the structural diagram of a simple sentence is an abstract syntactic pattern from which a separate minimal, relatively complete sentence can be constructed. Structural schemes are distinguished by a combination of the following features: the formal structure of the scheme (the forms of words included in it and, in schemes organized by two forms, the relationship of these forms to each other); schema semantics; paradigmatic properties of sentences constructed according to this scheme; regular implementation system; distribution rules. Sentences completed according to one or another structural scheme are combined into a certain type of simple sentence. The structural diagram of a simple sentence is organized by the forms (possibly even one form) of the significant words that are its components; in some schemes, one of the components is a negative particle - alone or in combination with a pronominal word.
Note. In specific sentences, the place of a schema component under certain conditions can be filled by some other form or combination of forms; There are certain types and rules for such substitutions. They are described in the chapters devoted to individual types of simple sentences.
In addition, each structural diagram has its own meaning - the semantics of the diagram. The semantics of the structural scheme of a sentence is formed by the mutual action of the following factors: 1) grammatical meanings of the components in their relation to each other (in single-component schemes - the grammatical meaning of the component of the scheme); 2) lexical-semantic characteristics of words specific to a given scheme, occupying the positions of its components in specific sentences.
You can download ready-made answers for the exam, cheat sheets and other educational materials in Word format at
Use the search form
21. Sentence structure diagram.
relevant scientific sources:
- Answers to the exam in modern Russian language
| Answers for the test/exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.09 MB
1. The meaning of the word and its compatibility. The concept of valence 2. Semantic valency and grammatical compatibility predicative unit 4. Sloform, phrase, sentence, complex
- Syntax of the Russian language. Answers for the exam
| Answers for the test/exam| 2017 | Russia | docx | 3.15 MB
Syntactic units in their relation to language, speech and text. Focus on multidimensionality when studying syntactic units. The essence of word form. General characteristics of the “Syntactic Dictionary” by G.
- Modern Russian language and its history
Unknown8798 | | Answers to the state exam| 2015 | Russia | docx | 0.21 MB
- Answers to the state exam on the history of the Russian language
| Answers to the state exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.11 MB
1. Articulatory characteristics of the sounds of the Russian language and features of its articulatory base. 2. Supersegmental units of the Russian language and their characteristics (syllable structure and syllable division, stress,
- Answers to the state exam in Modern Russian Language
| Answers for the test/exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.21 MB
I. Modern Russian language The phonetics section is written on the basis of the textbook by Pozharitskaya-Knyazev 1. Articulatory characteristics of the sounds of the Russian language and the features of its articulatory base.
- Lectures on the syntax of modern Russian language
| Lecture(s) | | Russia | docx | 1.31 MB
General characteristics of a complex sentence Complex sentence Complex sentence Unconjunct complex sentence Methods of conveying someone else’s speech Complex forms of speech organization List
- Answers to the test on the syntax of the Russian language
| Answers for the test/exam| 2017 | Russia | docx | 0.05 MB
Subject of syntax. Basic syntactic units. Types of syntactic connections in phrases and sentences The main members of a two-part sentence. Types of predicate Secondary members
The formal aspect of studying a sentence involves describing its structure. Traditionally, structure is described through the concept of sentence members. Modern syntactic science examines the structure of a sentence through the concept of a structural scheme; the structural scheme of a sentence can be defined as an abstract pattern consisting of a minimum of components necessary to create a sentence. (I’m reading a book; The rooks have arrived; The grass is turning green; There was a dusty country road behind the garden) - built according to the following scheme: N 1 V f- (N is the name of the first case, V is a variable verb). Each sentence has a predicative core (mean + predicative), which constitutes the predicative minimum of the sentence. But the minimum is understood in different ways. The first understanding of the minimum is addressed to the formal structure of the sentence as a predicative unit, and only the predicative minimum is taken into account. Then the sentences (The rooks arrived; They ended up here) are considered to be constructed according to the same structural scheme. But in the second sentence, filling out the diagram does not give a real sentence (They found themselves).