Message on the topic part of speech description. I urgently need an educational message on the topic "parts of speech"
INDEPENDENT PARTS OF SPEECH
Independent (significant) parts of speech are categories of words that name an object, action, quality, state, etc. or point to them and which have an independent lexical and grammatical meaning and are members of the sentence (main or secondary).
The independent parts of speech are:
- noun,
adjective,
numeral,
pronoun,
verb,
adverb.
24.1. Discharges of nouns: common, specific, collective.
Depending on the lexical and grammatical features, nouns are divided into:
- common nouns (names of homogeneous objects, actions or states): house, bed
own (names of single objects selected from a number of homogeneous ones - names, surnames, geographical names, etc.): Vanya Petrov, Pluto, Moscow;
concrete (they name specific objects and phenomena from reality): a boy, a station and abstract (abstract) (they call an object or sign abstractly from the agent or carrier of the sign): hatred, love, care;
collective (denoting a set of identical or similar individual items as one whole): students, sheet.
24.1. Animation-inanimate category: animate nouns designate living beings (people and animals), and inanimate nouns - an object in the proper sense of the word, in contrast to living beings. This category is manifested in the declension of nouns, namely in the accusative case of the plural: the form of the accusative case of the plural of animate nouns coincides with the form of the genitive case, and of inanimate nouns with the form of the nominative case. For masculine nouns (except for -a, -я), the same thing happens in the singular.
The masculine gender is a variety of the gender category, characterized by a certain form change, and for animate nouns, the belonging to it of masculine creatures (father, cat, table, house).
Feminine gender is a kind of gender category, characterized by a certain form change, and for animate nouns - belonging to it of feminine creatures (mother, cat, bench, terrace).
There are nouns generic, which can be correlated with both male and female persons: slob, orphan, incognito, protégé.
The neuter gender is a variety of the gender category, characterized by a certain form change (partially coincides with the form change of the masculine gender) and the meaning of inanimateness (window, sky, sun);
24.2.3. Category of number: in Russian there is a singular form (denotes one parent in a series of homogeneous objects): chair, sock, boy, and a plural form (denotes an indefinite set of homogeneous objects): chairs, socks, boys.
The singular and plural differ in different endings, different compatibility with other parts of speech.
There are nouns that have only the singular form: some abstract nouns (love, care), collective nouns (leaves, students), proper names (Moscow, Siberia), some nouns denoting substance (milk, gold).
There are nouns that, on the contrary, have only a plural form: some abstract nouns (holidays, twilight), some nouns denoting a substance (soup, cream), the names of some games (chess, hide and seek), some concrete nouns that consist of several components (scissors, trousers);
24.2.4. Case category: this category is based on the opposition of case forms and denotes the relationship of the object denoted by the noun to other objects, actions or signs. There are six cases in Russian: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental, prepositional.
24.3. Declension of nouns is a change of nouns by cases.
There are three declensions in Russian.
|
I. p. militia, genius, blade
R.p. militia, genius, blade
D.p. militia, genius, blade
V.p. militia, genius, blade
etc. militia, genius, blade
P.p. about the police, about the genius, about the blade
For more information about difficult cases of writing the ending of nouns, see the "Spelling" section.
In the Russian language there are nouns with different declensions: these are 10 neuter nouns in -mya (flame, burden, time, udder, banner, seed, stirrup, shemya, tribe, name) - they decline with an increase in the suffix -en- in the singular in all cases , except for the instrumental, according to the 3rd declension, and in the instrumental case of the singular - according to the 2nd declension, in the plural they decline according to the 2nd declension; words mother, daughter (inclined according to the 3rd declension with an increase -er-), path (inclined in all cases according to the 3rd declension and only in the instrumental - according to the 2nd), child (this word is not used in oblique cases now singular).
There are also indeclinable nouns (that is, they do not change for cases and numbers). Basically, they include words of foreign origin, which denote both inanimate objects (cafes, radios), and masculine and feminine persons (attache, lady); they can also represent animals (kangaroos, chimpanzees), given names and surnames (Helen Frankenstein), place names (Baku, Helsinki), etc.
24.4. Syntactic functions of nouns
In a sentence, a noun can be; any member:
- subject: Mom goes to the store,
addition: I asked him to give me a book.
definition: Mom bought me a notebook with checkered paper.
