Term clarifying separate members offers, as a rule, is used in a broad sense to mean clarifying , explanatory And affiliate members offers . Such members of the sentence can be both main and secondary.
Clarifying a member of a sentence is called, answering the same question as the other member after which it stands, and serving for clarification (usually it narrows the scope of the concept expressed by the member being clarified). Qualifying terms can be common. Any members of the sentence can be clarifying:
For example: His intelligence or rather the speed of reaction, amazed me ( subject ). Below, in the shadows, the river roared ( circumstance ).
Most often, clarification is required circumstances of the place And time , since they can be indicated in a sentence very generally and vaguely by such words as there, there, from there, in front, behind, everywhere, everywhere, then, then, now etc.
It is precisely such general indications of space and time that usually require concretization and transition from more broad concept to a narrower one.
For example: Now, after the flood, it was a river of six fathoms.(A. Chekhov) There, below, there is skinny moss and gray bushes.(A. Pushkin)
Explanatory is a member of a sentence that names the same concept as the member being explained, but in different words. Explanatory terms are or may be preceded by conjunctions exactly, namely, that is, or (= that is ) .
In this case, quite often the explanatory members of the sentence (main and secondary) are added using words that is, exactly, namely, or (= that is), including, for example, in particular, mainly, by name, by nickname, especially. Sometimes connecting words are missing, but they can be mentally substituted.
For example: At that time, exactly a year ago, I also collaborated on magazines.(F. Dostoevsky) From the forest ravine came the cooing of wild pigeons, or turtle doves.(S. Aksakov) Even the tsar's favorites, the Preobrazhentsy, felt as if abandoned by their sovereign leader.(D. Mordovtsev)
Connection is a member of a sentence containing additional explanations or comments, communicated incidentally, as an addition to the content of the main statement. Accessory members are usually added with words even, especially, especially, for example, mainly, in particular, including, and moreover, and, and, yes, yes and, and in general, and only.
For example: They often laughed at him, and rightfully so. At night especially in a thunderstorm, the faces of the images constantly lit up in the hall, the trembling pink-golden sky opened and swung open over the garden.(I. Bunin)
Punctuation marks for clarifying, explanatory and connecting members of a sentence
Clarifying members of the sentence
1. Clarifying members of a sentence, referring to a particular word in a sentence, narrow the concept it expresses or limit it in some way. Clarifying members of a sentence are separated by commas . Most often, the significance of clarification is acquired by the circumstances of place, time, degree, measure, and manner of action.
For example: Downstairs, in the hall, they began to put out the lights(Ch.); Rahim lies with his chest on the sand, his head to the sea, and thoughtfully looks into the muddy distance(M.G.) ; In the grove, behind the dam, a bittern was hooting(M.G.) ; There, on the horizon, from where the cloud floated into the sky, a pale pink strip of light shone(M.G.) ; The vast space was flooded by the river in flood, and now far away, all the way to the horizon, silver spots were scattered across the meadows(M.G.) ; On the eighth of July, Friday, Elizarov, nicknamed Kostyl, and Lesha were returning from the village of Kazanskoye(Ch.) ; The voices under the linden trees now sounded softer, more evening-like.(Bulg.) ; Everywhere, both above and below, the larks sang(Ch.); Now, after the flood, it was a river six fathoms(H .); Try to make out the Aksai tract there, in the west, on the steppe slope of the foothills(Aitm.); We just stood on the sidelines at a closed barn
(Nile.) ; Finally, one day, in the middle of the day, across the river, in the darkness, in the distance, as always, lights flashed and went out(Nile.) ; A crow sat sadly, like an orphan, on a crooked haystack.(Fad.) .
Specifying members of a sentence can also be definitions and subjects. Typically, clarifications relate to age, color, size, etc.
For example: A minute later they passed the sleepy office, came out onto the deep sand, up to the nave, and silently sat down in a dusty cab (Bun.); Long, several miles away, the shadow fell from the mountains on the steppe (L. T.); He liked this fragrant, honey-tasting drink (Sol.); It was on that eve, before the storm, that some significant incidents happened for Ivan Matveich (Leon.); Both mother and daughter were wearing straw hats (Ch.); Most big shield, five meters wide, occupied the middle of the left row(Chuk.) .
1. Clarifying members that are emphasized in to a greater extent, dashes are highlighted.
For example: Sergei Sergeich came up to Andrei and patted him painfully on the cheek.(Shuksh.) - the circumstance is specified; The mines are all in the snow, which is very shallow here - up to the ankle(Bull.) - the predicate is specified; There were, however, few monuments - only five or six (Paust.) - a member of a sentence with the meaning of an indefinite quantity is specified.
2. Clarifying definitions can specify the meaning of pronouns this one, that one, that one.
For example: Chichikov was a little puzzled with such a somewhat harsh definition (G.); ...Light blue eyes and ash-blond hair somehow brightened this one is not particularly noticeable, flaw(M.G.).
3. The clarifying nature of the members of the sentence may increase special words more accurately, more precisely, differently(they have the meaning of introductory words). Since the introductory word is highlighted, a comma is not placed after the qualifying member.
For example: Any annual session of the Academy is, of course, first and foremost a conscientious report of scientists. A report on what heights, or rather, depths, were achieved in the knowledge of nature...(gas.).
4. The clarifying meaning of a sentence member can be emphasized as a situational coincidence , although the direct meanings of adverbial words do not indicate such a relationship.
For example: And suddenly, at the very turn to Sukhodol, we saw in the tall wet rusty a tall and terrifying figure in a robe and shlyk, the figure of either an old man or an old woman(Boon.) - under the influence of the meaning of the circumstance suddenly next circumstance - at the very turn to Sukhodol- temporary meaning comes to the fore (at the moment when they arrived); This time, next to a sick mother, Sultanmurat especially acutely felt the desolation of life without a father(Aitm.) - the temporary meaning of the combination this time removes the spatial connotation in the meaning of the circumstance next to a sick mother. Similar members sentences while maintaining their own meaning do not require selection;
Compare: This time, next to his sick mother, Sultanmurat felt especially acutely...
