one way or another connected with their proper lexical meaning, parts of speech began to be designated as ""lexical-grammatical categories of words"".
Chapter II . Criteria for the allocation of parts of speech in the works of various scientists
According to F. I. Buslaev, there are nine parts of speech in the language: verb, pronoun, noun, adjective, numeral, adverb, preposition, conjunction and interjection. F.I. Buslaev allocates the latter to a special department.
The remaining parts of speech are divided into significant (noun, adjective and verb) and service (pronoun, numeral, preposition, conjunction and auxiliary verb); adverbs according to this classification (as well as verbs, by the way) fall into two groups: those derived from the service parts of speech belong to the service parts of speech, and those derived from the significant ones belong to the significant ones. Thus, it turns out that the division of words into significant and auxiliary ones does not coincide with their division into parts of speech.
F. I. Buslaev's observation of the closed nature of the list of functional words and the open nature of the list of verbs, nouns, adjectives and adverbs, which, according to him, are "countless"; but he denies the open nature of the list of numerals.
The most important in relation to the definition of parts of speech (which F. I. Buslaev considered in syntax) is his statement that "" in order to form a complete concept of the individual words used in speech, they must be considered in two ways: 1) in relation to the dictionary 2) in relation to grammar. In the first respect, attention is drawn to the expression of representations and concepts in a separate word, and in the latter, to the meaning and belonging of each part of speech separately "". This statement is, in essence, the key to defining the concept of parts of speech in modern linguistics.
V. V. Vinogradov defended a synthetic approach to parts of speech based on an in-depth analysis of the concept of words, its form and structure in the language.
Classification cannot ignore any side in the structure of the word, although lexical and grammatical criteria, in his opinion, should play a decisive role, and morphological features are combined with syntactic ones in "" organic unity "", since there is nothing in morphology that is not or before it was not in syntax and vocabulary. An analysis of the semantic structure of a word led V. V. Vinogradov to distinguish four main grammatical and semantic categories of words:
1. Words-names, to which pronouns adjoin, form the subject-semantic, lexical and grammatical foundation of speech and are parts of speech.
2. Particles of speech, i.e. connective, auxiliary words, devoid of a nominative function, closely related to the technique of language, and their lexical meanings are identical with grammatical ones, words that lie on the verge of vocabulary and grammar.
3. Modal words and particles, devoid, like linking words, of the nominative function, but more ""lexical"": ""wedging"" into the sentence, marking the relation of speech to reality from the point of view of the subject of speech. When attached to a sentence, modal words are outside of both parts of speech and particles of speech, although ""in appearance"" may sound like both.
4. Interjections in the broad sense of the word, having no cognitive value, syntactically unorganized, unable to be combined with other words, having an affective coloring, close to facial expressions and gestures.
V. V. Vinogradov notes that the ways of expressing grammatical meanings and the very nature of these meanings is heterogeneous for different semantic types of words. In the system of parts of speech, according to V. V. Vinogradov, grammatical differences between different categories of words come out most sharply and definitely. The division of parts of speech into the main grammatical categories is due to:
1. Differences in those syntactic functions that different categories of words perform in connected speech, in the structure of a sentence;
2. Differences in the morphological standing of words and word forms;
3. Differences in the real (lexical) meanings of words;
4. Differences in the way reality is reflected;
5. Differences in the nature of those correlative and subordinating categories that are associated with one or another part of speech.
V. V. Vinogradov, noting that different languages may have different composition of parts of speech, emphasized the dynamism of the system of parts of speech in one language.
Chapter III . Parts of speech in Russian
Parts of speech are groups of words combined on the basis of the commonality of their features. The features on the basis of which words are divided into parts of speech are not uniform for different groups of words.
According to their role in the language, parts of speech are divided into independent and auxiliary parts.
Independent words can be divided into significant and pronominal. Significant words name objects, signs, actions, relations, quantity, and pronominal words indicate objects, signs, actions, relations, quantity, without naming them and being substitutes for significant words in a sentence (cf .: table - he, convenient - such, easy - so, five - how many). Pronominal words form a separate part of speech - the pronoun.
Significant words are divided into parts of speech, taking into account the following features:
1) generalized value;
3) syntactic behavior (syntactic functions and syntactic links).
There are at least five significant parts of speech: a noun, an adjective, a numeral (a group of names), an adverb and a verb.
Thus, parts of speech are lexico-grammatical classes of words, i.e., classes of words distinguished taking into account their generalized meaning, morphological features and syntactic behavior.
There are 10 parts of speech, grouped into three groups:
1. Independent parts of speech: noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun, verb, adverb.
2. Service parts of speech: preposition, union, particle.
3. Interjection.
The modern Russian language has a large number of morphological variant forms. Some of them are fixed in the literary language, recognized as normative, while others are perceived as speech errors. Shape options can be associated with different meanings the words. Also, variant forms may differ in stylistic coloring. Variants of forms associated with the categories of gender and number can also be stylistically colored.
Morphology - (Greek "morphe" - form, "logos" - science, word) - a section of grammar in which words are studied as parts of speech. And this means studying the general meanings and changes of words. Words can change by gender, number, case, person, etc. For example, a noun denotes an object and changes in numbers and cases, an adjective denotes a sign of an object and changes in genders, numbers and cases. But, there are words that do not change, for example, prepositions, conjunctions and adverbs.
In speech, independent and auxiliary words perform different work. In a sentence, independent words, naming objects, their signs, actions, etc., play the role of members of the sentence, and service words most often serve to communicate independent words.
Noun
A noun is an independent significant part of speech that combines words that:
1) have a generalized meaning of objectivity and answer the questions who? or what?;
2) are proper or common nouns, animate or inanimate, have a constant gender and non-permanent (for most nouns) signs of number and case;
3) in the proposal most often act as subjects or additions, but can be any other members of the proposal.
A noun is a part of speech, in the selection of which the grammatical features of words come to the fore. As for the meaning of nouns, this is the only part of speech that can mean anything: an object (table), a person (boy), an animal (cow), a sign (depth), an abstract concept (conscience), an action (singing) , relation (equality). In terms of meaning, these words are united by the fact that you can ask them the question who? or what?; this, in fact, is their objectivity.
Adjective
An adjective is an independent significant part of speech that combines words that:
1) designate a non-procedural sign of the subject and answer the questions what ?, whose ?;
2) change by gender, number and case, and some - by completeness / brevity and degrees of comparison;
3) in a sentence there are definitions or a nominal part of a compound nominal predicate.
Adjectives depend on nouns, so questions to adjectives are asked from nouns. Adjectives help us to select the desired item from a variety of identical items. Our speech without adjectives would be like a painting painted with gray paint. Adjectives make our speech more accurate and figurative, as they allow us to show various signs of an object.
Numeral
The numeral is an independent significant part of speech that combines words that denote numbers, the number of objects or the order of objects when counting and answer the question how many? or what?.
The numeral is a part of speech in which words are combined based on the commonality of their meaning - relation to number. The grammatical features of numerals are heterogeneous and depend on which category the numeral belongs to in terms of meaning.
Number words play an important role in people's lives. Numbers measure the number of objects, distance, time, size of objects, their weight, cost. In writing, words-numbers are often replaced by numbers. In the documents, it is necessary that the amount be written in words, and not just in numbers.
Pronoun as a part of speech
A pronoun is an independent non-significant part of speech that indicates objects, signs or quantities, but does not name them.
The grammatical features of pronouns are different and depend on which part of speech the pronoun acts as a substitute in the text.
Pronouns are classified by meaning and by grammatical features.
Pronouns are used in speech instead of nouns, adjectives, numerals and adverbs. Pronouns help to combine sentences into a coherent text, to avoid repetition of the same words in speech.
An adverb is an independent part of speech denoting a sign of an action, sign, state, rarely an object. Adverbs are invariable (with the exception of qualitative adverbs in -о/-е) and adjoin the verb, adjective, another adverb (run fast, very fast, very fast). In a sentence, an adverb is usually an adverb.
In rare cases, an adverb can adjoin a noun: racing (the noun has the meaning of action), soft-boiled egg, Warsaw coffee. In these cases, the adverb acts as an inconsistent definition.
Classification of adverbs is carried out on two grounds - by function and by meaning.
The verb is an independent significant part of speech, denoting an action (read), a state (sick), a property (limp), an attitude (equal), a sign (turn white).
The grammatical features of the verb are heterogeneous in different groups of verb forms. The verb word combines: an indefinite form (infinitive), conjugated (personal and impersonal) forms, non-conjugated forms - participles and participles.
Verbs for speech are very important because they allow you to name various actions.
Participle
Participle as a morphological phenomenon is interpreted in linguistics ambiguously. In some linguistic descriptions, the participle is considered an independent part of speech, in others - a special form of the verb.