· The second understanding of the minimum is addressed not only to the formal organization of the sentence as a predicative unit, but also to its semantic organization. Both grammatical sufficiency and semantic sufficiency are taken into account. N 1 V f Adv loc /N 2 (Name + Predicate + Adverb - local - places / Name of any case - found ourselves at home / at the house, etc.). Thus, there are two types of structural schemes: a minimal structural scheme, reflecting the grammatical level, a predicative one, including a subject and a predicate. And expanded, reflecting the nominative level - subject + predicate + components necessary to read the minimum meaning. The expansion is subject to different rules. All minor members of the sentence are shared with this point. into two classes based on the principle of participation or non-participation in the expansion of the minimum scheme. Constitutive - those that participate in the expansion that are necessary to understand the minimal meaning. Divided into two classes: subject names denoting participants in the event, the nearest object, addresses, weapons, etc.; non-objective determiners of the predicate - various case forms with local and temporal meaning. Unconstitutional - optional. Their presence or absence does not affect either the structure of the sentence or its semantics. In the yard, the neighbor's children are deftly building a snowman (children making a snowman are constitutive members of a sentence). N.Yu. Shvedova described a simple sentence through structural diagrams. Minimal schemes according to Beloshapkova (they are quite universal, a generalizing list of all existing types). All structural diagrams are presented in three blocks: First block (two-component, nominative): A) N 1 V f (The rooks have arrived, the garden is empty, all things are done by people). Second block (two-component, infinitive): A) Inf V f (You should not remain silent, Smoking is prohibited, It is recommended to walk more). Third block (one-component): A) V f 3s (It was getting dark)
First This approach is the representatives of the Prague linguistic school. Exactly Czech linguists For the first time, the term “supply model” was used. In the Russian linguistic tradition - “structural scheme of a sentence”. He developed the concept in most detail sentence formula F. Danesh.
But already in the concept of Czech linguists there were controversial issues. It turned out to be controversial what components to include:
Some linguists - what needs to be included in the formula. only the meanings of the predicative center,
Others say that the formula should also include verb extenders.
ð The question is ambiguous from the very beginning.
Conclusions:
1). The merit of Czech scientists is that they were the first to raise the question of the need to isolate abstract formulas on which a sentence is constructed;
2). Czech linguists do not completely abandon taking into account the lexical-semantic features of a sentence when constructing formulas;
3). All Czech linguists build a sentence formula only on the material of verbal sentences; they do not take into account the class of verbless sentences, which is widely represented in the Russian language.
In Russian syntactic science new type of sentence description - at the end of the 60s. 20th century.
“Fundamentals of constructing a descriptive grammar of the modern literary Russian language” - in this book N.Yu. Shvedova first introduced the concept sentence structure diagram. In "Grammar-70" was first given closed list of Russian sentence structure diagrams. This type of description of sentences is also presented in the Russian Grammar-80.
In modern science - 2 interpretations of the concept block diagram:
I. Shvedova and her followers exclude all verb extenders from the structural diagram, leaving only the structural core. => Structural diagram as a minimum sample that meets the requirements of grammatical sufficiency (Shvedova, Beloshapkova).
Structural a diagram is an abstract pattern according to which. a separate minimal, relatively complete sentence can be constructed.
The understanding of the structural minimum of a sentence put forward by Shvedova is addressed to the formal organization of the sentence as predicative unit. The level of abstraction specified by this understanding of the structural minimum of a sentence corresponds to that which was accepted by the traditional doctrine of the main members of a sentence.
II. Structural diagram as a minimum sample that satisfies the requirements of grammatical and informative (nominative) sufficiency (Arutyunova, Lomtev, etc.). A different understanding (than Shvedova’s) of the structural minimum of supply is addressed not only to formal organization suggestions like predicative unit, but also semantic of its organization as nominative unit , takes into account both the actual grammatical and semantic sufficiency.
T.P. Lomtev understands the content of a sentence as a “system with relations”, the center of which is yavl. expresser of relations - a predicate that specifies places for objects, determines their quantity and nature.
N.D. Arutyunova considers the main task of studying the meaning of a sentence to be “identifying logical-syntactic “beginnings”, i.e. those relations that, being directly related to ways of thinking about the world, are at the same time involved in the grammatical structure of language.”
=> 2 understandings of the structural diagram of the sentence described above. despite all the differences, they complement each other, representing different levels of abstraction: greater when focusing on predicative minimum and smaller when oriented towards nominal minimum. => The different volume of allocated structural diagrams for both understandings is a result of different levels of abstraction.