Explanatory members of the sentence
1. Explanatory parts of a sentence are separated by commas.
They can be either the main members of the sentence or the secondary ones. Explanatory terms are second names in relation to the first, explained ones, which express a particular concept not sufficiently defined or for some reason not clear enough. These members of the sentence, as a rule, may have an indication of their explanatory nature, i.e. have special conjunctions that is, namely, or (meaning "that is")
For example: Someone came out of the house and stopped on the porch; this is Alexander Timofeich, or simply Sasha, a guest who came from Moscow(Ch.) ; For Konstantin Levin, the village was a place of life, that is joys, sufferings, labor (L.T.) ; In this regard, even one very important event happened for both of them, namely Kitty’s meeting with Vronsky (L.T.) ; From Nevsky Prospect it leads to the former Mikhailovsky Palace, that is, to the Russian Museum, short and wide street(Sol. ); To the left of the road there is a mirror in the reeds, and everything here is in the steppe. Not so big as to appear bulging that is, not a sea, not a lake, but precisely a pond (Sol.) ; She will go to the garden and tidy up the raspberries, that is, he will break off old dry ones and tie young shoots to pegs (Sol .); In the infinity of new and new discoveries, in the roar of incredible incidents, for the first time I felt not like Chekhov’s Chechevitsyn, not a high school student dreaming of escaping to the pampas, but a true reader, that is, a person who at the long-awaited hour is left alone with a book(Kav.).
2. If there are words warning about explanation, a dash is placed.
For example: He always wanted one thing with all the strength of his soul - be quite good ( L.T. ); One thing interested him in lately– painting; The goal set for the detachment was one - reach the forest before dawn. In such sentences, a dash replaces the missing explanatory conjunction: Baikal is glorious and holy to others - with its wonderful, life-giving power (Spread). The omission of a conjunction can also be indicated by a dash in sentences without special warning words for explanation: The task assigned to the detachment was difficult - reach the forest before dawn; The weather is just right - a blizzard(Nile.).
However, in print, with such explanations, a colon is also used, which can be perceived as a variant design of the construction with a more emphasized explanation.
For example: ...I set myself a state task: secure trade routes to Bukhara, Khiva (Grand .); One mood: work better(gas.).
3. Among the explanatory members of a sentence, agreed upon definitions with explanatory meaning stand apart.
They are not distinguished by signs, but are only separated from the explained definition by a comma. Explanation arises with definitions that are special in meaning - they carry a general, unspecified, indefinite meaning. The second, explanatory definition removes uncertainty.
For example: There were snowdrops special, irresistible passion of Glory(Baruzd.); At all others, urban sounds were heard outside and inside the block(Cat.).
An explanation can also arise in another, opposite situation, when the first definition is absolutely concrete, it is expressed by an ordinal number, and the second definition explains it in other words.
For example: Terrible path! On thirtieth, last a mile away doesn't bode well(A. Inter.) – i.e. " the thirtieth, which turned out to be the last" (combination the thirtieth last mile absurd, since it presupposes another twenty-nine of the latter).
Connecting members of the proposal
1. The connecting parts of the sentence are separated by commas.
They have the nature of additional information, reported incidentally, in addition to the content of the main statement. The connecting members included in sentences contain words and combinations even, in particular, especially, mainly, including, in particular, for example, and moreover, and therefore, yes and, and only, and in general, and too, etc.
For example: All, including a funny bouncing guy, reached for the window (H.); At night especially in a thunderstorm when the garden was raging in the rain, the faces of images in the hall were constantly illuminated, the trembling pink-golden sky was revealed and swung open over the garden (Bun.); I believe that it is precisely this - the mystery or the premonition of it - that is missing not only from your story, but also from all the works of your peers, especially modern lyrics ( Ast .); A large, also square, window looked out onto the garden ( Hall .); I studied well at school especially in French ( gas .); In several places old car cylinders were lying in the mud, including one huge toothed tire from a wheeled tractor ( Sol .); It was very warm, even hot(Chuck.).
It is also possible to highlight using a dash.
For example: Suddenly, interrupting her memories of the guys, a distant, distant day appeared in front of her - and also with a river(Spread).
2. Connecting members of a sentence that do not have special connecting words(non-union accession), separated by a dash, more sharply delimiting it from the main statement.
For example: The old woman accepted the death of the old man as fate - no more and no less (Spread) ; Stairs too disappear - until next time (Spread) ; The old woman looks at him and smiles patiently. Then he says - all with the same patient smile (Spread); Knyazev crossed the street with everyone else and walked slowly along the other side of the street - just like that, with nothing to do (Shuksh.) ; He didn’t even wash his face, but went straight into the yard to chop wood (Shuksh.); Why did he drag himself along? dawn - from insomnia, or something (Spread); All night and all day and again all night Nikita ran around the city - to the doctors, to the pharmacist, to the cloudberry shop (Gaych.).
Such sentence members are easily parceled (divided into separate, incomplete sentences) and when strengthening them excretory role separated by a dot.
For example: Brush and trowel - that's all scientific and technological progress in this industry. And not only in this(gas.); And he [ Lermontov ] wrote. At night, with a lit candle, while walking through the park, hiding in its corners( Chiv .); It's more of a parable. I would even call it a dramatic novella. About love. About hatred ( gas .); Maintaining consistency, we would then have to talk about the years, circumstances, people and destinies covered by the frame of the revolution. About a world of previously unknown goals and aspirations, tasks and exploits, new restraint, new rigor and new challenges(P ast .).
A special place among the isolated members of the proposal is occupied by the so-called explanatory Andclarifying members of the proposal.