Addendum: The Volga River is very beautiful.
circumstance: He got his way despite the difficulties.
predicate: My father is an engineer.
25.1. Classes of adjectives: qualitative, relative, possessive.
Lexico-grammatical categories of adjectives.
- quality adjectives - designate an object directly, that is, without relation to other objects (red, beautiful, kind), have forms of comparison and short forms;
relative adjectives - indicate a sign through relation to another object, they are derived from nominal bases (laboratory, wooden);
possessive adjectives - denote belonging to a person or animal, that is, they contain an indication of the owner (foxes, fathers).
25.3. Degrees of comparison of adjectives is a grammatical category of adjectives that expresses the relative difference or superiority in quality inherent in objects. In Russian, three forms are opposed:
- positive,
- comparative
- excellent.
A positive degree names a feature without any opposition to another feature. comparative indicates a feature that a given object has to a greater or lesser extent. The superlative degree indicates the highest degree of manifestation of this quality in comparison with other subjects (cf .: kind - kinder - kindest).
Formation of forms of comparison.
Adjectives are declined, i.e. change in gender, case and number, but their form depends on the form of the word on which they depend. (For the spelling of the endings of the names of adjectives, see the "Spelling" section)
25.4. Syntactic function of the adjective.
In a sentence, adjectives can act as:
- definitions (The girl had a very beautiful doll),
- the nominal part of the compound nominal predicate (The doll was beautiful).
26. NUMBER- an independent part of speech that combines words that denote abstract numbers or the number of objects and their order when counting. Numerals are combined as a quantitative determinant only with nouns and form an indivisible phrase with them, which in the sentence is one member of the sentence. Numerals cannot be determined by adjectives.
By composition, numerals are divided into:
- simple (non-derivative base: two, eight, one hundred),
complex (derivatives: eighteen, seven hundred, five hundredth),
compound (consisting of two or more words: six hundred thirty-five).
- quantitative (denoting an abstract number or the number of homogeneous objects): two, twenty-five;
fractional (denoting a fractional value: two-fifths);
collective (denoting the number of items as a set: three, both);
ordinal (indicate the order of objects in the count: first, third, twenty).
Fractional numbers are formed by combining the cardinal number in the nominative case and the ordinal number in the genitive case (three fifths, six eighths).
The collective numerals eight, nine, ten are practically not used in modern Russian, the numerals two, three, four, five, six, seven, both, both are used much more often. Collective nouns can only be used in certain cases:
- with masculine or common nouns that name males: two boys, both professors;
with nouns that have only the plural form: three days, two sledges);
with nouns guys, people, children, person (meaning "person"): six guys, two persons;
with personal pronouns in the plural (there were three of us);
with the names of baby animals: (three kittens);
as substantiated numerals (five in white);
with the names of paired items (three mittens (= three pairs of mittens)).
For details on the endings of numerals in declension, see the "Spelling" section.
27. PRONOUN- an independent part of speech, which includes words that indicate objects, signs, etc., but do not name them. In a sentence, pronouns can act as various members of a sentence.
Groups of pronouns according to correlation with other parts of speech:
- noun pronouns (I, who, nothing);
pronouns-adjectives (none, own);
pronouns-numerals (a few, not at all).
- personal (indicate a person or object): I, you, he, she, it, we, you, they;
reflexive (indicates the attitude towards the acting person): oneself;
possessive (indicate belonging to one of three persons): mine, yours, mine;
demonstrative (generally indicate objects, their quality or quantity): this, this, that;
interrogative (transmit the question): who, which, whose;
relative (in form they coincide with interrogative pronouns, but act as allied words): who, what;
negative (indicate the absence of an object): no one, nothing;
indefinite (indicate indefinite objects or their signs): someone, someone;
definitive (indicate a generalized attribute of an object): any, any.
- subject: I came home very tired.
definition: I want to buy some book.
Addendum: I want to ask her about it.
circumstance: The boys went to her.
28.1. conjugated and not conjugated forms verb, infinitive.
Verbs, depending on the ability or inability to change in persons, numbers, moods and tenses, have non-conjugated forms (the infinitive is the indefinite form of the verb) participles and participles, all other forms belong to conjugated forms.