With the second understanding, the structural diagram of a sentence includes a larger number of components. Thus, from the standpoint of this approach, the N1Vf scheme corresponds only to the sentence The rooks have arrived, for offer They ended up here it must be supplemented by a semantically adverbal component of local meaning, which, in accordance with the accepted symbolism, can be denoted Adv loc / N2...loc, where N2...loc represents any case form of a noun with an adverbial local meaning.
The second understanding of the structural minimum supply is represented by a large number of works by domestic and foreign scientists, they consider general principles for identifying structural diagrams, the entire system of Russian sentences is not described in the form of a closed list of structural diagrams. The general idea of all works: appeal to the meaning of the sentence as a nominative unit, recognition of the relative completeness and integrity of the informative content as the main and obligatory property of a sentence. With this approach, it is no longer possible to rely on traditional teachings about the main members of a sentence. For example, the differences between subjects and objects are not significant.
2 types of block diagrams:
- minimum and
- extended= minimal schemes + constitutive ones not included in them, i.e. components essential for the semantic structure of a sentence. Thus, m/a minimum. and extended schemas there are inclusion relations.
Yes, minimum. The N1Vf circuit is part of the extended circuit built. based on it, - N1Vf Adv loc / N2…loc, which is implemented by the proposal. They ended up here.
Beloshapkova offers list of minimal block diagrams:
1 block (single-component): Vf3sn (Rain), Adjs/n (Dark), N1 (Night), Adv/N2... (No laughing matter), Inf (Be silent).
Block 2 (two-component nominative): N1Vf (The rooks have arrived), N1Adj (He is smart), N1N1 (This student is an excellent student), N1Adv/N2... (He is not in the mood), N1Inf (He is running. And the queen is laughing!): noun. in IP, communication - coordination.
Block 3 (two-component quantitative): N2Vf (Enough money), N2Adj (Lots of money), N2N1 (Lots of money), N2Adv/N2... (Filled with things), N2Inf (Can’t count the money), + N2Num (There were two hunters): R.p. – quantitative ratio
4 block (two-component infinitive): N1 -> replaced with an infinitive: InfVf (Smoking is prohibited), InfAdj (Smoking is harmful), InfN1 (Smoking is a sin), InfAdv/N2... (Smoking is unaffordable), Inf Inf (Smoking is harmful to health ).
In a structural diagram, the components are presented in the usual order; we do not pay attention to word order. + Connections are not included. The structural diagram is closely related to the semantics of the sentence. Block 4 can be called evaluative-event, because evaluation of actions is independent of its implementation (proverbs, sayings).
Minimum schemes proposed. - the result of high abstraction: they include only such components, the presence of which is not determined by word connections, are completely freed from taking into account the combinability of words and record only specific facts of synth. organizational proposal
Advanced Schemas– minimal schemes + “extenders” => this is a more complete abstract model on which real sentences can be constructed that have semantic autonomy and are capable of performing a nominative function - naming an event, a situation, a “state of affairs” (out of context).
Mechanisms (“expanders”) for distributing proposals:
1. Conditional syntactic connections ( We saw house.– N1Vf circuit is used with an expander ).
2. Proposal connections (characterize not the lexeme, but the model of the sentence)
2 types of sentence connections:
1) connection in passive design(Letters are delivered courier - the form of the entity is dictated by the passive synth. construction, not a verb). Or the conjugated form of the verb can control TV. case, or participle.
2) a separate word form can be included in a sentence as its extender, not formally associated with any word form. Such an independent distributor, relating to the entire proposal as a whole, is called Determinant . Several types:
q determinants with circumstantial meaning(At breakfast he was silent. – a determinant with temporal meaning. + m.b. with local semantics, causal meaning (from delicacy), etc.).
q determinants with subjective meaning(can take different forms: To him funny. He has cheerful mood. For the scientist The main thing…).
q Object det-nts (Senu (for son) he only wants the best.)
The position of the beginning of the sentence is the usual position of the det-nt (here it is easier to distinguish it), but in some cases it can be in another part of the sentence.
3 mechanism) introduction technique
Feature: syntactic. They have no connection with the components of the sentence / with the sentence as a whole: In my opinion,..(no connection with the rest of the sentence.). Introductory constructions, in addition to having constructive status, help to separate the Modus from the Dictum ( What's worse- grade, In my opinion - authorization).