Their function is to give additional characteristics of those members of the sentence to which they relate: to limit (narrow) or, conversely, to expand the scope of the concept expressed by the main member of the sentence (explained or clarified), to specify the member of the sentence, denoting it in other words, for example: Anna spent the whole day at home, that is, with the Oblonskys , and did not accept anyone (L. Tolstoy); There, behind the quiet river, there is a high mountain (A. Pushkin). It is customary to distinguish between clarification and explanation. The word that is specified or explained is called specified (explained); one that contains clarification (explanation) - clarifying(explanatory).
Clarification- this is a limitation of the scope of the concept, i.e. transition from a broader concept to a narrower one: In the east, behind the wavy line of hills, the dark golden light of the moon, ready to rise, grew (A. Kuprin).
Explanation- this is the designation in in this context of the same concept in a different word or words: Before, that is, before arriving in the village, they lived in great harmony (I. Turgenev).
Clarifying(explanatory) all members of the sentence can be, including the main ones: The most early ripening mushrooms, For example birch trees And russula, reach full development at three days (S. Aksakov). (Birch trees and russula clarify the word mushrooms also serves as the subject.) Tower would la high - no less than thirty meters(K. Paustovsky). (Here the qualifying member is the predicate.) A long shadow, several miles long, lay from the mountains on the steppe (L. Tolstoy) ( clarifying definition). There was one thing he didn’t know how to do: train dogs (I. Turgenev) ( clarifying addition).
Clarifying(explanatory) members can contact clarified (explainable) words with the help of conjunctions that is, or (- that is), namely, and also with the help of words especially, in particular, for example, including, etc.: That was a pleasant, noble, short challenge, or to a r t e l... (A. Pushkin); Rhyme, i.e. the consonance of two words is at the end of the verse; Everyone, and especially the officials, remained stunned for some time (N. Gogol); At that time, exactly a year ago, I was still collaborating on magazines (F. Dostoevsky).
Clarifying Character is given to the statement by the words more accurately, more precisely, rather, etc., but the members of the sentence that follow them are not isolated: His kindness, or rather, his generosity touched me.
Not all clarifying words are equally active in speech. The most active are the circumstances of place and time. They can be lined up one after another, strung on top of each other, forming chains of clarifying members. For example: Before, long ago, in the years of my youth, in the years of irrevocably flashed childhood, it was fun for me to drive up to an unfamiliar place for the first time (N. Gogol); In the west, behind the village, behind the blackening wooded fields, the long Moscow summer dawn was still shining deathly (I. Bunin).
A sentence can be complicated by special syntactic relations - explanatory ones. They are established between members of a series, one of which acts as the one being explained, and the other as the one explaining. The explanation may be in the nature of either re-designation or clarification; A typical case of an explanatory construction is a series with a generalizing word.
For example: a) Anna spent the whole day at home, that is, with the Oblonskys, and did not receive anyone (L.T.); The youngest of Aunt Marya’s sons, namely Dmitry, left for the side later than everyone else (Sol.); b) A crowd of buildings: human buildings, barns, cellars, apparently dilapidated, filled the courtyard (G.); Once upon a time, in '41, Serpilin unexpectedly spoke to him about his childhood (Sim.); Some – conscientious ones – put their forks aside and looked at Yegor with bewilderment (Shuksh.).
The place of explanation in the syntactic system of the Russian language remains insufficiently defined with theoretical point vision. On the one hand, explanation is closely related to the homogeneity of the members of the sentence, and on the other hand, to their isolation. Therefore, in descriptive grammars and in textbooks on the syntax of the Russian language, constructions containing explanatory relations are described in different sections: some - in the section on generalizing words with homogeneous members, others - in the section on isolating circumstances; still others are included in the application descriptions.
The syntactic nature of explanatory relations is so unique that it does not fit neatly into either of the two basic concepts - composition or subordination. But also highlighting the explanation in special type syntactic connection, standing outside of composition and subordination, does not have a sufficient theoretical basis.
What is unique about explanatory relationships? From the functional-semantic side, explanatory relations are opposed to all others semantic types intra-row relations, such as connection, opposition, comparison, division, etc. The logical basis of explanatory relations is the thought of identity. Two members of a sentence have a common denotative reference, and it is established only by the speaker himself. In our examples: houses are what the Oblonskys have (from the speaker’s point of view!); Dmitry and youngest son Aunt Marya is one and the same person. Two different nominations refer to the same object of reality, but each represents this object in its own aspect. This is the function of double designation. Compare, for example, the meaning of different designations for the same fact in the following sentence: In Perm, Sonnenberg zealously set to work, that is, buying unnecessary things, all kinds of dishes, pots, cups, crystal, supplies... (Hertz.). “The ability to name the same object differently stems from the ability to designate it differently, which is a consequence of the multiplicity of judgments that can be made about one object (person or thing).”
The double designation is not redundant. It is always functionally justified. As a rule, an explanation significantly enriches the proposal in terms of content; often carries new information, and sometimes is the main one semantic part messages. For example: There was one thing he didn’t know how to do: train dogs (T.).
In explanatory relations, the meaning of identity is purely syntactic: it follows from the construction, and not from the lexical meaning of the words. Regardless of what we know about the essence of objects (signs or actions) named by certain words, we recognize these words as related to one object of reality due to a certain way of their syntactic connection.
Explanatory relations, being purely syntactic, cannot be confused with lexical synonymy. Naturally, members of a sentence that are in such relationships can also be represented by synonymous words (or synonymous descriptive expressions), for example, with the conjunction or: Red deer, or sika deer, lives in the forests of Transbaikalia and the Far East, but in principle, the explanation and explanation is these are not synonyms; on the contrary, they are intended to characterize the same object of reality in different ways.
Let's compare the words simple and elegant, taken separately (in their lexical meaning) and in design: Kitty crouched low and gracefully in her very simple, that is, very elegant summer dress, ordered from Paris (L.T.).