The infinitive is the original form of the verb, with which all other forms of the verb are lexically and word-formatively connected. Verbs in the infinitive name the process itself, without attributing it to any person or tense. The indefinite form of the verb is characterized by the suffixes -t, -ti (revenge, buy), some verbs in the infinitive end in -chi (lie down).
Grammatical categories of verbs:
28.2. Verb type
- aspect - a grammatical category that expresses differences in the course of an action. Imperfective verbs denote an action in development, without indicating its limit, and answer the question what to do? (receive, buy, wear); and perfective verbs designate an action as limited by a certain limit and answer the question what to do? (get, buy, demolish).
28.3. Transitivity of the verb
- transitivity - intransitivity - this is a category on the basis of which verbs with the meaning of an action directed at an object (it is the object of this action) are distinguished - transitive verbs read a magazine, paint a wall), and verbs with the meaning of an action that does not imply an object on which this action is naturally directed - intransitive verbs (ache, sit). In practice, this difference) manifests itself in management: transitive verbs are combined with nouns or pronouns in the accusative case without a preposition (treat a boy, read a book), and intransitive verbs are combined with objects expressed by nouns or pronouns in indirect cases with prepositions (walk down the street, play in the yard). A special group of intransitive verbs is made up of reflexive verbs, the formal feature of which is the suffix -sya (to return, to wash).
28.4. Voice of the verb
- pledge is a category that expresses various relations between the subject and the object of the action. Active voice verbs are verbs in which the subject names the actor (subject of the action): mother washed the frame; passive voice verbs are verbs that act in a passive construction (when the subject names the object of the action, and the object in the instrumental case is the subject of the action (the window was washed by mom)).
28.5. verb mood
- inclination is a category that expresses the relation of action to reality. There are three moods in Russian:
- indicative - expresses an action that really exists, existed or will exist (bought, read); verbs in the indicative mood have forms of tense (present, past and future), person (1,2 and 3) and number (singular or plural);
conditional (or subjunctive) - expresses an action that does not really exist, but is only possible or desirable (would buy, would read); it is formed with the help of a verb in the past tense of the indicative mood and a particle by;
imperative - expresses an action that is not real, it expresses a request, an order, etc. (buy, read); it is formed from the basis of the present or simple future tense using the suffix -i- (buy, count) or the zero suffix read, smear), the plural is formed by adding the imperative suffix -te (buy, read) to the singular form (buy, read), also imperative mood can be formed by adding particles to verbs in the explanatory mood of the present tense let, let.
- person is the most important category, with the help of which it is indicated who performs the action. There are three persons in Russian, they differ in singular and plural. Every face has its endings
For conjugation of verbs, see the Spelling section. In a sentence, verbs can act as:
- simple predicate: I bought a book;
complex verbal predicate: I decided to go to the library;
an inconsistent definition: I did not like the plan to go there right away.
- signs of the verb:
- transitivity - intransitivity,
return, irrevocable
view,
pledge,
time (present and past);
- genus,
number,
case,
in the sentence acts as a definition,
the presence of passive participles in both full and short forms.
note:
- from perfective verbs that do not have the present tense form, present participles are not formed;
passive participles are formed only from transitive verbs.
In a sentence, full participles act as a definition (The girl who entered was very pretty.), And short participles act as a nominal part of a complex predicate (The floor is washed.)
30. GENERAL PARTICIPLE- this is a special invariable form of the verb, which denotes a sign, but acts as a sign of another action. The participle combines the features of a verb and an adverb:
- signs of the verb:
- lexical meaning,
view,
syntax control,
recurrence - non-returnability;
- immutability,
type of subordinating relationship - adjacency.
For more information on the spelling of adverbs, see the "Spelling" section.
31. ADVERB- this is an independent part of speech, which includes words denoting signs of actions or signs of signs and answering questions like how? where? when? where? why? for what? in what degree? (read carefully, see you tomorrow, very cheerful). In a sentence, adverbs act as circumstances, adjoining verbs, adjectives, adverbs and nouns.
According to the word-formation structure, adverbs are:
- derivative (or motivated), they are formed mainly from adjectives (fabulous, beautiful); there are much smaller groups that include adverbs formed from nouns, numerals, pronouns, verbs and other adverbs;
non-derivative (then, here, where, etc.).