Additionally:
Offer - this is one of the main grammatical categories of syntax, contrasted in its system with words, phrases in forms, meanings and functions. The offer may be simple and complex. In a narrow, strictly grammatical sense, a simple sentence is a unit of message that is formed according to a specially designed pattern, has the meaning of predication and its own semantic structure, and has a specific communicative task, expressed by intonation or word order. A proposal considered from the side of its communicative organization is usually called statement. As an utterance, a sentence is qualified as a separate communicative unit in oral speech with a certain intonation, and in writing - with separating marks (period, question mark or exclamation mark), and it also becomes possible actual division - semantic division. Current division of the proposal corresponds to the communicative task: It organizes a sentence for relevant information. The doctrine of actual division of a sentence was created by the Czech scientist Mathesius in the 20-30s. 20th century. Mathesius made a discovery by showing that a phenomenon that was seen as psychological in nature was in fact a linguistic phenomenon. He defined the basic concepts of the doctrine of the actual division of a sentence and introduced new, non-psychological terms: “statements”, “actual division”. The actual division of the sentence is binary. In accordance with its communicative task, the sentence is divided into theme and rheme. When defining a topic, researchers note its three signs: 1). The topic is the starting point of the statement (Kovtunova “Modern Russian language: word order and actual division of sentences”); 2). It is actually less significant than the rhema; 3). This is the part of the sentence that is usually given, known from the previous context. Referring the content of a sentence to reality - the grammatical meaning of a sentence, called predicativeness. The intonation of completeness indicates predication (reading a book out loud). In context, it is perceived as a complete predicative unit. A sentence differs from a word and phrase: in predicative completeness, communicative significance and intonation of completeness. Dividing syntax into traditional and modern dates back to the 50-60s. 20th century. Vinogradov summed up the results. For traditional syntax characteristic: 1).In a sentence, various aspects of its organization are not consistently differentiated; 2). Characteristic is the lack of differentiation between constructive, communicative and semantic aspects. At the origins of the drains stands Shakhmatov’s teaching on one-part and two-part sentences. If the predicative basis includes two components: the subject of the psychological judgment and the predicate, that is, the subject and the predicate, this is a two-part sentence. If there is no division, it is one-part (for example, “a dog is barking in the yard,” “it was freezing yesterday”). A sentence may have minor members: definition, addition, circumstance. The division of all members of a sentence into main and secondary ones reflected the difference between predicative combinations of words and their predicative compounds (subjects and predicates are predicative, the rest are not predicative). Shakhmatov drew attention to this. The offer is characterized by: 1). By the presence and absence of secondary members (distributed and non-distributed proposals); 2). Sentences are complete and incomplete. Complete - communicatively complete sentences in a given context. Incomplete - sentences in which any member is missing, which is clearly restored from the context. Only members of the sentence that are included in the topic can be omitted from the sentence. Rema never gives up. Subject , in the traditional sense, is the expression in speech of a logical or psychological subject. Expressed by a noun infinitive, a complete phrase (“brother and sister left”). That. the subject receives two characteristics - in meaning and in form. Predicate - a member that is associated with the subject and expresses its predicative meaning, a sign. Sign - any characterization of an object . The signs vary non-predicative (called by the speaker as given in advance. For example, a good student passes exams on time) and predicative (set by the speaker precisely at the moment of speech. For example, this student is good). Most often, the subject and predicate are connected by coordination. According to the method of expressing the predicative feature, the predicate is divided into simple and complex. Simple - the predicative feature is expressed in one word, for example, “the poet works.” Complex- the predicative sign is expressed in several independent words, for example, “he wants to try to become a good son.” Among simple predicates, verbs are distinguished, for example, “I remember my childhood” or “I will remember”; and nominal ones, for example.. “the task is difficult. There are also complex nominal predicates, for example.. “he appeared satisfied.” The Virtue of Traditional Teaching : The division of sentence members into main and secondary ones assumes