Explanation of how syntactic relation must be distinguished from an explanation in the broad, non-special meaning of the word. Explanation in syntactic meaning presupposes a certain design. The fact is that other figures of speech may also have an explanatory, specific meaning - insertions, participial phrases, many definitions.
An explanation as a construction is a special type of series consisting of two parallel terms. Members connected by explanatory relations are, in parallel, independently of each other, assigned to a common third member. For example: I found my friend in the same position, that is, having hoisted long legs on the iron headboard of the bed, with his hands thrown back behind his head (Sol.). External relations do not distinguish the explanation from other types of rows, but the internal ones are special character, which makes it possible to contrast the explanatory construction with all types of constructions with homogeneous members: it is distinguished by a specific conjunction and intonation design, which shows that associated members relate to each other as determined and determining.
From the functional side, the explanatory construction differs from other types of series primarily in the nature of the intra-series relations: the first member (explained) occupies the initial position, and the second (explanation) is introduced into the sentence in addition to the first; thus, occupying the position of one and the same member of the sentence, the first and second members differ in function. The difference itself is formalized grammatically, which allows us to talk about a special explanatory construction.
An explanatory construction can be in the position of any member of a sentence - main and secondary, since relations of identity can be established between the names of objects, their characteristics, actions and circumstances; in the next sentence the definitions are connected by explanatory relationships: So, there is talent, the first gardener has been found, the time has come to transplant the tree to another, namely, to the capital’s soil (Sol.).
Explained and explanation can be represented by separate word forms (for example: think about the main thing - about service), but complex syntactic composition one or both members of the structure.
Typical example: Restraint was also noticed in the face, that is, the ability to control oneself, not to allow the face to be a mirror of the soul (Gonch.) - grammatical basis the construction is made up of a connection of word forms: restraint, that is, skill; but the semantics of the explanation is created by the entire part introduced by the conjunction. The explained and the explanation may include a predicative unit, for example a subordinate clause: He also had something tied around his neck that could not be made out: a stocking, a garter or a belly, but not a tie (G.).
The means of forming an explanatory structure depend on the nature of the explanatory relationships. As part of an utterance, repeated designation pursues different goals: specification, list of special cases, varieties, giving an example; clarification, interpretation, more precise designation, indication of the possibility of a double name; determining the significance of something, revealing the essence of a phenomenon, subjective assessment fact. This is expressed, first of all, in the choice of function words - indicators of explanatory connections and in the type of intonation, as well as in the lexical composition of what is being explained.
Functional words of explanatory construction are divided into two types: 1) special explanatory conjunctions: that is (arch. variants: that is, that is), namely (namely), like that, or (in an explanatory meaning); adjacent to them is the conjunction be it, which is used not only in explanatory construction; 2) other function words that combine their own function with a union: a) more accurately, more precisely, in other words, simply put, it is better to say, rather, simply; b) including, such as, for example; c) for example, let's say, let's say, in particular, in particular (especially), first of all, first of all, at least, mainly; d) even, at least; d) already, in fact, exactly (in the meaning of ‘already’).
Functional words of the second group appear both independently and in combination with conjunctions, including coordinating ones (for example: and including; or, more precisely).
The intonation design of an explanatory structure also comes in two main types: 1) one intonation is perceived by the speaker as “warning” (strong emphasis on what is being explained, somewhat weaker emphasis on the explanation and a significant pause between them), according to the model: Now you need to think about the main thing - about the service ( Sim.); Everywhere: in the bushes, in the grass, birds began to sing and chirp (A.K.T.); another intonation is isolating, sometimes close to the intonation of introduction (syntagmatic emphasis of an explanatory member), according to the model: Everyone, and especially the officials, remained stunned for some time (G.); That same day, in the evening, I arrived in Peski (Bel.). The lexical composition of the explanation is generally free, but with some types of explanatory relations, the explained is characterized by special features corresponding to its function - signs of pronominalization. The words are one, another, main, different, everything, there; late, long ago, far, rarely; event, thing, matter, etc. Like function words, they participate in the expression of explanatory relations. Combined with characteristic intonation, they compensate for the lack of an explanatory conjunction.
Let's consider the types of explanatory relations and types of explanatory constructions.
Explanatory relations are a broad syntactic concept that unites different types based on semantic and constructive commonality. Central location belongs to the explanation itself as the most clearly grammatically formulated; clarification differs significantly from it; special place takes to turn on.
The distinction between types of explanatory relations has a logical basis. In some cases, the denotative content of the explained and the explanation completely coincides, for example: We, keeping our grandfather’s custom, are carrying home the prey from the mountains - a deer shot down by an arrow (Bruce); Soon all of us, i.e. the prince, Ivan Ivanovich and I, parted one fine day (Bun.); Here, at the crossroads of the rivers, the wind always frolicked with special force (Leon.). The explained and the explanation have one referent. In other cases, the designated objects do not completely coincide, one nomination covers reality more widely, the other narrower, for example: Let's meet in the library, in the periodicals department, or the objects of the nominations are partially combined, for example: In the west, behind the station, behind the black wooded fields, still The long Moscow summer dawn shone deathly (Bun.). This difference can be visually represented as follows:
complete identity of objects
incomplete identity of objects or
However, indicating a logical difference is not enough, since it does not fully correspond to the syntactic one. WITH syntactic side it is important to distinguish between two types of structures that reflect different meaning explanatory relations: 1) relations in which the identity of objects is specifically asserted and 2) relations in which this assertion is not. The first ones are formalized with special function words or intonation equivalent to them in function. The latter do not have any special means design, but are expressed only by separating the second member. The first are conventionally called clarification, the second are clarification. Wed: A new enterprise was put into operation - a porcelain factory. “Behind the house, near the ravine, there were thickets of burdocks. From a logical point of view, in both the first and second cases one can see the same reference of two different designations (one referent). However, from a syntactic point of view, it is significantly different. It is important that when explaining, the second member, naming what has already been named, is, as it were, substituted in place of the first, syntactically duplicating it: with any of the two members, the sentence remains a nomination of the same event. Wed: A new enterprise has been put into operation. – A porcelain factory was put into operation. When clarifying, there is no duplication function: clarifying is always different, new, additional; members of a series are not interchangeable. Wed: Behind the house there were thickets of burdocks. – There were thickets of burdocks near the ravine. Therefore, the clarification does not allow the substitution of an explanatory conjunction - that is, namely, etc.