- definitive (characterize a feature or object in terms of quality or quantity): by heart, good, bad; this group includes qualitative adverbs (beautifully, softly), quantitative adverbs (very, twice), adverbs of image and mode of action (in my opinion, in English, tipsy, secretly).
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Abstract:
Parts of speech in Russian
Introduction
1. From the history of the doctrine of parts of speech
2. Criteria for the allocation of parts of speech in the works of various scientists
3.Parts of speech in Russian
Bibliography
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. 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 debatable problems of general linguistics.
Are separate parts of speech distinguished on the basis of one leading feature inherent in words related to this 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 work is to determine the role of parts of speech.
1 . From the historytheory 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 division vocabulary by 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 (4th 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 the Greek-Latin languages; 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, 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.
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 own lexical meaning, parts of speech began to be designated as ""lexical-grammatical categories of words"".
2 . Criteriaallocation 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 service parts of speech belong to service units speeches, and those produced from significant to significant. Thus, it turns out that the division of words into significant and auxiliary ones does not coincide with their division into parts of speech.
An interesting observation by F.I. Buslaev over the closed nature of the list of function 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 individual words used in speech, they must be considered in a twofold way: 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"": ""wedged"" 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. Division of parts of speech into basic grammatical categories 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.
3 . Parts of speech inin Russian
Parts of speech are groups of words united 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;
2) morphological features;
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 lexical and grammatical classes of words, i.e., classes of words distinguished taking into account their generalized meaning, morphological features and syntactic behaviour.
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 settled in literary language, are recognized as normative, while others are perceived as speech errors. Variants of forms can be associated with different meanings of the word. The forms may also vary. 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 auxiliary words most often serve to connect 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 permanent 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. speech noun verb adverb
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.
Words with the meaning of number play 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 -o / -e) 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.
The 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 - participial and participle.
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 independent part 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 a special form of the 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 independent parts speeches 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 an official part of speech that serves to communicate homogeneous members proposals, parts 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, which serves to express shades of the meanings of words, phrases, sentences and to form word forms.
In accordance with this, the 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 either to the group of independent or to the group of service ones.
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 existence 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.
Listliterature
1. Vinogradov VV Russian language (Grammatical doctrine of the word). M.,
graduate 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. Textbook allowance. M., Higher School, 1998.239s.
5. Rosenthal D.E. Practical stylistics of the Russian language. Textbook for high schools. M., Higher school, 1977. 316s.
Hosted on Allbest.ru
...Similar Documents
Definition of the role of various parts of speech. The problem of the universality of their nature. Do all languages have parts of speech and is their set the same in all languages. Criteria for the allocation of parts of speech in the works of various scientists. The role of parts of speech in Russian.
test, added 02/20/2010
Theoretical basis study of words of the category of state as an independent part of speech. The main problems of the doctrine of the processes of transitivity at the level of parts of speech. Analysis of the category of state as an independent part of speech in modern Russian.
term paper, added 12/08/2017
General definitions term "word". The word as a lexical, grammatical unit of speech. Parts of speech in modern Russian, characteristic. Morphological features of parts of speech. The grammatical meaning of the word. Service parts of speech in the names of stores.
term paper, added 04/13/2010
Separation of parts of speech according to the semantic principle. Syntactic function as a possible substitution in a linear speech chain. Classifications of parts of speech German language. The division of words into parts of speech as a preliminary stage of their grammatical description.
abstract, added 04/03/2010
The grammatical division of the entire lexical composition of the language is at the heart of the question of the parts of speech. Classification of parts of speech in Russian and English, conducting them comparative analysis. Typological criteria that exist for comparing parts of speech.
term paper, added 10/28/2016
Identification of parts of speech in Russian and Chinese, the basics of grammar. General features of a noun as a part of speech. Grammatical categories of a noun in Russian and Chinese (animation/inanimateness, gender, number, case).
thesis, added 12/03/2011
Characterization of lexico-grammatical features (semantic, morphological, syntactic) and modern classification(noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun, category of state, preposition, conjunction, particles, verb) parts of speech.
report, added 05/07/2010
The study of the rules in the Russian language on the topic of the study and checking how they are observed in oral and written speech. The main differences in the use of words with inflection and without inflection. Factors that influenced the change in the forms of use of the studied words.
thesis, added 04/25/2015
Typology as a science. Fundamentals of typological analysis of parts of speech. Typological features interaction of parts of speech in modern English language. Semantic, morphological and functional analysis of parts of speech in modern English.
thesis, added 06/25/2011
The essence of dialogical speech as a type of oral activity. Development of a didactic and methodological system for teaching students in grades 5-6 the skills and abilities of dialogic speech in English when using linguistic experience students in Russian.