a high level of abstraction. Traditional teaching lies in the area of formal organization of the sentence. One-part sentences - one main member, the bearer of predicative meaning. Stand out definitely personal(the main member is expressed in the form of 1st or 2nd person, for example “I am writing a letter”); generalized-personal(verb of the 2nd person singular and 3rd person plural, for example, “tears cannot help my grief” or “they count chickens in the fall” - an action that is common to everyone, the action is thought of in a generalized way); vaguely personal ( verbs of the 3rd person plural, denoting a sign of a person that is thought of indefinitely, for example, “they are knocking”, “they are asking you”); impersonal(denote actions, states or signs that arise or exist on their own, regardless of the producer of the action, for example, “the wind is knocking on the window”); infinitives(the main member is the infinitive, for example, “to be in a thunderstorm”); nominative(for example, “black evening”, “white snow”). Contradictions of traditional classification : 1) the subject is determined both by form and content at the same time (by form - im.p. noun, infinitive; by content - the subject of judgment); 2). Classes of one-component sentences are determined either by semantics or by form, therefore, syntactically and semantically heterogeneous sentences fall into one class; 3). The secondary members of the sentence receive contradictory interpretations. Structurally syntactic level organizing a simple sentence involves abstracting from the following: the specific speech conditions in which the sentence was pronounced, the features of the actual division of the sentence, its intonation, and its lexical content. Representatives of the Prague linguistic school were the first to propose this approach. They began to use the words “model” and “sentence diagram.” Danish developed the proposal formulas in the most detail. But there were controversial questions, for example.. “what components should be included in the proposal formula?” In 1966 Shvedova's work "Fundamentals of constructing a descriptive grammar of the modern Russian language" was published, where she first introduced the concept of a structural scheme of a sentence. In "Grammar 70" for the first time a closed list of structural schemes of Russian sentences was given, and in "Grammar 80" Shvedova excluded all verb extenders, leaving only the predicative core. A structural diagram is an abstract pattern according to which a separate, minimal, relatively complete sentence can be constructed. Beloshapkova identifies four blocks of structural diagrams: 1). One-component sentences (VF3sn “rain”, “freeze”, “dawn”, Adjs/n “dark”, “frosty”, “light”, N1 “night”, “street”, “winter”, Adv/N2 “sorry” , “no laughing matter”, Inf “be silent”); 2). two-component nominative sentences (N1VF “the rooks have arrived”, N1Adj “the night is quiet”, N1N1 “this student is an excellent student”, N1Adv/N2... “he is not in the mood”, “she cannot afford this purchase”, N1Inf “the queen laughs "); 3).Two-component quantitative sentences (N2VF “enough money”, N2Adj “full of money”, N2N1 “lots of money”, N2Adv/N2... “lots of money”, “full of things to do”, N2Inf “can’t count the money”); 4. Two-component infinitive sentences (InfVF “smoking is prohibited”, InfAdj “smoking is harmful”, InfN1 “smoking is a sin”, InfAdv/N2... “smoking is not affordable”, InfInf “smoking is harmful to health”). Modern syntax requires considering a simple sentence with the principle of systematic syntactic description. He points out that the proposal must be viewed from a paradigmatic point of view. Concept " supply paradigms" was developed in the late 60s. Two interpretations: 1). Focused on an expanded understanding of the paradigm as any associative series. 2). Narrow, related to morphology. This is a system of forms in a sentence, similar to the system of forms of a word. The doctrine of the Shvedova paradigm. Position: The grammatical meaning of a sentence is predicativeness, predicativeness exists in the form of a number of private meanings (modal, temporal), the form of a simple sentence - its changes, which are carried out by such grammatical means that are specifically designed to express syntactic tenses and moods. The entire system of sentence forms expressing the category of predicativity is generally called its paradigm.
Narrow and broad understanding of the structural scheme of a sentence. Model of an elementary simple sentence as a representation of a two-way linguistic unit.
Koshkareva: Offer– an independent syntactic unit, the most important feature of which is the unity of the category of predicativity (the grammatical meaning of the sentence) and the minimal structural scheme of the sentence.
Block diagram> – “this is the abstract pattern on which a minimal independent message can be constructed”
The constituent elements of the structural diagram are the main members of the sentence (predicative node): subject + predicate.
Beloshapkova: structural diagram - an abstract sample consisting of a minimum of components necessary to create a sentence.