The participle denotes a sign of an object by action, combines the properties of an adjective and a verb. In oral speech, participles are used less frequently than in writing.
gerund
Like the participle, the participle can be considered as an independent part of speech or as special form verb.
A gerund is a special form of a verb that has the following features:
1. Indicates an additional action, answers the questions what by doing? or doing what?
2. Has the grammatical features of a verb and an adverb.
Service parts of speech
Service parts are those parts of speech that, without independent parts of speech, cannot form a sentence and serve to connect independent units or to express additional shades of meaning.
A preposition is an official part of speech that serves to connect a noun, pronoun and numeral with other words in a phrase. Prepositions can denote relationships between an action and an object (looking at the sky), an object and an object (a boat with a sail), a sign and an object (ready for self-sacrifice).
Prepositions do not change, they are not independent members of the sentence.
Linking independent words with each other, prepositions express, together with the endings of independent words, various semantic meanings.
A union is a service part of speech that serves to connect homogeneous members of a sentence, parts of a complex sentence, as well as individual sentences in the text.
Unions do not change, are not members of the proposal.
A particle is a service part of speech that serves to express shades of meanings of words, phrases, sentences and to form word forms.
In accordance with this, particles are usually divided into two categories - semantic and formative.
Particles do not change, are not members of the sentence.
Interjection
Interjection is a special part of speech that does not belong to either the independent group or the service group.
An interjection is a part of speech that combines words that express feelings, an impulse to action, or are formulas of speech communication (speech etiquette).
conclusions
At the end of this work, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The question of parts of speech in linguistics is debatable. Parts of speech are the result of a certain classification, depending on what is taken as the basis for the classification. So, in linguistics there are classifications of parts of speech, which are based on only one feature (generalized meaning, morphological features or syntactic role). There are classifications using several bases. School classification is of this kind. The number of parts of speech in different linguistic works is different and ranges from 4 to 15 parts of speech. But the most productive and universal approach seems to be the approach to parts of speech as lexico-grammatical categories of words, taking into account their syntactic role.
2. Language belongs to those social phenomena that operate throughout the existence of human society. Being a means of communication between people, language is closely connected with the life of society. Changes in social life are reflected in the language: in grammar, in phonetics, in vocabulary, in the morphology of the language. Language is used to convey certain information. The role of parts of speech in the language is undeniably great, since with the help of them we can exchange information, express emotions, describe actions, name objects, etc.
Bibliography:
1. Vinogradov VV Russian language (Grammatical doctrine of the word). M.,
Higher School, 1986. 639s.
2. Kochergina V. A. Introduction to linguistics. M., ed. Moscow State University, 1970. 526 p.
3. Maslov M. Yu. Introduction to linguistics. M., Higher School, 1997. 272p.
4. Rakhmanin L.V. Stylistics of business speech and editing official documents. Uchebn. allowance. M., Higher school, 1998. 239p.
5. Rosenthal D.E. Practical stylistics of the Russian language. Textbook for high schools. M., Higher school, 1977. 316s.
Introduction 2
1 On the history of the study of parts of speech and the criteria for their establishment
1.1 From the history of the doctrine of parts of speech 3
1.2 Difficulty in identifying parts of speech 5
1.3 About the criteria for establishing parts of speech 8
2 Criteria for the allocation of parts of speech in the works of various scientists 11
3 Name system and verb system
3.1 Name system 18
3.2 Verb system 22
Conclusion 24
Application
Table #1 26
Scheme No. 1 27
Scheme No. 2 28
References 29
Introduction
The question of parts of speech has occupied the minds of scientists since ancient times. Research in this area was carried out by Aristotle, Plato, Jaska, Panini, in Russian linguistics this issue was dealt with by L. V. Shcherba, V. V. Vinogradov, A. A. Shakhmatov and others.
The most common and necessary categories in the grammar of each language are the parts of speech. With clarification of the question of parts of speech, a grammatical description of any language begins. Speaking of parts of speech, they mean the grammatical grouping of lexical units of the language, i.e. the allocation in the vocabulary of the language of certain groups or categories, characterized by certain features (Maslov Yu. S., 155). But on what basis are groupings of words called parts of speech distinguished? Or otherwise - what is the traditional distribution of words based on parts of speech?
The problem concerning the essence of parts of speech and the principles of their allocation in various languages of the world is one of the most debatable problems of general linguistics.
Statements on the question of what the distribution of words into parts of speech is based on are numerous, varied, but very often not clear and contradictory.
Are separate parts of speech distinguished on the basis of one leading feature inherent in words related to a given grouping of words, or are they distinguished on the basis of a combination of various features, of which not one can be called the leading one? If the first is true, then what is the leading feature? Lexical meaning of the word? The logical category enclosed in it? Its connection with the grammatical category? Its morphological nature? Its syntactic function? etc. Are the parts of speech singled out on the same basis or on different grounds?
Knowledge in the field of the nature of the word, in particular its grammatical nature, is not yet deep enough to be able to construct a grammatical classification of words in the scientific sense of the word, and the distribution of words gradually emerging and entrenched in the tradition of parts of speech is not yet a classification, but only a statement that among the words there are groupings united by one or another common and more or less significant, but not always clear signs.
There is another problem in determining the essence of parts of speech. This is the problem of the universal nature of parts of speech, i.e. whether parts of speech are distinguished in all languages, whether the set of parts of speech is the same in all languages.
Analyzing research in the field of parts of speech in our term paper We have set ourselves the following tasks:
1. Illuminate the history of the question of parts of speech
2. Highlight the criteria for establishing parts of speech
3. Analyze the work of scientists in this area of grammar.
1 On the history of the study of parts of speech and the criteria for their establishment
1.1 From the history of the doctrine of parts of speech
For a very long time, people intuitively, on the basis of a wide variety of
criteria established certain classes of words, which turned out to be convenient to establish when describing languages with a division of the vocabulary into parts of speech. In the history of the science of language, beginning with the ancient Indian linguists and Aristotle, there is a constant desire to characterize certain classes of words.
Yaska and Panini (V - III century BC) established four parts of speech in ancient Indian languages: name, verb, preposition and particle. They were combined in pairs on the basis of the preservation of the meaning outside the sentence (name, verb) or the loss of the meaning outside the sentence (preposition, particle). Name and verb in a sentence, i.e. as word forms of the speech chain, were called "case" and "action"". As a subgroup of names Jaska singled out pronouns. Semantic criterion was the leader in the establishment of parts of speech in ancient Indian linguistics (Kochergina V.A., 87).
Aristotle (IV century BC) established three parts of speech in the ancient Greek language: the name, the verb and conjunctions (which also included articles, pronouns, copulas). Later Alexandrian grammarians established eight parts of speech: noun, verb, participle, article, pronoun, adverb, preposition, conjunction. Roman linguists, removing the article from the parts of speech (there was no article in Latin), added an interjection. In the Middle Ages, the adjective began to be emphasized. The classification of parts of speech in ancient linguistics was compiled in close connection with the development of logic: parts of speech were identified with the members of the sentence and approached the members of the judgment, i.e. with categories of logic. But still, this classification was partially grammatical, since some parts of speech were established by the presence of certain grammatical forms and meanings (for example, verbs are words that change in numbers, tenses, persons, etc. and denote an action). The grammar of the ancient world, the Middle Ages, and even the Renaissance dealt mainly with Greek and Latin; when developing the grammars of new Western European languages, linguists proceeded from the norms of the Latin language (Kochergina V.A., 87-88).
The view of parts of speech as logical-grammatical categories dominated until late XVIII- middle of the 19th century
In the XIX - XX centuries. the traditional system of parts of speech ceases to satisfy scientists. There are indications of inconsistency and contradictions in the existing classification, the absence of a single principle of division in it.
In the 19th century In connection with the intensive development of linguistics, in particular morphology, with the study of many new languages, the question arises of what criteria should be used to distinguish parts of speech and whether they are different in different languages. The allocation of parts of speech is beginning to be based on morphological criteria, i.e. on the commonality of grammatical forms inherent in certain categories of words. An example of the allocation of parts of speech from a formal grammatical point of view is the definition of parts of speech by F. F. Fortunatov. F.F. Fortunatov singled out the parts of speech that he called “formal classes” by the presence of certain forms of inflection in the corresponding words: inflected words, conjugated words, indeclinable and non-conjugated words. Proceeding from this, a noun is such a formal class (according to Fortunatov), which has a case form, and an adjective is such a formal class, which is characterized by the form of gender, number and case (Kochergina V.A., 88).
Along with the morphological criterion, the logical-syntactic criterion of approach to the characterization of parts of speech continued to develop. From a syntactic point of view, words that act as the same member of a sentence are combined into the same part of speech. For example, those words that can act as definitions are adjectives. Based on the narrow morphological or syntactic features of words, which are always somehow connected with their proper lexical meaning, parts of speech began to be designated as “lexico-grammatical categories of words” (Kochergina V.A., 88).