One of the most difficult, in our opinion, rules in the Russian language - punctuation marks for clarifying, connecting and explanatory parts of a sentence - somewhat undeservedly costs textbooks. In fact, it is more useful to explain the rule for spelling "not" with parts of speech or complex sentence with several subordinate clauses. The rule about the use of punctuation marks when specifying members of a sentence has been pushed out, as it were, to the periphery of the Russian language. One can only guess why every year, in response to a question addressed to an applicant: “Why is there a comma here?”, examiners hear: “This is a clarification.” Moreover, applicants “tailor” this answer to individual definitions, circumstances, and, most often, applications. As for independent written works schoolchildren, then there special success uses the selection of a “clarifying” member of any level - from homogeneous subject and additions to circumstances and “words similar to introductory ones.” When analyzing such works, you constantly hear explanations: “This is a clarifying term.” The root of the errors lies in an unsteady understanding of the essence of clarification, and even in the construction of our manuals, replete with examples from fiction, but not teaching the real Russian language.
So, first of all, it is necessary to determine what clarification is, how clarification differs from addition and explanation, which members of the sentence may serve as clarifying, connecting and explanatory.
“Clarification is a transition from a broader concept to a narrower one,” defines the “Handbook of Punctuation” edited by D. E. Rosenthal (Rozental D. E. Handbook of Punctuation. - M. AST, 1997, p. 79). (In another tutorial famous author(Rosenthal D.E. Russian language. - Ulyanovsk, Moscow, 1997, p. 239) clarifying members are words that “clarify the meaning of words”). But, in addition to this definition, in the text of the above manual we find homogeneous members that “are in the nature of clarification”, and “clarifying remarks” in the group homogeneous members, and an additional "qualifying value" separate definitions; applications that clarify or qualify common nouns; revolutions with the meaning of clarification or accession. The very concept of “clarification”, “clarifying member” is blurred. A student studying a textbook either throws out a bunch of “unnecessary notes” from his memory, or extends the concept of “clarification” to any use of a double comma (after all, in each case of isolated terms, he reads about additional clarifying shades of meaning). It seems, why study several pages about the isolation of definitions, if there is magic word"clarification"?
Another problem is the examples given by the authors of the manuals. It is often almost impossible to see the difference in a “clarifying” and a simply isolated member. Compare: In the deep blue sky, the silver moon was melting. And about five minutes later it started to rain heavily. These are examples from different sections of the separation rule single definition. Isolation in the first case is explained as follows: “carries a significant semantic load and can be equated to the subordinate part of a complex sentence” (Rozental D.E. Punctuation Handbook. - M. AST, 1997, p. 49), and in the second case – as having a clarifying meaning. Another example: Then Dasha was surprised by the “homegrown” nature of all this much-talked-about boldness. Dasha was waiting for everything, but not this obediently bowed head. In the second example there is no clarifying meaning; in the first, from the author’s point of view, there was one. How can you tell the difference? I don’t know about you, but, in my opinion, most high school students should formulate the following rule: “Any member of a sentence that I, as a writer, want to highlight can be isolated, and this can be explained either as a special semantic load, or as its clarification". Another version of the rule, perhaps more dangerous for a student: “In every rule for non-isolation there is a special exception - the clarifying meaning requires isolation, so I will isolate just in case - in case I miss this clarifying meaning.”
The second formulation we came up with begins to work when completing tasks from the manuals. For example, several sentences are given in which it is necessary to place signs or indicate those where there are no signs. Compare: “Two years later, at the beginning of September, I had to visit these places again. One spring I heard in the aroma of the buds a fragrant conversation between birch and bird cherry The next day, early in the morning, I went to Kosov. By morning, it was still dark, they should be there" (Tkachenko N.G. Tests on Russian grammar. Part 2. - M. Iris, 1998, exercises 89-91. ). Students must decide where to put signs and where not to. True, in the above-mentioned Rosenthal reference book it is stated that it is the will of the author to decide whether a member is drowning or not. But put yourself in the shoes of those testing their knowledge who did not guess the will of the author in the phrases he proposed from the works of the classics. Will they subsequently guess the will of the examiner? So schoolchildren begin to isolate anything and explain it in a clarifying way minor member or turnover.
As a result, we have the following extremely common mistakes in essays and presentations:
*These observations made by Belinsky are still relevant today.
*In his office in St. Petersburg, Onegin keeps various objects that he does not need.
*In Manilov’s office there was a dusty book, hidden on page 14.
*Once, while hunting, he managed to shoot a seasoned wolf.
In the practice of teaching the Russian language at preparatory courses and preparatory department The author brought Moscow State University to listeners similar examples as true and offered to explain the meaning of isolation. Applicants easily found explanations, the absurdity of which did not require comment: because they were made by Belinsky; precisely the one in St. Petersburg; exactly those that he does not need; dusty because it is blocked, that is, it is not readable; what happened during the hunt (it’s hard to imagine that you can kill a wolf during a ball!). But what leads children to search for such explanations is the need to explain the will of the authors, and not to place commas themselves.
It seems that the time has come to more accurately define the rule for separating qualifying members, without resorting to reforming spelling rules.
1. A member of a sentence will be considered clarifying if, located after its syntactic analogue, it will narrow the conveyed concept or limit it in some respect. In other words, the clarifying circumstance of time should come after the circumstance of time, the definition - after the definition, but the meaning of the second should be narrower and more specific than the first. The role of clarifying members is the circumstances of place, time, mode of action, definition and application.