A new type of description of the formal organization of a sentence, based on the concept of a structural diagram of a sentence, appeared in Russian science in the late 60s. last century. It was implemented in relation to all Russian sentence structures in Grammar-70 and Grammar-80. And a controversy ensued around the concept of a sentence structure. Two understandings of the structural minimum of the proposal emerged. The understanding put forward by Shvedova in Grammar-70 is addressed to the formal organization of a sentence as a predicative unit and involves abstracting from everything that is not essential for it. On this basis, the structural scheme does not include such components of the sentence as all conditional extenders that realize the syntactic potency of words, the forms of which form a sentence and are components of the scheme. The scheme also does not include the obligatory conditional predictable distributors, without which a sentence cannot be a minimal message independent of the context. Thus, the structural diagram includes only a predicative minimum. The level of abstraction specified by this concept of a structural minimum corresponds to the traditional doctrine of supply. Shvedova, based on such a predicative minimum in her Grammar-70, compiled a closed list of structural schemes of the Russian language and there are 37 units in it.
Another understanding of the structural minimum is addressed to the understanding of the formal organization of the sentence as a predicative unit and the semantic organization of the sentence as a nominative unit. The structural minimum is understood as “the limit of semantic autonomy, suitability for performing a nominative function.”
Two understandings of the structural scheme of a sentence allow us to talk about two types of structural schemes of a sentence - minimal and extended. Minimum Scheme (MCS)– predicative minimum of a sentence. Extended Scheme (RSS)– MSS + constituent components not included in them, that is, components essential for the semantic structure of the sentence.
The MSS includes forms of words of three classes:
1. Indicators of predicativity (conjugated forms of the verb, conjugated forms of the copula - the auxiliary verb to be, the infinitive of the verb or copula, conveying a specific modal meaning)
2. MSNs that include a copula include certain forms of names and adverbs, which, in combination with the copula, form a single syntactic complex (forms of the nominative and instrumental cases of IS, non-prepositional or prepositional forms of any indirect case that can be combined with the copula; forms of the nominative and instrumental case IP and passive participles, as well as their short forms and comparatives;
3. The MSS, which includes verb or connective forms that are variable in terms of concordant categories, includes components that determine the form of predicative indicators by number, gender (person). (the nominative case form IS and its substitutes, in particular combinations of quantitative words in different forms with the genitive case form IS, as well as the infinitive)
Types of MCC expanders:
1.Substantial component with subjective meaning: he has luck; He's lucky
2.Substantial component with object meaning: Children are afraid of the dark; Mother misses her son
3.Adverbial component: The children stayed with their grandmother. He acted nobly.
M.I. Cheremisin and T.A. Kolosova: the predicative node is not a sentence, but sentence schemes with several actants exist along with actant and non-actant ones, i.e. are not “extensions” of the latter. Offer He paid me back cannot be considered an extension of the proposal He returned, because the latter is not a sentence due to its semantic incompleteness. The structural scheme is not always identical to the predicative minimum, but is necessarily the nominative minimum of the sentence.
Elementary simple sentence
- this is the simplest linguistic syntactic unit, representing the unity of the plane of expression and the plane of content. PV of an elementary simple sentence – block diagram(a sequence of conventional symbols reflecting the morphological way of expressing the components necessary to realize the corresponding meaning), and the content plan is proposition(an abstraction that corresponds to the meaning of a sentence as a sign of language is a generalization of a class of concrete propositions of the same type).
The conventional symbols of the structural diagram correspond to parts of speech and are accompanied by two types of descriptors: subscript descriptors indicate grammatical meanings, superscript descriptors indicate semantic roles.
The composition of an elementary simple sentence includes a predicate (nominal or verbal predicate) and its obligatory distributors - actants (subject, object), and with spatial predicates also circonstants - adverbs of place.
As already said, the structural diagram of a simple sentence is an abstract syntactic pattern from which a separate minimal, relatively complete sentence can be constructed. Structural schemes are distinguished by a combination of the following features: the formal structure of the scheme (the forms of words included in it and, in schemes organized by two forms, the relationship of these forms to each other); schema semantics; paradigmatic properties of sentences constructed according to this scheme; regular implementation system; distribution rules. Sentences completed according to one or another structural scheme are combined into a certain type of simple sentence.
The structural diagram of a simple sentence is organized by the forms (possibly even one form) of the significant words that are its components; in some schemes, one of the components is a negative particle - alone or in combination with a pronominal word.
In specific sentences, the place of a schema component under certain conditions can be filled by some other form or combination of forms; There are certain types and rules for such substitutions. They are described in the chapters devoted to individual types of simple sentences.