1.2 Difficulty in identifying parts of speech
Since one can argue about what is the basis on which the parts of speech are distinguished, then, obviously, the distribution of words into parts of speech is not the result of a logical operation called classification, since the latter, as you know, obeys all the rules for dividing the scope of a concept and, in particular , that basic rule that the division must be made on the same essential and, of course, quite definite basis. Where the very basis of division is not obvious and needs to be defined, there can be no question of classification in the scientific sense of the word. Summarizing individual words under one or another part of speech gives a kind of classification of words, however, the very distinction of parts of speech can hardly be considered the result of a "scientific" classification of words (Steblin-Kamensky M.I., 19-20).
The distribution of words by parts of speech does not satisfy another basic rule for dividing the scope of a concept, namely, the rule that the members of the division must mutually exclude each other. Since in the question of parts of speech we are not dealing with the classification of words, it may happen that the same word will be simultaneously subsumed under different categories. So, for example, a pronoun turns out to be both a noun and an adjective at the same time (Steblin-Kamensky M.I., 20).
The distribution of words by parts of speech does not satisfy the third basic rule for dividing the scope of a concept, i.e. the rule that the volume of all members of the division in the aggregate must be equal to the volume of the divisible concept. But, since we are not dealing with a classification, there is nothing to fear that some words will not fit anywhere - it means that they really do not fit into any category (Steblin-Kamensky M.I., 20).
When determining parts of speech by lexico-morphological or lexical-syntactic features, there is always a transposition of meanings, i.e. repetition of morphological meanings in units of vocabulary and syntax. For example, the grammatical meaning of the nominative case partially repeats the meaning of the subject. The accusative case repeats the meaning of the complement to the same extent. Moods to some extent repeat the lexical meaning of modal words, etc. Thus, the establishment of parts of speech is not strict, but arbitrary (Kochergina V.A., 88-89).
The structural originality of each language, obvious when considering the system of its private grammatical(inflectional) categories, led to the idea that the system of parts of speech of each language should also be original. Therefore, when describing the parts of speech of individual languages, new terms are being introduced in order to designate and highlight this ""peculiarity"". The problem gets worse. In this regard, the question of general principles and criteria for establishing parts of speech fades into the background, giving way to a strict descriptiveness of the classes of words according to their formal indicators, which they try to establish (for example, types of word formation, functioning in a sentence) even for those languages in which the forms of inflection are not developed at all (Kochergina V. A., 89).
The presence of several acceptable criteria for establishing parts of speech led to the fact that in the list of parts of speech of one language in the same historical period a different number of parts of speech was established. For example, for the Russian language, A. A. Shakhmatov established fourteen parts of speech, D. N. Kudryavsky - four parts of speech, and in the "Academic Grammar of the Russian Language" they write about eight parts of speech.
Each scientist, dealing with the same factual material, comprehended it based on different concepts of parts of speech. Thus, the lack of a general concept of parts of speech, the diversity of terms and definitions used by different authors in describing parts of speech, have a negative impact on generalizing reviews in this area of grammatical studies.
In modern linguistics, the question of the principles of establishing parts of speech is still relevant. Now more and more languages of the world are involved in linguistic research. At the same time, the old criteria for establishing classes of words (parts of speech) cease to be satisfied, since these criteria were developed mainly in the study of only the languages of the Indo-European, as well as the Semitic and Turkic families.
Modern linguistics highlights the description according to such principles, which, being unified, would cover all known structural types of languages, reducing their description to common initial ideas.
1.3 On the criteria for establishing parts of speech
The hierarchy of features underlying the allocation of parts of speech is understood differently in different linguistic schools. Traditionally, the foreground morphological features, which is due to the orientation of European linguistics towards inflectional and agglutinative languages. The expansion of the typological perspective led to the realization of the non-universal nature of morphological features. In typological analysis, the universal definition of parts of speech is based on syntactic characteristics, while morphological parameters act as additional, significant for inflectional and agglutinative languages. Semantic properties that are essential primarily for identifying parts of speech in different languages also act as additional ones.
The morphological approach to identifying parts of speech cannot fully satisfy. When identifying parts of speech by grammatical forms, even in languages rich in inflection forms, words devoid of these forms remain outside, since in all languages \u200b\u200bknown to science there are unchanging words that are heterogeneous in composition (among them, for example, adverbs, particles, interjections) ( Kochergina V. A., 90-91).
Even in languages rich in inflection forms, the establishment of parts of speech through private grammatical category is not always possible. For example, is it possible to say, as we are accustomed to, that a noun has a category of grammatical gender, if this category does not exist in most languages of the world. Or another example: with the indisputable presence of adjectives in Russian and Turkish in particular grammatical categories and in morphological structure they are different. Particular grammatical categories of the adjective in Russian are the categories of case, number and concordant class (as a combination of the grammatical categories of gender and animateness-inanimateness), i.e. the same particular grammatical categories that are also characteristic of the Russian noun. The Turkish adjective does not have any particular grammatical category inherent in the noun of the Russian language (for example, the category of gender, number, definiteness - indefiniteness) (Kochergina V.A., 91).
Morphological features of parts of speech can, to a certain extent, be identification marks of parts of speech, but not a general criterion for their establishment.
Inflection criterion when establishing parts of speech, it partially justifies itself in morphologically developed languages, primarily in Indo-European, Semitic and Turkic. This criterion is unsuitable for Sino-Tibetan and some other languages of the Far East, as it leads some researchers even to deny the parts of speech in these languages. In Chinese, Thai, Vietnamese languages there are words that do not differ morphologically, about which they usually say that, depending on the syntactic function, the same word acts either as a noun, or as an adjective, or as a verb (Kochergina V.A., 91 ).
In such cases, we have various homonyms. Common in Chinese, Vietnamese and other languages, they are comparable to cases of grammatical homonymy that are rare for the Russian language, but still possible for the Russian language: Worker and a collective farmer or Six o'clock worker day; Bake heat up, maybe bake pies, etc. They have different general grammatical meanings and, in addition, have some additional identifying features (Kochergina V.A., 91).
Word-formation processes do not always affect the belonging of a word to a particular part of speech. Words of different production may belong to the same part of speech (forest, forester, forester, copse, forestry, etc.), and words similar in word formation may not belong to the same part of speech ( good, sighted, big- adjectives; worker, forester, canteen- nouns) (Kochergina V.A., 91).
Syntactic Criteria the establishment of parts of speech is based on the fact that the members of the sentence and the part of speech are identified according to the same grammatical categories. But if, for example, a noun as a part of speech is associated with the category of the grammatical subject, and through it with the category of the subject of a logical judgment, then it should be noted: the subject is expressed in speech most often in the form of a grammatical subject, and the functions of nouns are wider and more diverse. In most languages, nouns can act as any part of a sentence. At the same time, different parts of speech have similarities in syntactic functions. So, in Russian, the circumstance of the mode of action can be expressed by an adverb or a construction with a noun. Or, for example, adjectives Chinese similar in syntactic function with verbs, nouns and especially with numerals (Kochergina V.A., 92).
Thus, neither the particular grammatical forms and meanings of words, nor their types of word formation, nor their syntactic functions in themselves act as determinants when referring a word to a certain part of speech. Parts of speech - each in its own way and in different languages in different ways - are morphological or non-morphological, syntactic, in a certain sense logical.
What criteria for selecting parts of speech can be common to all languages known to science?
The nature of the parts of speech is linguistic and common to all languages, as are common ways in the development of human thinking. Some scholars have associated general grammatical meanings parts of speech with some categories thinking(substance, quality, quantity, etc.). The most striking identification feature of parts of speech is the lexical meaning of words. For example, if we know that cockatoo is the name of a bird, then we are not looking for formal signs to say that this word is a noun. According to lexical meanings, by summing them up under one of the general grammatical meanings of words objectively given in the language, the belonging of the word to one or another part of speech is determined (Maslov Yu. S., 156).
As evidenced by studies of parts of speech in the most diverse, related and unrelated languages, parts of speech, for all their originality in languages of various types, act as the most general and universal phenomena in the grammatical system of languages. The general grammatical meanings of the parts of speech are certainly connected with the universal human forms and laws of thinking, which are reflected in the most essential phenomena of the language system.
The definition of the specifics of the parts of speech is thus reduced to the definition of their general grammatical meanings, which have received their own terminological designations in linguistic science, as ""subject"" or ""objectivity"" , ""action"" or "procedural" , ""quality"" or ""attribution"" etc.