2. Circumstances of time can be expressed by pronominal words: then, then, now. In this case, the following circumstance of time is isolated, since it specifies the time of action - Then, in childhood, even ice cream seemed sweeter. The next day, March 15, the final test was scheduled.
The second circumstance of time can limit the time of the first, giving it more precise and narrow boundaries. Compare: Reception of visitors on Tuesdays and Fridays from 11 to 18.- V in this case both temporal circumstances indicate a broad time frame for the action. On Friday, from 11 to 11.30, there will be a distribution of coupons for free lunches. – time is limited very narrowly, which is noted both by the intonation of the sentence and by punctuation. Let us immediately note that in the first sentence we have the opportunity to indicate a narrowing of the boundaries of time - reception takes place only on Fridays, from 11 to 18. Sentences in which the second circumstance is isolated require a more careful attention to the exact time, and not just to the general time offers. Every morning from 7 to 10 I go to the gym. – in this phrase there is no clarification regarding the exact time, it is usually, this is the time most people associate with the concept of “morning”. Early in the morning, at the beginning of six, Masha is running around her house. Concept " early morning" is quite vague - for some it is six hours, for others it is eight, so it needs to be clarified. At the very rush hour, at three o'clock in the afternoon, I was tightly stuck on Tverskaya.– unfortunately, the reality of our life is such that when we say “rush hour,” we specify its time. IN big cities it sometimes lasts for a day.
The circumstance of time can more accurately describe the time of the action, giving it a more detailed and even figurative description: I first came to Paris in the spring, on a sunny and warm day. In winter, on a cold and dank evening, I had to walk for about an hour to get home.
The isolation of time circumstances in other cases depends on the will of the author and on the meaning that we want to give to the entire sentence: In the fall, in a thunderstorm, walking on this bridge is dangerous. The phrase can be interpreted approximately like this: during thunderstorms, walking on the bridge is dangerous, and the strongest and longest thunderstorms occur in the fall. When writing down someone else's text, you can hear the intonation emphasis of the clarifying term. The author does not recommend that schoolchildren create sentences where the clarifying meaning requires such a long interpretation, and, whenever possible, paraphrase it (“during autumn thunderstorms...”).
3. The circumstances of a place can also be expressed very vaguely: there, from there, everywhere. The circumstances of place following them will be clarifying - There, in Moscow, Tatyana found her destiny. From above, from observation deck, the city seems painted.
Often the qualifying circumstance of a place will be the exact name of the locality in relation to the wider area - I lived then in Spain, in Barcelona. Every summer they vacation in Europe, in Austria. He received an apartment in the south of Moscow, in Troparevo.
Most circumstances of place are isolated or not depending on subjective, extralinguistic factors: In the yard, between the sandbox and the swing, there is a flower bed.– By the presence of a clarifying member, we know exactly the picture of the yard. There was a checkpoint on the road ahead. – the speaker is also on the road.
4. The circumstances of the course of action are specified, as they bear additional information about the manner of performing the action, and this information is of a more specific nature - She dressed sadly, like an old woman. Only then, in silence, could she work.
5. Definitions are separated if they have a more specific meaning than the definition being specified (agreed), which expresses the characteristic in its general form. Clarifying definitions most often include color, size, age - She was wearing a light, pale blue skirt. A young girl, about eighteen years old, entered the room.
Almost all manuals provide examples of clarifying definitions for the pronouns that, that, and such. Meanwhile, in the text of the rules for isolating definitions, it is noted that the attributive phrase after these words is closely adjacent to them in meaning and should not be isolated (see, for example, Rosenthal D.E. Handbook of Punctuation. P. 47). And although the authors of manuals always point out the possibility of isolation with a clarifying nature of the definition, it seems to us that when teaching practical literacy one could refuse to analyze such examples. Confused in discovering a clarifying or non-specifying meaning, the student makes more errors, than could have appeared if he had learned only one rule. Examples for isolating definitions when demonstrative pronouns found mainly in fiction, depend entirely on the will of the author, and the application similar cases when writing essays and presentations by schoolchildren themselves, it is unlikely. In dictations, according to already established practice, the isolation of a clarifying definition with the named pronouns can be considered as an optional sign; non-isolation, in our opinion, is preferable.
6. Formal means of highlighting the clarifying member of a sentence are the words more accurately, more precisely, rather, differently (when you can add “speaking” to them), moreover. These words stand alone; the clarifying term following them is not separated by commas. Thus, these words turn out to be introductory, which, in fact, is reflected in the manuals. In our opinion, duplicating them in the rule into clarifying terms leads to errors when the student begins to isolate the above words together with the sentence members that follow them:
His honesty, or rather, his truthfulness, did not give him the opportunity to be cunning. I immediately understood, or rather, felt my involvement in what was happening.
The word is rather not isolated in the meanings of “better to say”, “better”, “more willingly” - He was not pleased, but rather surprised by her comment. She would rather agree to quit, but not comply with the boss’s absurd demand.
Let us give as an example a text on which you can consider different cases isolation of clarifying members:
Typically, institutions are open on holidays from 10.00 to 15.00. No one, or rather, most people, would prefer not to work at all on such days, because they need to clean up the house, prepare a festive dinner, and, moreover, get themselves in order. At the main office of the Whole World company on December 31, a young unmarried secretary was on duty, (the comma is optional, given the end of the sentence, you can use a dash or do without punctuation) Lidochka Sergeeva. She had to send confirmations for the arrival of groups of our tourists in warm countries, Spain and Greece, to celebrate the holiday under the hot rays of the sun. There, at the resort, celebrating the New Year was supposed to be a special, unforgettable (can be either a homogeneous member of the sentence or a clarifying) holiday for someone. Lidochka visited Spain in the spring, in May, and now, in the midst of a cold winter, she recalled this trip with pleasure. Today the girl sent faxes without the usual envy, with pity. For a week now, since December 23, news programs have been reporting about unprecedented cold snaps in Europe, especially in Athens and Barcelona. From here, from frozen Moscow, their minus one seems funny, but they, poor fellows, (especially the application with the personal pronoun) are probably sad.