The grammatical meaning common to all simple sentence structures (and therefore to all types of sentences) is predicativity. In addition, each structural diagram has its own meaning - the semantics of the diagram. The semantics of the structural scheme of a sentence is formed by the mutual action of the following factors: 1) the grammatical meanings of the co-components in their relation to each other (in single-component schemes - the grammatical meaning of the component of the scheme); 2) lexical-semantic characteristics of words specific to a given scheme, occupying the positions of its components in specific sentences. I.I. Meshchaninov Sentence structure. M.; L., 1963
To designate the components of the scheme, the following elementary alphabetic symbols are introduced, corresponding to the Latin names of parts of speech and the names of some forms: Vf - conjugated form of the verb (Latin verbum finitum); Vf 3s - conjugated verb in the form of 3 l. units hours (lat. singularis); Vf 3pl - conjugated verb in the 3 l form. pl. hours (lat. pluralis); Inf - infinitive; N - noun (Latin nomen - name, title); adj - adjective (lat. adjectivum); Pron - pronoun (lat. pronomen); Adv - adverb (lat. adverbium); Adv- o - predicative adverb on - o; Praed - predicative (lat. praedicatum); Part - participle (lat. participium); Praed part - participial predicate; interj - interjection (lat. interjectio); neg - negation (negation, lat. negatio); cop - copula (lat. copula); quant - quantitative (quantitative) value (lat. quantitas (quantity), (value)). With the symbol N, numbers from 1 to 6 indicate cases, respectively: 1 - im. n., 2 - gen. n., 3 - dat. p., 4 - vin. p., 5 - TV. p., 6 - sentence p.; with the symbol N, the number 2 with the following ellipsis (N 2 ...) means: “a noun in the form of one of the oblique cases.” L.S. Barkhudarov On the issue of surface and deep structures of sentences // Questions of linguistics. 1973, p.78
Accordingly, the formal structure of the structural schemes of a simple sentence is shown, i.e., the word forms that organize such a scheme in their neutral (constitutively not conditioned and not expressively colored) arrangement in relation to each other. When constructing a specific sentence based on a given model (when filling out the diagram), it receives its original form, i.e., the form of a syntactic present. vr.; for example: N 1 - Vf (The forest is noisy; The father is working; The children are happy); Inf Vf 3s (Smoking is prohibited; Meeting is not possible); Adv quant N 2 (Lots to do; Little time); N 1 (Night; Silence); Vf 3pl (Ringing); Inf cop Inf (To lead is to inspect). L.S. Barkhudarov On the issue of surface and deep structures of sentences // Questions of linguistics. 1973, p.111
The general classification of structural patterns of a simple sentence can be carried out on various grounds. Such grounds are: 1) freedom or phraseology of the scheme; 2) lexical limitation or unlimitedness of one of its components; 3) the presence or absence of a conjugated verb (Vf) in the scheme as a form that itself contains the meanings of tense and mood; 4) number of components (single-component or two-component circuits); 5) for two-component circuits - the presence or absence of formal similarity of components to each other (their coordination with each other). The "Russian Grammar" adopted a classification in which the primary basis is the division into free and phraseological schemes. Free schemes conventionally include those in which one of the components is limited lexico-semantically. Free schemes (the majority of them, and they occupy a central place in the simple sentence system) are divided into two-component and one-component. Two-component schemes, in turn, are divided into schemes with a conjugated form of the verb and without a conjugated form of the verb in the original form. Within schemes with the conjugated form of the verb, subject-predicate and non-subject-predicate schemes are distinguished. Within the class of schemes without a conjugated form of the verb, schemes with lexically unrestricted components - subject-predicate and non-subject-predicate - and schemes with components limited lexico-semantically are distinguished.
In the following presentation, lexical limitation will be understood as the closedness of the list (countability) of words acting as a component of the scheme; by lexical unlimitedness - the openness of such a list both within a part of speech and within a semantic group of words that, as part of a particular part of speech, has its own grammatical characteristics.
Single-component schemes are divided into schemes with a conjugated form of the verb (this is a conjugated-verb class) and schemes without a conjugated form of the verb (these are not conjugated-verb classes: nominal, infinitive and adverbial). Phraseological schemes are classified according to the grammatical nature of the lexically closed component: these are phraseological types of sentences with conjunctions, with prepositions, with particles, with interjections and with pronouns.