2 Criteria for the allocation of parts of speech in the works of various scientists
According to F. I. Buslaev, there are nine parts of speech in the language: verb, pronoun, noun, adjective, numeral, adverb, preposition, conjunction and interjection. F.I. Buslaev allocates the latter to a special department. The remaining parts of speech are divided into significant(noun, adjective and verb) and official(pronoun, numeral, preposition, conjunction and auxiliary verb); adverbs according to this classification (as well as verbs, by the way) fall into two groups: those derived from the service parts of speech belong to the service parts of speech, and those derived from the significant ones belong to the significant ones. Thus, it turns out that the division of words into significant and auxiliary ones does not coincide with their division into parts of speech.
F. I. Buslaev's observation of the closed nature of the list of functional words and the open nature of the list of verbs, nouns, adjectives and adverbs, which, according to him, are "countless"; but he denies the open nature of the list of numerals.
The most important in relation to the definition of parts of speech (which F. I. Buslaev considered in syntax) is his statement that "" in order to form a complete concept of the individual words used in speech, they must be considered in two ways: 1) in relation to the dictionary 2) in relation to grammar. In the first respect, attention is drawn to the expression of ideas and concepts in a separate word, and in the latter, to the meaning and belonging of each part of speech separately "" (Buslaev F.I., 289). This statement is, in essence, the key to defining the concept of parts of speech in modern linguistics.
For A. A. Ponebnya, it was extremely important to establish a connection between language and thinking in their functioning and development. Emphasized attention to psychology, to the very process of speech creation led A. A. Potebnya to assert the primacy of the sentence; a single word seemed to him a scientific fiction. And since the word is only an element of a sentence, A. A. Potebnya believes that it is possible to understand the parts of speech only on the basis of a sentence. Parts of speech for A. A. Potebnya are grammatical categories that exist only in a sentence. ""Understanding language as an activity, it is impossible to look at grammatical categories, what are the verb, noun, adjective, adverb, as something unchanging, once and for all deduced and eternal properties of human thought" (Potebnya A.A., 82). He talked about how these categories change even in relatively short periods.
A. A. Potebnya approached the process of speech, in which language alone is revealed, from the standpoint of a separate individual. And therefore, in his works there is a mixture of inflection and word formation, sometimes an understanding of almost every use of a word as a separate, independent word.
In his early works, when classifying parts of speech, A. A. Shakhmatov relied primarily on semasiological criteria, assuming that each part of speech has some system of grammatical forms. Later, he attributed the definition of parts of speech to syntax, at the same time considering in morphology not only inflection and related categories that receive semantic content from A. A. Shakhmatov, but also the structure of the base. "" The word in its relation to the sentence or in general to speech is defined in grammar as a part of speech "" (Shakhmatov A. A., 29). A. A. Shakhmatov also noted that in some languages, in particular in Russian, parts of speech can differ morphologically. Grammatical categories, Shakhmatov wrote, are known in syntax, therefore, when determining parts of speech, "" one must take into account the connection that exists between separate parts speech and grammatical categories "" (Shakhmatov A. A., 29).
In accordance with those ""ideas"" that are expressed in words, A. A. Shakhmatov divides them into three groups: significant words, expressing necessarily the main ideas with or without relation to the accompanying grammatical categories (noun, verb, adjective adverb); insignificant words, serving to express one or another independent grammatical category (pronoun, numeral, pronominal adverb); official parts of speech, which serve to express one or another non-independent grammatical category (preposition, conjunction, prefix, particle); interjection stands out as the equivalent of a word (Suprun A.E., 31).
When dividing words into parts of speech, A. M. Peshkovsky introduces the concept ""syntactic"", i.e. dependent on other words in speech, and ""non-syntactic""(word-forming) form, which made it possible for adverbs, gerunds and infinitives, as words with non-syntactic forms, not only not to be considered ""formless"", but also to distinguish between them (Peshkovsky A.M., 37). The syntactic forms of A. M. Peshkovsky are given by the list: case of nouns; case, number and gender of adjectives; person, number, gender, tense and mood of the verb. This is also related to the composition of the parts of speech, as well as their classification table (see table No. 1) (Peshkovsky A. M., 43).
A. M. Peshkovsky attaches considerable importance to mental associations that arise in the speaker and in the listener when pronouncing words. A. M. Peshkovsky identifies parts of speech with "" the main categories of thinking in their primitive nationwide stage of development "" (Peshkovsky A. M., 74). In this regard, the discovery of objectivity as a psychological or primitive-logical category of thinking corresponding to a grammatical noun, etc., the search for a common meaning of parts of speech that are combined not only by a bunch of similar forms, but above all by this common meaning (Suprun A.E. , 35).
L. V. Shcherba said that when classifying parts of speech, a researcher should use the scheme that is imposed by the language system itself, i.e. establish a general category under which one or another lexical meaning of a word is summed up in each individual case, or, otherwise, what general categories differ in a given language system. Hence, L. V. Shcherba recognized the possibility of experimentally establishing the composition of parts of speech. L. V. Shcherba notes that there must be some external exponents of these categories, and such categories can be "" mutability "" of words of different types, prefixes, suffixes, endings, phrasal stress, intonation, word order, special auxiliary words, syntactic link, etc. Shcherba believed that there is no reason to attribute a special role in the allocation of parts of speech to formal morphemes. Shcherba's position on a bundle of formal features as a characteristic of a part of speech is also important (Shcherba L.V., 65), and it is assumed that individual words belonging to a given part of speech may not have individual features of this bundle; so, for example, the word cockatoo does not have endings inherent in nouns, but in terms of its compatibility it is sufficiently characterized as a noun ( my cockatoo, sitting cockatoo, my brother's cockatoo), as evidenced by its semantics.
L. V. Shcherboy also raised the question of varying degrees of brightness and severity of the properties of individual parts of speech. He believes that some words may have features of two parts of speech (for example, participles are subsumed under the category of an adjective and under the category of a verb), and on the other hand, it allows the possibility of homonymy between parts of speech (the same word may in some cases belong to one part of speech, and in other cases - to another) (Suprun A. E., 40).
I. I. Meshchaninov makes an attempt at a typological analysis of sentence members and parts of speech in languages of various types on the basis of the idea put forward by I. I. Meshchaninov about "" conceptual categories "", i.e. a kind of grammatical universals, without which, in his opinion, a typological comparison of the grammars of different languages is impossible.
The genesis of parts of speech, according to I. I. Meshchaninov, can be described as the result of the process of using words of a certain meaning in a certain syntactic function, which further led to the development of some morphological features specific to this group of words, different in different languages. "" Those groupings of the vocabulary of the language, to which we assign the names of parts of speech, are formed in the language only if and only if the grouping of words occurs not only according to their semantics, but also according to the presence in them ... characterizing formal indicators "" (Meshchaninov I.I., 17). Parts of speech, according to I. I. Meshchaninov, are a lexical group characterized by the corresponding syntactic properties. These are acquired by them in a sentence, where a certain group of words is timed to the predominant performance in the meaning of one or another member of the sentence or is included in its composition. At the same time, both a sentence member and a part of speech have their own characteristics that distinguish them: a sentence member in a sentence, a part of speech in the lexical composition of the language (Suprun A. E., 48).
V. V. Vinogradov defended synthetic approach to parts of speech based on an in-depth analysis of the concept of words, its form and structure in the language. ""Identification of parts of speech should be preceded by the definition of the main structural-semantic types of words"" (Vinogradov VV, 29). Classification cannot ignore any side in the structure of the word, although lexical and grammatical criteria, in his opinion, should play a decisive role, and morphological features are combined with syntactic ones in "" organic unity "", since there is nothing in morphology that is not or before it was not in syntax and vocabulary. An analysis of the semantic structure of a word led V. V. Vinogradov to distinguish four main grammatical and semantic categories of words:
1. Name words, to which pronouns adjoin, form the subject-semantic, lexical and grammatical foundation of speech and are parts of speech.
2. Particles of speech, i.e. connective, auxiliary words, devoid of a nominative function, closely related to the technique of language, and their lexical meanings are identical with grammatical ones, words that lie on the verge of vocabulary and grammar.
3. Modal words and particles, devoid, like linking words, of a nominative function, but more ""lexical"": ""wedged in"" into a sentence, marking the relation of speech to reality from the point of view of the subject of speech. When attached to a sentence, modal words are outside of both parts of speech and particles of speech, although ""in appearance"" may sound like both.
4. Interjection in the broad sense of the word, having no cognitive value, syntactically unorganized, unable to be combined with other words, having an affective coloring, close to facial expressions and gestures (Vinogradov V.V., 30).