The door slammed and Lida’s friend, Katya Petrova, a girl of about twenty-five, entered the room. On the occasion of the holiday, she was in an elegant light blue dress. She usually dressed business-like, faded and gray. From the threshold, Katya began noisily, loudly and shrilly, telling something funny about her work colleagues. Lida frowned: she could only work in silence, calmly and without distraction, and did not like to participate in these stupid and meaningless (in this case, it is possible to isolate definitions after “these” as an author’s sign, the rules allow this) conversations. Therefore, Lidochka interrupted her friend and turned the conversation to the problems of Europe, or rather its southern countries.
Half an hour later, at about noon, Lida, with the help of Katyusha, finished sending faxes and joined the noisy, young and cheerful crowd of her colleagues. The work for today has come to an end and the employees of the travel company have begun to jointly celebrate a joyful, fun and beloved holiday.
The above text shows some typical cases of using clarifying members of a sentence in speech. But no less important will be the work of analyzing the writers’ own mistakes. The tendency of some to excessively highlight the circumstances of time, others - the mode of action, the failure to distinguish between a group of homogeneous members and the clarifying and clarifying member should be the subject of attention of teachers, school teachers and teachers of different preparatory courses. Work on such errors should be built along the path of creating individual tasks, and not texts from fiction, in which the student is faced with the need not only to apply the rule of punctuation, but also to “guess” the individual will of the author.
Now let's move on to considering the rules for highlighting the explanatory parts of the sentence.Explanation is the designation of the same concept in different words. Almost any member of a sentence and even an entire sentence can be explanatory. To introduce an explanatory member, coordinating explanatory conjunctions are used, namely, namely, that is, or (= that is). If these conjunctions are not used in a sentence, they can be inserted. An explanatory clause is set off by a comma, but can be set off by a dash, especially if it is at the end of a sentence.
Basic Rule: the explanatory member of the sentence is highlighted by commas on both sides along with the explanatory conjunction. The explanatory member itself is not separated from the union.– Next week, that is, from the seventh to the thirteenth of March, I will be busy preparing for the conference. His new apartment, namely two-level 150-meter apartments, were the envy of all acquaintances. Between the explanatory conjunction and the explanatory member itself there may be introductory words and introductory structures“His cousin, or, to be more precise, second cousin, is the president of a large real estate company.
The appendix often has explanatory meaning. Firstly, it could be given name at common noun, if before the name without changing the meaning you can insert namely, that is, and his name is - His youngest daughter, Larisa, differed from her peers in her quiet and calm character. In this case, punctuation often depends on the meaning being conveyed. For example, in the above example, it is acceptable to assume that the listener/reader is receiving information about someone’s daughter for the first time or does not clearly remember her name. Or - She went to visit her sister Larisa.- we can assume that she has several sisters and it is important for the speaker to indicate the choice of one. If there is only one sister, we will clarify her name and add a comma. Secondly, applications become clarifying in cases where participants in speech or objects of speech are more accurately named, and the word being defined is more general character – Both father and son were fond of fishing.
A sentence may have an explanatory member introduced without an explanatory conjunction (it can be inserted without changing the meaning). The punctuation in this case remains the same. – For this room, other wallpapers, light and with small stripes, would be more suitable than these, red and with flowers..
If an explanatory member is introduced without using a conjunction, but is at the end of a sentence, a dash can be used - He wanted one thing - to eat. He had only one dream - to see his hometown. He spent more time completing the order than the customers allocated to him - three months.
If the whole sentence turns out to be explanatory, and the conjunction “namely” is in front of it, then a colon can be used after the conjunction - When executing homework One circumstance should be taken into account, namely: the work should be completed strictly in accordance with the examination requirements.
Possible difficulties with punctuation with explanatory terms are associated with the following:
When using the conjunction “or,” one should distinguish between cases of its use as an explanatory conjunction (meaning “that is”) and as a disjunctive conjunction (“or”). – The addition of a prefix or prefix does not affect the change in the partial affiliation of the word. – here “or” is used in the meaning “that is”, introduces an explanatory member and is isolated along with it. Attaching a suffix or a suffix together with a prefix often changes a word's part of speech. – here “or” is used in a disjunctive sense. Compare also: The pocket edition of the book, or pocket book, is in high demand due to its relatively low price. Publishers have not yet decided whether to publish a pocket or regular book format.
Explanatory definitions are separated from the word being defined, but a comma is not placed after them (that is, they are not isolated) – In the poem " Dead souls"The negative, scary and ugly sides of Russian reality are shown. Memories of the old, broken car no longer bothered him.
Exercise . Place punctuation using the rules outlined above.
The fourth and last part of the novel “War and Peace” turns out to be unread by almost all schoolchildren.
Nectarines or a hybrid of peach and apricot are an artificially bred fruit.
There were always nectarines or peaches on the table, because these were Katya’s favorite fruits.
His house was considered elite, namely, on the ground floor there was a swimming pool and a gym, in the courtyard there was a guarded parking lot only for residents and guests, and each apartment had a winter garden.
Since childhood, namely from the age of 11, he had a single dream of becoming a great hockey player, and then an Olympic champion.
His dacha plot of ten acres, a tiny house and a bathhouse he built himself were the annual gathering place for all his friends.
Figure skiing or freestyle skiing is one of the most difficult, but at the same time very beautiful sports.
This year, enrollment has been announced for groups wishing to study Korean or Thai, as well as Persian or Farsi.
Either he decided that she would not come and decided not to meet with him again, or he was simply offended, but Ivan left the meeting place without waiting for the girl.