The question of studying parts of speech has occupied scientists for a long time. Since ancient times, such studies have been carried out by such famous scientists as Plato and Aristotle. Parts of speech are the most general and necessary categories in the grammar of any language, therefore, in the grammatical description of a language, first of all, the question of parts of speech as a grammatical grouping of lexical units is clarified. These may be certain groups or categories, which are characterized by different characteristics. There are many different statements about the essence and principles of parts of speech, on which they are based. This topic is a debatable issue in general linguistics. In the etymological meaning of the modern term, parts of speech were originally called grammatical phenomena, which in our time are called "members of a sentence" in grammar. These are parts of speech, parts of statements and sentences. The parts of speech include the subject and predicates, as well as additions, definitions. When studying linguistics, the question of dividing all the words that are in the language into certain classes often arose before learned linguists. So, even Aristotle divided all words in the Greek language into parts of speech, there were four of them: a member, a verb, a name and a union (a bunch). In our time, linguists, studying the grammatical doctrine concerning parts of speech, more often paid attention to the analysis of grammatical specific properties inherent in the Russian language. Thus, Russian linguistics, as a science, has already acquired its own grammatical original ideas. They are formed on the basis not only of comparative historical methods, but also in the field of descriptive grammar.
The Russian science of grammar in the Russian language has naturally developed and continues to develop successfully today, it does not remain aloof from the great achievements of world science. The path of its development every year becomes more independent, original and fruitful, due to the originality of the concepts and the originality of the material. Today in linguistics different countries you can find ideas that are consonant with our domestic schools, in particular, concerning the question of the definition of parts of speech. This is most often especially pronounced in finding common paths when determining parts of speech.
Even the young grammarian G. Paul noted the failure of many attempts to establish a strict logical classification of all parts of speech. He wrote extensively and pointed out three aspects of their definition:
Semantic;
- syntactic;
- morphological (word formation and inflection).
Linguists emphasized that “parts of speech can reflect our ability to fit reality into formal, diverse patterns,” it was also noted that when determining a part of speech, many things must be taken into account: form, meaning and function.
As for the definition of parts of speech, then in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia are classes of words that have the following characteristics:
1. The unity of meaning (generalized), but abstracted from the lexical meaning of all words in a given class.This may be objectivity in a noun, or process in a verb.
2. Common inflection and grammatical category.
A noun is a part of speech denoting an object and answering questions: who? what? (person, book). They differ by gender and change by cases and numbers. There are animated (worker) and inanimate (TVs).
adjectives
An adjective is a part of speech denoting a sign of an object and answering questions: which? which? which? which? It varies by gender, number and case. Differs from communion that has no signs of pledge, type and time.
- Quality adjectives denote an irrelevant property of the object itself, capable of manifesting itself with different intensity: white, fast, old. They have short forms and degrees of comparison: white, faster, oldest, oldest.
- Relative adjectives denote the property of an object through its relation to another object or action: door, iron, inflatable, measuring.
- Possessive adjectives indicate who owns the item they define: fathers, sisters, foxes.
Numerals
The numeral is a part of speech denoting:
- the number of items; answers the question How many? (Cardinal numbers): two, fourteen, one hundred twenty five;
- the order of the items in the count; answers the question which the? (ordinals): second, fourteenth, one hundred twenty-fifth;
- a group stands out among cardinal numbers collective numbers denoting the number of items as a whole: two, three, four, five, six, seven, nine, ten, both, both.
Pronouns
A pronoun is a part of speech that refers to a person, object or feature, but does not name them. Pronouns are divided into:
- Personal: I, we, you, you, he, she, it, they.
- returnable: myself.
- Possessive: mine, ours, yours, yours.
- Interrogative-relative: who, what, which, which, which, whose, how much.
- pointing: this, that, such, such, so much.