V. V. Vinogradov notes that the ways of expressing grammatical meanings and the very nature of these meanings are heterogeneous for different semantic types of words (Vinogradov V. V., 33). In the system of parts of speech, according to V. V. Vinogradov, grammatical differences between different categories of words come out most sharply and definitely. The division of parts of speech into the main grammatical categories is due to:
1. Differences in those syntactic functions that perform different categories of words in connected speech, in the structure of a sentence
2. Differences in the morphological standing of words and word forms
3. Differences in the real (lexical) meanings of words
4. Differences in the way reality is reflected
5. Differences in the nature of those correlative and subordinating categories that are associated with one or another part of speech (Vinogradov V.V., 38-39).
V. V. Vinogradov, noting that different languages may have different composition of parts of speech, emphasized the dynamism of the system of parts of speech in one language.
Completing the historical-linguistic and theoretical review of the parts of speech in the Russian language, V. V. Vinogradov offers two schemes: one illustrating the relationship between individual parts of speech (in the narrow sense of the word), and the second characterizing all groups of words in the modern Russian language (see. diagram #1 and diagram #2). These diagrams list the parts of speech in Russian and demonstrate their relationships with each other.
So far, scientists have not come to a consensus on the criteria for identifying parts of speech, so the question of the basis for classifying parts of speech in modern linguistics remains open. But the most productive and universal approach seems to be the approach to parts of speech as lexico-grammatical categories of words, taking into account their syntactic role.
3 Name system and verb system
Trying to highlight the universal properties of parts of speech, linguists came to the conclusion that in most languages, systems of the name and the verb are distinguished, most often opposed to each other.
3.1 Name system
The distinctive features of the name as a type of word are related to the peculiarities of the naming process leading to names, and to the role of names in the sentence.
Morphological differences of names from words of other classes cannot be generalized, they may be absent altogether. In languages with a developed morphology, the name differs in declension forms, while the verb has conjugation forms, the adjective has forms of agreement and degrees of comparison, etc. However, what in the Indo-European languages is naturally perceived as an object and expressed by a name, may in some Indian languages be expressed as a process, in the forms of the third person of the verb; for example, in the Khupa language ""it descends"" is the name of the rain (the name of the object is ""rain""), in the Tyubatiulabal language, "house" and "house in the past" are distinguished (what was a house and ceased to be be), i.e. the name has a change in the category of time, etc.; the concept of ""rain"" in Russian is usually expressed by a name, which by function can be a predicate or a sentence (""Rain, you need to take an umbrella""), and, for example, in English it usually does not receive a nominal form of expression (""It is raining""), etc. (Yartseva V.N., 175).
There are objective reasons, both extralinguistic and intralinguistic, for distinguishing names from words of other types. The extralinguistic basis is that a name denotes a thing, while a verb, a predicate in general, is a sign or relation; the distinction between these extralinguistic entities is objective and does not depend on the language. The intralinguistic basis is that only a name stands in such a relation to an extralinguistic object, which is the naming relation. Verbs and predicate words in general "express" relations between objects of reality, without naming these relations, i.e. their designation objects. Conjunctions ""express"" logical connections between elements of thought, without denoting any extralinguistic objects; interjections "express" emotions without naming them either. Special place are occupied by "names of features" - adjectives (which can also serve as predicate words) and adverbs, the relationship of both to extralinguistic objects is similar to the relationship of a name to a thing, but the objects here are not things. Thus, from the intralinguistic side, the justification for the definition of names comes down to the problem of naming and, ultimately, to an objective extralinguistic difference in things, properties, relationships (Yartseva V.N., 175).
In a sentence, the name takes the place actant(term) as part of a predicative, as a subject and object, as well as various additions.
In developed languages, both natural and artificial, by a special transformation, the so-called nominalization, any expression can be turned into a name, for example, in Russian: the verb ""beg"" > ""beg""; predicate ""It's cold in the room"" > ""It's cold in the room""; whole sentence "I
I'm late"" > ""The fact that I'm late..."". In this sense, sentences are sometimes viewed as ""the name of a fact or event"".
The nomination is natural, but the choice of the attribute is random, which explains the difference in the names of the same objects in different languages. Nevertheless, since the feature underlying the name itself already had a linguistic expression, names are always included in the lexico-semantic system, getting their place in a group of related names opposed to other groups. Due to the stability of oppositions, fields and the entire lexical-semantic system as a whole, it, and mainly the names, are a fact of the spiritual culture of the people, forming a stable framework of this culture - the names of kinship, power, law, economic relations, human, animals, etc. , reflect the deep traditions of culture, revealed during historical reconstruction (Yartseva V.N., 175).
The internal structure of the name, especially the non-derivative one, is quite fully characterized by the system of the so-called semantic triangle: the name (1) denotes a thing, (2) names a thing, (3) expresses the concept of a thing. In the history of the philosophy of language and linguistics itself, the relation "to name" was understood ambiguously - either as a link between a name and a thing, or as a link between a name and a concept.
In the new European philosophy of language, Plato, in his dialogue "Cratyl", sets out the second understanding: the name names the idea, the concept ( ""eidos"") and only as a result of this is it capable of naming a thing "of the same name" with him (Yartseva V.N., 175).
Gradually, the insufficiency of such an understanding of the name, generally recognized as correct, was discovered: it was proposed to single out a smaller set from the totality of all objectively distinguishable features of a thing - the direct subject of the name - denotation. In logic, to some extent parallel to this, the concept was introduced ""extension"" name corresponding to the class of objects directly referred to by the given name. A similar process of splitting was experienced by the concept of "the concept of a thing", in which in logic they began to single out the part directly structured by the language - ""intension"", and in linguistics - significat. In linguistics, the concept of "significance" (different from "meaning"), introduced by F. de Saussure, served as a prototype of significat and intension even earlier. C. I. Lewis in his work "Kinds of Meaning" introduced four components in the semantics of the name (at the same time they are also processes): signification- a set of features that serve as a conceivable subject of designation; volume, or "coverage" - all conceivable objects that correspond to such a signification (including those that do not really exist); denotation, or extension, - objects that really exist; connotation, or intensity, is a conceivable subject of designation corresponding to such a denotation, or extension. Thus, intension, intension relates to extension, denotation in the same way as signification relates to coverage, volume (Yartseva V.N., 175).
As it expands semantic research the sentence began to be interpreted as a kind of name with its own denotation, or extension, or reference, and, on the other hand, meaning, intension. The specificity of the name began to get lost, dissolving in the semantics of the sentence.
Classifications of names, in accordance with the scheme of the semantic structure (semantic triangle), can be carried out on three different grounds:
1. According to the form of the word, or morphological
2. By value type in syntactic construction, or semantic-syntactic
3. According to the type of meaning in the proposition, or logical-linguistic.
Morphological classifications describe the ranks of names that exist in a given particular language; they rely on morphological indicators - mainly affixes and the structure of stems; in them such rubrics as ""names of the figure"", ""names of action"", ""names of quality"", ""names of alienable and inalienable belonging"" are distinguished. These rubrics are endowed at the same time with a clear semantic feature (expressed in their title). Further, such headings as childbirth can be distinguished Indo-European languages, where the semantic basis is expressed much weaker. Morphological classes such as declination ranks(declension) of names in which there is no connection with the semantics in this state of the language, but in the distant past, it may have existed. These classifications are of great importance for inflectional languages, especially for Indo-European ones; deep historical reconstructions of grammar are based on them (Yartseva V.N., 176).
Semantic-syntactic classifications are of a more general, typological nature, they are based on the role of the name in the sentence, formally in its place as an actant in the predicate. Since such differences are by no means always expressed morphologically, their description and classification are more hypothetical than morphological classifications; in to a large extent they depend on the chosen method of description. In most descriptions (and therefore quite objectively) names are emphasized denotative character, gravitating towards the direct designation of things and occupying in the sentence (ceteris paribus) the position of the subject, and names significative character, gravitating towards the designation, signification of concepts and occupying the position of the predicate in the sentence (including ""forbidden position"" - for example, Russian ""take part""). The formulations of regularities and headings in these classifications are of a statistical (i.e., not rigidly defined) character. These classifications intersect with morphological ones, since in languages of some types the difference in actants is associated with different case design of the name (Yartseva V.N., 176).
Logico-linguistic, universal classifications, completely abstracting from the morphological type of the name, correlate it with the logical construction, which is ultimately based on the relation of the name to the thing as part of the statement - reference. Rubrics such as referential names and non-referential names are distinguished; individual, general, metanames; names in direct and indirect contexts; real names and quasi-names –descriptions and others (Yartseva V.N., 176).