The connecting members of the proposal are those members that contain additional clarifications or comments. They are introduced in the middle or at the end of a sentence and separated by commas, although a dash may be used. Usually the connecting member is introduced by the words even, especially, especially, for example, in particular, moreover, and (= and moreover), and, and in general, and only, including...
Basic rule:the connecting member and the connecting clause are separated by commas together with the one introducing this connecting turn in a word. – Everyone, especially first-year students, went to his lectures to look at the first handsome man of the faculty. He always read, even ruined his eyesight, but he was absolutely unable to tell what he read about. His classmates laughed at him, and rightly so. His apartment was small, and, moreover, very shabby and in a non-prestigious area, so he was embarrassed to invite his friends there.
In order to isolate the connecting member (select it from both sides), it is often necessary to consider the entire structure of the sentence. We separate the connecting member if its removal does not violate general structure sentences, and we do not isolate them if, when removing a connecting member, the structure of the entire sentence is violated - In this novel, and in the previous one, the writer managed to create a surprisingly accurate image of our contemporary.– in this example, the removal of the connecting member will not disrupt the structure of the sentence. In this, and in two previous novels the main character became police major Petrova. – when the connecting member is removed, the structure is disrupted – “in this... novels.”
A whole sentence can act as a connecting member: I didn't like going to school, and none of my friends were eager to learn..
By the way, the conjunction “yes and” should be treated very carefully. It can act not only in a connecting meaning, but also as a connecting one (= “and”) – He went into the forest and got lost.– in this case, a comma is not placed before the conjunction. “Yes and” can be part of the construction “took and did”, which is a single predicate, therefore there is no comma inside the construction - After arguing with his friends, Vasya ate the toadstool. Stable combination, inside of which there is no comma, it turns out to be the construction “no, no, yes and” - Pavel no, no, yes, he remembered his quiet life Houses.
Exercise. Place the missing characters using the following rule:
All my classmates, especially Katya, are rooting for me.
I didn’t want to see her and there was no need for us to meet again.
You have extensive experience working with children, especially with little ones, which is why we recommended you.
In mine and in two neighboring apartments, after a major renovation of our house, the plaster fell from the ceiling.
The most experienced athletes, including veterans, volunteered to help organize a children's sports camp.
I fell and it hurt so much that I cried.
During the week of my absence, the floor of the window sills and everything in general free surfaces The room was covered in dust.
In my yard and in the neighboring one, hooligans broke all the benches.
Our athletes, mainly skiers, will be our hope at the upcoming Olympics.
Out of boredom, I took it and entered the competition but unexpectedly won.
Task 2.
In the proposed text there are isolated members of the sentence, introductory words, clarifying, connecting and explanatory members. Place the missing signs and explain them.
In a large clearing cleared of trees, the hare and the fox built two houses at the beginning of a long and cold winter, especially for forest animals. Everyone, of course, was surprised by such a strange neighborhood, but the hare and the fox, meeting each other every day, as a result, even became friends, or rather, learned not to quarrel. Of course, the fox would not mind having dinner with a bunny that settled nearby, but for the time being she tried to restrain her predatory instinct. In the mornings from seven to nine, the neighbors were busy clearing the area around the houses, removing the snow that had piled up overnight, after which the hare snacked on crunchy carrots stored in the fall, and the fox, probably sniffing the pleasant smell of a young hare, ran to steal rabbits in a village located a mile or one and a half kilometers from the forest edge . There in the village, a fox sometimes managed, despite all the precautions taken by the housewives, to grab a chicken for lunch. The fox only calmed down after swallowing its prey and, having had its fill, went to its neighbor to chat. Satisfied with the food, she did not even notice that her tomorrow's lunch was possible in front of her. So the evening flew by unnoticed while talking and the fox and the hare, two sworn forest enemies, managed to finally become friends.
Now, having finished the exposition, we should move on to the characterization of the main characters of the story, that is, the hare and the fox. The hare was a serious and positive animal. He built his hut from mostly pine boards received from beavers for help provided during logging. A strong and durable hut was supposed to stand for more than one year, and besides, starting in the spring, the hare was going to begin expanding it. While hatching plans for marriage, the hare could not help but understand the need to have a warm house, especially during the cold season. Therefore, he worked tirelessly all winter, distracted only by lunch and nightly conversations with the fox. By the way, while talking to the fox, the hare was thinking about the time when small and fluffy bunnies would run around the clearing and hoped that a friendly and warm relationship with his neighbor would help him protect his unborn children.
Now let's talk about the neighbor, that is, the fox. The red-haired sly one, as her acquaintances called her, built her relationship with her neighbor on completely different grounds. The fact is that, having decided to save on building materials, the fox built her house from the most fragile material, that is, from ice. The animals laughed at the cunning but still stupid fox, and rightly so. Everyone immediately started talking in one voice about what was to come. global warming climate and started accepting bets mostly"for bunnies" when the house starts to melt. But not understanding the reasons for the giggling of the forest inhabitants, the fox repeated only one thing, namely: “The hare’s hut is dark, but my fox’s hut is light.” Although now, at the beginning of March, it became clear to even the stupid little fox that he needed to be friends with his neighbor. Therefore, the fox began to use every evening free from her personal affairs and meetings with her fox friends to establish good relationships. family relations with a hare.
Calmed by the imaginary friendliness of the neighbor, the hare lived calmly until the arrival of real spring. In one such short week, the snow melted and with it came the inevitable and even predictable end to the fox’s house built of light, marbled ice. She, being cruel, did not do anything special and, moreover, it was pointless to ask to go to the houses of her even her closest friends. Just going in one evening to chat with a neighbor, the fox did not talk about her mostly fictitious problems, did not ask about the romantic and sentimental plans for the hare’s life, but simply had a delicious dinner at the same time, privatizing a comfortable one built with the expectation of big family the house of the unfortunate victim of his predatory plans.
© All rights reserved