- Determinants: himself, most, all (all, all, all), everyone, everyone, any, other.
- Negative: no one, nothing, none, no one, none, no one, nothing.
- indefinite: someone, something, some, some, a few and etc.
Verbs
A verb is a part of speech denoting an action or state and answering questions: what to do? what is he doing? what have you been doing? what will do? It has signs of aspect, voice, person, number, tense, mood and gender (in the past tense, in the subjunctive mood).
Verb forms:
- Infinitive- an indefinite form of the verb without signs of person, number, tense, voice, mood and gender: run, sleep, read.
- Participle- a non-conjugated verb form denoting an action or state as such a sign of an object that can change over time. It varies by gender, number and case; has signs of pledge, type and time - this differs from adjective.
- Real Communion denotes an action that is performed by the carrier of the sign: reading student, blossomed garden.
- Passive Communion denotes a sign that arose as a result of the impact of someone (something) on the bearer of the sign: abandoned stone, persecuted wind-blown leaves.
- gerund- an invariable form of the verb, denoting an action as a sign of another action, for example: spoke, looking in the eyes; exhausted, sat down on a bench. Differs from communion that which does not change; has signs of type and pledge.
Adverb
An adverb is a part of speech denoting a sign of an action, quality or object and answering questions: as? when? why? where? and so on. The main feature is immutability: slowly, yesterday, foolishly, everywhere etc. Adverbs also include pronominal adverbs: where, nowhere, like, in any way, when, never, sometimes, from where, where, from here, there, there, why, because, therefore, why, then etc.
Prepositions
Preposition - an official unchangeable part of speech that connects words (distinguish from unions, which connect not words, but syntactic units: members of a sentence or parts of a complex sentence): in, to, from, on, from, at, through, between, for the sake of, by means of, during, around, around, like, relatively, according to, thanks to, later, despite, really, due to, depending on, in connection with, in relation to and so on.
Unions
Union - an official unchanging part of speech that connects the members of a sentence and / or parts of a complex sentence (distinguish from pretexts, which connect not syntactic units, but words).
- Coordinating conjunctions: and, yes, but, or, either, too, also.
- Subordinating conjunctions: when, before, while, what, in order to, how, since, because, due to the fact that, so that, as if, as if, if, times, although, despite the fact that, in order to, not only ... but also ..., not so much ... as ... etc.
Particle
Particles are auxiliary words that give additional semantic or emotional shades to sentences and individual words: not, nor, something, something, something, - those, -sya (s), -ka, -de, well, whether, would, it happened, yes, let, let, even, only , almost, only, at least, perhaps, really, give, know, come on, well, they say, they say, after all, well, as if, as if, exactly, as if, like, supposedly, tea, perhaps, maybe, just, exactly, almost, almost etc.
Bundle
A copula is a function word torn off from the paradigm of a pronoun or a verb. Its function includes an indication of the syntactic relations between the components of the sentence. Links are words this is, phrase it is, it is(and other verb forms to be), conjugated forms of verbs appear, appear, signify, signify, be called. Couplings are often omitted, and a dash is put in their place in the sentence: Automobile - [ there is] is not a luxury, but a means of transportation.
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 this 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 in one way or another connected with their own 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 the boundaries, 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 a single grammatical category inherent in the noun of the Russian language (for example, the categories 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. Far East, as it leads some researchers even to the denial of parts of speech in these languages. In Chinese, Thai, Vietnamese, 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 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 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 official parts of speech belong to the official 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 individual words used in speech, they must be considered in a twofold way: 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 immutable, once and for all derived and eternal properties 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 themselves (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 grammatical noun etc., the search for a common meaning of parts of speech that are combined not only with a bunch of similar forms, but above all with this general 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 subsumed 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 bunch 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 signs 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, relations (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 categories of names that exist in a given separate 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. Such morphological classes, how 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 nature, 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).
Logical-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 in the composition 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 being 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 signs. Significant verbs oppose official(so-called copulas) and auxiliary verbs used in analytical verb forms. On the basis of the semantically determined ability to "open vacancies" for actants, all verbs are also divided into a number of valence classes corresponding to the formal-logical classes of single and multi-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 lexical meaning the words.
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., Bolshaya Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. 685 p. pp. 104-105, 175-176, 578-579