3.2 Verb system
A verb is a part of speech that expresses the meaning of an action (i.e., a sign of a mobile, realized in time) and functions primarily as a predicate. As a specifically predicative word, the verb is opposed to the name (noun); the very separation of parts of speech in ancient (already Plato), ancient Indian, Arabic and other linguistic traditions began with a functional distinction between the name and the verb. At the same time, the shaping of the verb (conjugation) is not clearly opposed to the shaping of the name (especially the adjective) in all languages, and the set of grammatical categories of the verb is far from the same in different languages. Many languages distinguish between verbs and so-called verboids. The verb itself, or the finite verb, is used in a predicative function and, thus, in languages like Russian it means "action" not abstractly, but at the time of its occurrence from actor, at least in a particular case and ""fictitious"" (for example, ""it's dawning""). In accordance with its function, a finite verb is characterized by one or another set of specifically predicative grammatical categories (tense, aspect, voice, mood), and in many languages also by concordant categories (repeating some categories of name and pronoun). Verboids combine some features and grammatical categories of the verb with features of other parts of speech - nouns, adjectives and adverbs. Verboids act as various members of the sentence, as well as in the composition of analytical finite forms and some constructions close to them. Verboids include infinitives (and other "action names" - gerund, masdar, supin), participles and gerunds. Some languages have no morphological opposition finite and non-finite forms; the form of the verb, acting in a non-predicative function, receives a special syntactic design (Yartseva V.N., 104)
Semantic-grammatical categories of verbs are distinguished on the basis of various features. Significant verbs oppose official(so-called copulas) and auxiliary verbs used in analytical verb forms. On the basis of the semantically conditioned ability to "open vacancies" for actants, all verbs are also divided into a number of valence classes corresponding to the formal-logical classes of one-place and many-place predicates. This is how monovalent verbs are distinguished ("sleeps" - who?), bivalent ("reads" - who? what?), trivalent ("gives" - who? to whom? what?), etc. A special group is made up of the verbs "nullvalent" denoting a certain indivisible situation and therefore unable to have at least one actant ("it is dawning") (Yartseva V.N., 104).
Others intersect with the above classification - according to the ability of the verb-predicate to have a subject (the so-called personal and impersonal verbs) and by the ability to accept an object ( transitional and imperishable Verbs).
Personal verbs, i.e. capable of being used with the subject, make up the majority of verbs of very different semantics. Impersonal, i.e. inconsistent with the subject, is zerovalent verbs and all those mono- and multivalent, the first actant of which does not receive the status of the subject (for example, ""I'm lucky"").
Transitive verbs receive a direct object ("I sew a coat"). The transitive also include those monovalent verbs, the only actant of which takes the form of a direct object (""I am shivering""). Intransitive verbs do not combine with a direct object ("brother is sleeping""), but they can also have other types of additions (""I admire the sunset"", ""I deviate from the rules""), called indirect ones (Yartseva V.N., 104 -105).
In another plane lies the division of verbs into dynamic and static. Dynamic means actions in the literal sense of the word ("ruble", "run"") or events and processes associated with certain changes ("the cup has broken", "the snow is melting""). Static ones denote states that depend on the will of the subject ("I am standing") or not dependent on it ("I am cold""), relations ("I am superior""), manifestations of qualities and properties ("The grass is turning green"") ( Yartseva V.N., 105).
Conclusion
The question of the principles of establishing parts of speech is still relevant in modern linguistics. Now more and more languages of the world are involved in linguistic research and, thus, the criteria for establishing classes of words (parts of speech), based mainly on data from the study of the languages of the Indo-European and Turkic families, turn out to be completely unacceptable for the languages of other families.
Although the features that characterize the words of a particular part of speech do not coincide in different languages, they are due to the general meaning of this class of words, i.e. are conditioned by a certain general category, under which the lexical meaning of the word is summed up.
In some cases, the main formal feature of a certain part of speech is one or another combination of the corresponding words with others.
When comparing languages, the syntactic functions of parts of speech show much greater similarity than the types of word formation and form formation. Nevertheless, the leading and defining moment is the general grammatical meaning. The remaining moments are somehow subordinate to it and should be considered as its direct or indirect manifestations specific to each language.
The principle of common grammatical meaning underlies the traditional classification of parts of speech. Only this principle is not carried out consistently in it, different types of common grammatical meanings are not distinguished. The task is not to discard the traditional system of parts of speech and replace it with some completely new classification, but to reveal the oppositions fixed by the traditional classification, to clean this classification of inconsistencies, to separate the essential from the random features that change from language to language.
Thus, modern linguistics highlights the description of the system of parts of speech according to principles that, being unified, would cover all known structural types of languages, reducing their description to common initial ideas.
Table #1
Scheme No. 1
Scheme No. 2
Bibliography:
1. Buslaev F. I. Historical grammar of the Russian language. M., Uchpedgiz, 1959. 623 p. pp. 287-289
2. Vinogradov VV Russian language (Grammatical doctrine of the word). M., Higher school, 1986. 639s. pp. 29-39
3. Kochergina V. A. Introduction to linguistics. M., ed. Moscow State University, 1970. 526 p. pp. 87-93
4. Maslov M. Yu. Introduction to linguistics. M., Higher School, 1997. 272p. pp. 155-157.
5. Meshchaninov I. I. Members of the sentence and parts of speech. L., Nauka, 1978. 387 p. S. 17
6. Peshkovsky A. M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. M., 1956. 511 p. pp. 37-74
7. Potebnya A. A. From notes on Russian grammar. M., Uchpedgiz, 1958. 536 p. S. 82
8. Steblin-Kamensky M.I. Controversial in linguistics. L., Ed. Leningrad State University, 1973. 141 p. pp. 20-22
9. Suprun A.E. Parts of speech in Russian. M., Education, 1971. 135s. pp. 19-50
10. Shakhmatov A. A. From the works of A. A. Shakhmatov on the modern Russian language (Teaching about parts of speech). M., Uchpedgiz, 1952. 272 p. S. 29
11. Shcherba L. V. Selected works on the Russian language. M., Uchpedgiz, 1957. 118 p. S. 65
12. Yartseva VN Linguistics. M., Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. 685 p. pp. 104-105, 175-176, 578-579
Service parts of speech
Pretext
Pretext
- the service part of speech, which expresses the dependence of the noun, numeral and pronoun on other words in the phrase, and therefore in the sentence.
Prepositions do not change and are not part of the sentence.
Prepositions express different relationships:
spatial;
temporary;
causal.
Non-derivative and derived prepositions
Suggestions are divided intonon-derivatives and derivatives.
Non-derivative prepositions
: without, in, before, for, for, from, to, on, over, about, about, from, by, under, before, with, about, with, at, through.
Derived prepositions
formed fromindependent parts of speech
by losing their meaning and morphological features.
It is necessary to distinguish derivative prepositions from independent parts of speech homonymous to them.
aroundgarden,alongroad,nearcoast,according toinstructions;
aroundaxes,due tobad weather,aboutwork,due torain,
duringdays,in continuationnights, sayFinally,
by virtue ofcircumstances;
thanks torain,in spite ofdisease.
Adverb: liveon the contraryin , goahead , standnear , washinside , inspectedaround , stickalong , did not havenear , liveaccording to , looked backaround , havein mind
Noun: putto the account jar,because of in this case,during rivers,in continuation novel,in custody on the book, believeby virtue of .
gerund: thanks to mistress,despite on both sides.
Prepositions:
Independent parts of speech:
Derivative prepositions are usually used with one case. Many non-derivative prepositions can be used with different cases.
Note.
Prepositions consisting of one word are calledsimple
(
in, on, to, from, before, from, in spite of, after
and etc.). Prepositions consisting of two or more words are calledconstituent
(
in spite of, in conclusion
and etc.).
Morphological analysis of a preposition
I.
Part of speech. General value.
II.
Morphological trait: Immutability
III.
syntactic role.
Union
Union
- an official part of speech that connects homogeneous members in a simple sentence and simple sentences in a complex sentence.
Unions are divided intocoordinating and subordinating.
writing unions connect homogeneous members and equal simple sentences as part of a complex (compound).
Subordinating
unions connect simple sentences in a complex (complex-subordinate) sentence, of which one is subordinate in meaning to the other, i.e. from one sentence to the next one can pose a question.
Unions consisting of one word are calledsimple:
a, and, but, or, either, how, what, when, barely, as if
etc., and conjunctions consisting of several words,composite:
due to the fact that, while, due to the fact that, despite the fact that
and etc.
Coordinating conjunctions are divided into three groups:
Connecting : and; yes (meaning and); not only but; like so;
opposing : a; but; yes, however; but;
Dividing : or; or or; or.
Parts of some unions (not only but, etc.) are found with different homogeneous members or in different parts of a complex sentence.
Subordinating conjunctions are divided into the following groups:
Causal : because; because of; because; due to the fact that; thanks to; due to the fact that; due to the fact that and others;
Target : to (to); to; so that etc.;
Temporary : when; only; just; bye; barely, etc.;
Conditional : if; if; once; whether; how soon, etc.;
Comparative : how; as if; like; as if; exactly, etc.;
Explanatory : what; to; like others;
concessions : although; although; no matter how, etc.
Morphological analysis of the union
I.