In free two-component schemes, word forms are in syntactic relationships with each other. In most cases, this is simultaneously the relationship between the central semantic components of the sentence - the subject and its predicative feature. Formally, these relationships are expressed in different ways. Based on the different nature of the syntactic connection of the components, meaning the semantic subject and its predicative feature, all two-component schemes are divided into two large groups: subject-predicate and non-subject-predicate. The first group consists of those types of sentences in which the semantic subject is expressed by the actual naming form. This is a form that opens the paradigm of the word and the main function of which is naming: im. n. noun or infinitive. The second component in such sentences expresses the predicative feature; it is a conjugated form of a verb, a case form of a noun, an infinitive or an adverb. According to those patterns in which the semantic subject is expressed by the naming form - im. p. or infinitive, subject-predicate sentences are constructed; the first component is named after. p. or infinitive, which contains the meaning of the semantic subject, is called the subject; the second component - the form containing the meaning of the predicative attribute, is called the predicate. These are the samples (and, accordingly, the sentences built on them): N 1 - Vf (The forest is noisy; Children are having fun); N 1 - N 1 (Brother - teacher; Moscow - capital); N 1 - Adj 1 short form. (The child is smart); N 1 - Adj 1 full.f. (The child is smart); N 1 - Part 1 short form. (The house is built); N 1 - N 2 ... or Adv (House - by the road; The end is near); N 1 - Inf (Task - learn); N 1 - Adv -o (Excursion - [is] interesting); Inf - N 1 (Work - valor); Inf - Adv- o (Riding is fun); Inf cop Inf (To lead is to inspect). B.A. Uspensky The problem of universals in linguistics//New in linguistics. M., 1970
Other two-component schemes are not subject-predicate; the relationship between the word forms in them can also be the relationship between the subject and its predicative attribute, however, unlike subject-predicate sentences, the subject is expressed in them by a form of the word that is not a naming one, and, therefore, the subjective meaning here turns out to be complicated by the meaning of this very forms. These are, for example, schemes N 2 (neg) Vf 3s (Water is coming; There is not enough time) or No N 2 (No time). In such cases, the connection between word forms has the form of subordination, a formal dependence of one component on another. However, the difference from the conventional subordinating connection here is that in such a minimal sample of a sentence the verb dominates precisely and only in its given form (in the form of 3 l. units, in the past tense and subjunctive tense - in the form average r.); As for the word no, in this meaning (absent, not present) it functions only as the main member of the sentence and, therefore, with this word the connection characteristic of the sentence is always realized. B. A. Uspensky The problem of universals in linguistics//New in linguistics. M., 1970
In subject-predicate sentences, the subject and the predicate can be formally likened to each other: The train is coming - The trains are coming; Children are having fun - The child is having fun; This city is a new building, These cities are new buildings; The night is bright - The nights are bright. This similarity of the main members of a sentence is called their coordination. Externally, the connection between the coordination of the subject and the predicate is similar to the subordinating connection of agreement. But the internal nature of this connection and its grammatical features are different from those of the coordination connection. The differences here are as follows.
- 1) When coordinating, the form of the dependent word is subordinated to the form of the dominant word; when coordinating the subject and the predicate, there is a mutual correlation of forms, none of which is either dominant or dependent.
- 2) When agreeing, the connection passes through all forms of matching words (new house, new house, new house...); during coordination, only two data, certain forms (House - new) are correlated.
- 3) Based on the connection of agreement, a phrase is formed, which changes, subject to a change in the form of the dominant word (new house, new house, new house...); a sentence, the main members of which are coordinated with each other, is included in the paradigm of the sentence and changes according to the rules of its form change (The house is new; The house was new/new; The house will be new/new...).
- 4) When agreed in a phrase, attributive (not predicative) relations arise; coordination formalizes such a connection in which a feature is assigned to a certain time plan, i.e., it is predicative. B.A. Uspensky The problem of universals in linguistics//New in linguistics. M., 1970
Below is the entire system of structural diagrams of a simple sentence, their structure and semantics. All sentences are given in their original form, i.e. in the form of a syntactic present. vr., which directly demonstrates the structure of the sample.