Part of speech. General value.
II.
Morphological features:
1)
Composing or subordinating;
2)
The unchangeable word.
III.
syntactic role.
Particle
Particle - a service part of speech that introduces various shades of meaning into a sentence or serves to form word forms.Particles do not change and are not members of the sentence.According to the meaning and role in the sentence, the particles are divided into three categories: formative, negative and modal.
Shaping particles
Form-building particles include particles that serve to form the conditional and imperative mood of the verb.
Particle would (b)
can stand before the verb to which it refers, after the verb, can be separated from the verb by other words.
negative particles
The negative particles are not
andneither
.
Particlenot
can give sentences or individual words not only a negative, but also a positive meaning with a double negation.
The value of the particle is not
of the whole offer:Not hurry up with the answer.Not to be this.
a single word: Before us wasnot small, but a large meadow.
Comradenot couldnot help me.
Negative meaning.
Positive value.
negative particleneither can have other meanings than negative.
The meaning of the particle is neither
Negative meaning in a sentence without a subject.
Neither
from place! Aroundneither
souls.
Strengthening the negation in sentences with a particleneither
and with the wordNo
.
around noneither
souls. Can not seeneither
bush.
Generalizing meaning in sentences with negative pronouns and adverbs.
Whatneither
(
= everything
) would do, everything worked out for him. Whereneither
(
= everywhere
) look, fields and fields are everywhere.
modal particles
Modal particles include particles that bring various semantic shades to the sentence, and also express the feelings and attitudes of the speaker.
Particles that add semantic shades to the sentence are divided into groups according to their meaning:
Question : whether, really, really
indication : here (and here), out (and out)
Clarification : exactly, exactly
Highlight, limit : only, exclusively, exclusively, almost
Particles expressing the feelings and attitude of the speaker are also divided into groups according to their meaning:
Exclamation : what, how
Doubt : hardly, hardly
Gain : even, even and, neither, and, yet, after all, really, everything, after all
Mitigation, requirement : -ka
Morphological parsing of a particle
I.
Part of speech. General value.
II.
Morphological features:
1)
Discharge;
2)
The unchangeable word.
III.
syntactic role.
Interjection
Interjection
- a special part of speech that expresses, but does not name, various feelings and impulses.
Interjections are not included in either independent or auxiliary parts of speech.
Interjections do not change and are not part of the sentence. But sometimes interjections are used in the meaning of other parts of speech. In this case, the interjection takes on a specific lexical meaning and becomes a member of the sentence.
There are 12 parts of speech in modern Russian: noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun, adverb, verb, participle, participle, preposition, conjunction, particle, interjection. Participle and participle are a special form of the verb.
Parts of speech are divided into independent, auxiliary, and interjections are distinguished separately. In Russian, there are also words that do not belong to any part of speech: the words "yes" and "no", modal words, onomatopoeic words. Modal words express the relation of the utterance to reality: undoubtedly, true, fact, certainly, perhaps, probably, maybe, maybe, tea, it seems, probably, and others. They usually act as introductory words. These are invariable words, not related to other words in the sentence, therefore they are not members of the sentence.
Note. Many scientists do not consider participle and gerund as separate parts of speech and refer to the verb group. According to such scientists, there are 10 parts of speech in the Russian language. In a number school programs(for example, in the textbook by T.A. Ladyzhenskaya) one more part of speech is distinguished: the category of state. Use the material in this article, taking into account your school curriculum.
Diagram of parts of speech
Independent parts of speech are divided into changeable (inflected or conjugated) and invariable. Let's show the parts of speech of the Russian language in the diagram:
Table of parts of speech
Part of speech is characterized by: 1) general meaning, 2) morphological features, 3) syntactic role. Morphological features can be permanent and non-permanent. Invariable independent parts of speech, service parts of speech, interjections have only constant morphological features. Independent parts of speech are members of sentences, service parts of speech and interjections are not. From the point of view of these characteristics, consider the parts of speech of the Russian language:
The pages of independent and service parts of speech contain tables with a detailed and comparative description of meanings, morphological features and the syntactic role of parts of speech. We will show a generalized table of meanings and morphological features of all parts of speech in the Russian language.
Morphological features | Syntactic role |
---|---|
Noun - subject (primary meaning) | |
Permanent signs: own or common noun, animate or inanimate, gender, declension. Variable signs: case, number. |
Subject, object, inconsistent definition, circumstance, application, nominal part of the compound predicate. |
Adjective - a sign of an object | |
initial form- nominative case, singular, masculine. Permanent signs: qualitative, relative or possessive. Inconstant features: comparative and superlative degree (for qualitative), full or short (for qualitative), case, number, gender (in the singular). |
Definition, nominal part of the compound predicate, predicate (in short form). |
Numeral name - the number or order of objects when counting | |
The initial form is the nominative case. Constant signs: simple or compound, quantitative or ordinal, whole, fractional or collective. Variable signs: case, number (if any), gender (if any) |
Quantitative - any member of the proposal. Ordinal - definition, nominal part of the compound predicate. |
Pronoun - points to objects, signs or quantities, but does not name them | |
The initial form is the nominative case, singular. Permanent signs: category (personal, reflexive, interrogative, relative, indefinite, negative, possessive, demonstrative, attributive), person (for personal pronouns). Variable signs: case, number (if any), gender (if any). |
Subject, definition, object, circumstance. |
Verb - action or state of an object | |
The initial form is an indefinite form (infinitive). Constant signs: appearance, conjugation transitivity. Non-permanent signs: inclination, number, time, person, gender. |
An infinitive is any member of a sentence. Personal forms - predicate. |
Participle - a sign of an object by action | |
The initial form is the nominative case, singular, masculine. Permanent signs: real or passive, time, appearance. Variable signs: complete or short form(in the passive), case (in full form), number, gender. |
Definition. Brief passive - the nominal part of the compound predicate. |
The participle is an additional action with the main action expressed by the verb | |
The initial form is the indefinite form of the verb. Permanent features: unchanging form, perfect and imperfect form, transitivity*, recurrence*. * In a number of school programs, signs of transition and recurrence are not considered. |
Circumstance. |
Adverb - a sign of the action of an object or other sign | |
Groups by meaning: adverbs of place, time, mode of action, measure and degree, reason, purpose. Degrees of comparison: comparative and superlative (if any). Immutability. |
Circumstance. |
Preposition - expresses the dependence of a noun, numeral and pronoun on other words | |
Union - connects homogeneous members in a simple sentence and simple sentences in a complex | |
Immutability. Composing and subordinating. | They are not part of the offer. |
Particle - introduces various shades of meaning into a sentence or serves to form word forms | |
Immutability. Formative, negative and modal. | They are not part of the offer. |
Interjection - expresses, but does not name, various feelings and urges | |
Immutability. Derivatives and non-derivatives. | They are not part of the offer. |
Presentation materials
Materials on parts of speech for the preparation of presentations by students in grades 5-7. Click on the desired picture - it will open in a separate tab, press CTRL + S on a computer or select the save icon on a mobile device to save the picture.
Pictures with a diagram.
* This work is not scientific work, is not graduation qualifying work and is the result of processing, structuring and formatting the collected information, intended to be used as a source of material for self-preparation of educational work.
Introduction
The part of speech is admittedly one of the most general categories of language. They in a certain way group words with similar lexical and grammatical characteristics, with the same way of displaying objective reality. Therefore, the parts of speech have attracted and continue to attract special interest both in solving important theoretical issues and in the practical development of the language. Nevertheless, despite the large number of works on this issue, the problem of parts of speech remains unresolved. For the science of language, the words spoken by O.P. Sunik about four decades ago: “A very old and very confusing question about parts of speech, about their linguistic nature, about their quantity and quality in languages of various types and families, as you know, has not received a satisfactory solution either in grammatical studies on individual languages, nor in works on general linguistics The question of parts of speech has occupied the minds of scientists since ancient times.
Aristotle, Plato, Yaska, Panini were engaged in research in this area; in Russian linguistics, L.V. Shcherba, V.V.
Vinogradov, A. A. Shakhmatov and others.
Principles of classification of parts of speech.
All words of the Russian language are divided into certain lexical and grammatical categories, called parts of speech. Parts of speech- the main lexical and grammatical categories, according to which the words of the language are distributed on the basis of signs: a) semantic (generalized meaning of an object, action or state, quality, etc.), b) morphological (morphological categories of a word) and c) s and n t a x i c h e c o o g (syntactic functions of the word).
Parts of speech are categories of the most general nature. Nouns have a general meaning of objectivity, adjectives - qualities, a verb - actions, etc. All these meanings (subjectivity, quality, action) are among the general lexico-grammatical meanings, while the actual lexical meanings of words are different, and the same stem can become a source of formation of words that differ in grammatical features, i.e. different parts speech. For example, from the basics that have a general meaning of objectivity - stone, wood, you can form nouns stone, tree, and adjectives stone, wood, and verbs to stone, to stiffen; from the foundations that have the general meaning of quality, - white, deaf, not only adjectives can be formed white, deaf or verbs to turn white, to stun, but also nouns whiteness, deafness. Lexical meanings stems even within the same part of speech can be different and differ markedly from grammatical meanings. For example, adjectives along with the meaning of quality - white, skinny can be related to the meaning of objectivity - gold, brick, action process - evasive, loose, etc. . Adjectives express objectivity and the process of action not abstractly, but only as a sign of some object or phenomenon of reality ( gold bracelet, brick house, evasive answer, loose material), as belonging to an object or phenomenon, while nouns that have quality values ( whiteness, deafness) or actions ( running, running), denote independent (independent) concepts and may have adjectives defining them: pleasant whiteness, severe deafness, constant running around, fresh uprooting etc.
Morphological features different parts of speech are different. For example, nouns have the categories of gender, case, and number. Adjectives also have grammatical categories of gender, number and case. But if the gender, number and case of nouns are grammatically independent categories, then for adjectives they entirely depend on the noun to which the adjective refers. Verbs have the category of person, tense, mood, aspect, voice, number. At the same time, the categories of time, mood, aspect, voice are inherent only in the verb. And the category of number covers different parts of speech (nouns, adjectives, pronouns, verbs), the category of person is also inherent in pronouns.
Parts of speech differ in the nature of morphological changes: nouns change in cases and numbers (decline), but not in gender; adjectives change not only by cases and numbers, but also by gender; verbs - according to persons, numbers, tenses and moods (conjugate), and adverbs and impersonal predicative words (state category) are distinguished by immutability.
In some inflected parts of speech, words that do not undergo morphological changes are distinguished. This includes, for example, borrowed nouns ( coat, subway etc.), which do not change either in cases or in numbers; adjectives borrowed type beige, burgundy and etc.
Depending on the role of which members of the sentence this or that part of speech is used, as well as on what words it is combined with in the sentence, various syntactic functions parts of speech. For example, nouns in a sentence most often act as a subject and an object. Adjectives perform the function of definition. Verbs act primarily as a predicate.
Classification andparts of speech
The modern classification of parts of speech in Russian is basically traditional and is based on the doctrine of eight parts of speech in ancient grammars.
I. The first grammar of the Russian language was "Russian Grammar" by Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov (1755). Lomonosov divided all parts of speech into significant and auxiliary. Two parts of speech - the name and the verb - were called the main, or significant, the remaining six - the pronoun, participle, adverb, preposition, conjunction and interjection - official. The main provisions of M.V. Lomonosov entered the Russian grammatical tradition and were revealed, supplemented in the works of A.Kh. Vostokova, F.I. Buslaeva, A.A. Potebni, F.F. Fortunatova, A.M. Peshkovsky, A.A. Shakhmatova, V.A. Bogoroditsky, L.V. Shcherba and V.V. Vinogradov.
II. In the "Russian Grammar" by Alexander Khristoforovich Vostokov (1831), the traditional eight parts of speech were preserved. However, the adjective was singled out from the name as a special part of the speech of the East, but participles were considered as a kind of adjectives (“effective adjectives”), and numerals were also assigned to adjectives.
III. Fedor Ivanovich Buslaev in his work "The Experience of the Historical Grammar of the Russian Language" (1858) delimits the parts of speech into significant and auxiliary. He refers to significant words as three parts of speech: a noun, an adjective and a verb.
As part of the official parts of speech, Buslaev names five: pronouns, a numeral, a preposition, a union and an adverb. Moreover, he divides adverbs into two groups: 1) formed from significant words, for example, again, sideways, and 2) formed from service words, for example, here, there, twice. The former should be considered as part of significant parts of speech, the latter - as part of official words.
IV. Alexander Afanasyevich Potebnya in the book "From Notes on Russian Grammar" (1874) somewhat redistributes the parts of speech. To significant parts (" lexical words"") it relates: verb, noun, adjective and adverb; to service ("formal words"): conjunctions, prepositions, particles and auxiliary verbs; pronouns are considered separately.
v. In the course "Comparative Linguistics" by Philip Fedorovich Fortunatov (1901-1902), there is no traditional division of words into parts of speech and grammatical categories are distinguished according to formal features: 1) full words: verbs, nouns, adjectives, infinitives, adverbs, which are divided into conjugated , declinable and non-declining; 2) partial words; 3) interjections stand separately.
VI. The general list includes Academician A.A. Shakhmatov 14 parts of speech, of which 4 are significant (noun, adjective, adverb, verb), 4 non-significant (pronoun-noun, pronoun-adjective, pronominal adverb, numeral), 5 auxiliary (preposition, copula, particle , union, prefix) and one special part of speech (interjection).
VII. The classification of parts of speech proposed by the representative of the Kazan linguistic school Vasily Alekseevich Bogoroditsky. He singles out: 1) words with an independent meaning: noun, verb, personal pronoun;
2) words with a lesser degree of independence: adjectives, numerals, definitive pronouns, participles, adverbs, gerunds; 3) words without their own meaning: prepositions and conjunctions; 4) interjections stand separately.
VIII. Academician Lev Vladimirovich Shcherba made a great contribution to the development of the theory of parts of speech. The scientist distinguishes "two correlative categories: the category of significant words and the category of auxiliary words." To the words of L.V. Shcherba refers to the verb, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, quantitative words (i.e. numerals), the category of state, or predicative adverbs. As part of service words, Shcherba calls ligaments ( to be), prepositions, particles, unions (coordinative, connecting, connecting), words "separating", or fused unions ( and - and, neither - nor and etc.), relative words(or subordinating conjunctions). Separately, he considers interjections and the so-called onomatopoeic words. L.V. Shcherba was also the first to single out parts of speechRussian language category u states (in article "On parts of speech in Russian" 1928 ).
IX. The classification of academician Viktor Vladimirovich Vinogradov is one of the most reasonable and convincing. She divides all words into four grammatical-semantic (structural-semantic) categories of words:
1. Words-names, or parts of speech;
2. Connective, service words, or particles of speech;
3. Modal words;
4. Interjections.
1. Words-names (parts of speech) designate objects, processes, qualities, signs, numerical connections and relationships, are members of a sentence and can be used separately from other words as sentence words. To the parts of speech V.V. Vinogradov refers nouns, adjectives, numerals, verbs, adverbs, words to the category of state; pronouns are also attached to them.
2. Service words are devoid of a nominative (naming) function. These include connective, auxiliary words (prepositions, conjunctions, proper particles, bundles).
3. Modal words and particles also do not perform a nominative function, but are more “lexical” than auxiliary words. They express the attitude of the speaker to the content of the utterance.
4. Interjections express feelings, moods and volitional impulses, but do not name and. Interjections differ from other types of words in the absence of cognitive value, intonation features, syntactic disorganization and direct connection with facial expressions and expressive test.
In modern Russian, 10 parts of speech are distinguished: 1) noun,
2) adjective, 3) numeral, 4) pronoun, 5) category of state, 6) adverb, 7) preposition, 8) union, 9) particles, 10) verb (sometimes participles and gerunds are also distinguished as independent parts of speech ). The first six parts of speech are significant performing a nominative function and acting as members of the proposal. A special place among them is occupied by pronouns, including words devoid of a nominative function. Prepositions, conjunctions, particles - official parts of speech that do not have a nominative function and do not act as independent members of the sentence. In addition to the named classes of words, special groups of words are distinguished in the modern Russian language: 1) modal words expressing the relation of the statement to reality from the point of view of the speaker ( probably, obviously, of course); 2) interjections that serve to express feelings and will ( oh, oh, chick); 3) onomatopoeic words ( quack-quack, meow-meow).
Conclusion
The question of parts of speech in linguistics is debatable. Parts of speech are the result of a certain classification, depending on what is taken as the basis for the classification. So, in linguistics there are classifications of parts of speech, which are based on only one feature (generalized meaning, morphological features or syntactic role). There are classifications using several bases. School classification is of this kind. The number of parts of speech in different linguistic works is different and ranges from 4 to 15 parts of speech. But the most productive and universal approach seems to be the approach to parts of speech as lexico-grammatical categories of words, taking into account their syntactic role.
7. Rakhmanova L.I., Suzdaltseva V.N. Modern Russian language. - M., Moscow State University, 1997. - C. 144
8. Rybacheva L.V. Modern Russian literary language. Morphology. - Voronezh., VSU, 2008. - C. 7
9. Nikonova M.N. Modern Russian language. - Omsk., OmGTU, 2008. - P. 88
10. Sidorenko E.N. General questions of the theory of parts of speech. Noun