Научная статья на тему 'Correlation of the verb transitivity with other grammatical categories'

Correlation of the verb transitivity with other grammatical categories Текст научной статьи по специальности «Языкознание и литературоведение»

CC BY
313
102
i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.
Ключевые слова
ASPECT / CATEGORY / DIATHESIS / TRANSITIVITY / VOICE

Аннотация научной статьи по языкознанию и литературоведению, автор научной работы — Liubchenko Tatiana Viktorovna

The correlation of the verb transitivity with other categories, including voice and aspect is specified in investigation. The article also deals with interpretation of categories “voice” and “diathesis” in linguistics.

i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.
iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.
i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.

Текст научной работы на тему «Correlation of the verb transitivity with other grammatical categories»

Section 1. Linguistics

ми аллитерациями звуков и звукосочетаний “сгущают" лиризм и создают целостность высокохудожественного текста «Annabel Lee». Проведение звукообраза поэтонима через все стихотворение является самым

сильным поэтическим средством, обеспечивающим единство звучание — значение и превращение имени Annabel Lee в интралингвальный (или даже интерлингвальный) символ прекрасного и трагического.

Список литературы:

1. Брюсов В. Я. Избранные сочинения. - М.: Худож. литература, 1980. - 574 с.

2. Богословский В. Н., Прозоров В. Г., Головченко А. Ф. Американская литература: Романтизм//История зарубежной литературы XIX века. - М.: Высшая школа, 1991. - С. 326-428.

3. Poe E. A. The Philosophy of Composition/Edgar Allan Poe//Graham’s Magazine. - Volume XXVIII. - no. 4, April 1846.

Liubchenko Tatiana Viktorovna, Kiev National Linguistic University, PhD, associate professor

E-mail: lyuleta78@gmail.com

Correlation of the verb transitivity with other grammatical categories

Abctract: The correlation of the verb transitivity with other categories, including voice and aspect is specified in investigation. The article also deals with interpretation of categories “voice” and “diathesis" in linguistics. Keywords: aspect, category, diathesis, transitivity, voice.

The explanation of correlation of the verb transitivity with other categories, including voice, diathesis and aspect is controversial. Many studies in determining the verb transitivity refer to the categories of voice and diathesis. During some time, the transitive verbs in linguistics were generally interpreted as forms of the voice category [1, 343]. The first attempt of terminological distinction of the categories of transitivity and voice is represented in the work by S. Kartsevskyi [2, 81].

The determinations of the voice available in linguistics attract semantic (“subject", “object") or syntactic (“subject", “complement") units to the description. Thus, the voice is explained in the following way:

1) relation of the verb to the subject. The voice is defined as grammatical relation of the verb to the subject, transitivity — as grammatical relation of the verb to the direct complement [3, 158; 4, 3; 5, 102];

2) relation of the verb to the complement. M. Peterson believes that the “form of the voice expresses the different directions of the verbal action determined by the verbal stem" [6, 81]. The researcher distinguishes two voices in Russian: intransitive — the formal indicator -ся, and transitive — the formal indicator: absence of -ся [6, 81]. A. Shapiro also refers verbs to two voices: transitive and intransitive [7, 49];

3) relation ofthe verb to the subj ect and complement. According to this opinion, voice is understood as the re-

lation of the action expressed by the verb-predicate to the subject and complement [8, 219];

4) relation of the action to the subject. In this approach, the voice is understood as relation of the action to the grammatical subject [9, 214; 10, 43; 11, 414];

5) relation of the action to the subject and object. The voice category in this explanation is used to describe the relations between the subject and the object of the action [12, 152-153; 13, 192; 14, 354; 15, 412].

6) According to the definition by P. Kuznetsov: “We understand the voice category as the relation of the action to its subject and object expressed in the verbal form" [16, 333].

If the concepts of two sentence levels are taken into account: semantic and syntactic, the voice is interpreted as the meaning of verbal predicate determined by the function of subject and displays different relations between the subject and units of the semantic level — the subject and the object of action [17, 31; 18, 19]. So semantic and syntactic criteria for determining the voice belong to different levels of the category: deep level and surface level, respectively [11, 414].

The standard opposition is the opposition active/pas-sive voice, however, the Slavic studies also associate with the opposition reflexiveness/irreflexiveness of the verbs. Thus, the concept by V. Vinogradov marks fifteen values of reflexiveness (actually reflexive, secondary reflexive, generally reflexive, passive reflexive, reciprocally reflexive,

18

Correlation of the verb transitivity with other grammatical categories

indirectly reflexive, collaterally reflexive, secondary passive reflexive, qualitative passive objectless, active objectless, intensive collaterally reflexive, with passive indication of the external character, indirectly resultative reflexive, reciprocally motor, impersonal intensive) [19, 630-637].

E. Benvenist offers to refuse “traditional symmetry ac-tive/passive” and consider the voice as the opposition to the active voice that “indicates the relations of the subject to the process in direction to the other” and the middle voice that “denotes the relation of the subject to the process directed to itself” [20, 190-191].

In the 1970s, in a scientific turning the concept of diathesis as syntactic-semantic category, indicating the relations between the semantic roles of lexeme and parts of the sentence, was introduced. Diathesis is defined as:

- relation between the syntactic actants of the lexeme and its semantic actants. Diathesis can be terminal (configuration of the word-predicate with its syntactic actants in the terminal construction of the sentence at the level of deep lexico-semantic structure) and derivative (regrouping of actants of certain syntactic structure associated with the change of composition of the syntactic actants and/or transitivity/intransitivity of the verbal lexeme) [21, 72].

- L. Tesniere distinguishes four diathesis as “subvoices” of the transitive voice: active (action is taken by the first actant, who is its active participant), passive (first actant is influenced by the action), reflexive (first and second actants, active and passive actants are identical), reciprocal (each of two actants takes an active role in one action and a passive role in another one) [22, 254-255].

- O. Holodovych determines diathesis as a scheme of compliance between the units of syntactic and semantic level, the voice — as diathesis marked in the verb [23, 284]. The change of diathesis is connected with the change of “functional load of participants regarding the verbal predicate and other predicates” [24, 63].

- According to V. Khrakovskyi, the sentence structure consists of a predicate — a top and participants. Diathesis is a change between the participants and voice means the derivational relations between the lexemes of active structures [25: 5, 13].

- There is an opinion that the voice is a two-level category. At a deep level the voice reflects the relation of the action to the subject, this is diathesis, at a superficial level the voice is the ratio of the verb-predicate to the subject [11, 415].

- G. Sylnytskyi describes the voice as a grammatical category represented at three levels: lexical, morphological, and syntactic, reflecting the regular relations between

the elements of valence paradigms of the verbal lexemes that correlate with the regular changes in the value of these lexemes [26, 54].

The modern Ukrainian linguistics defines the voice as a morphologic, word-building, syntactic category. In this case, a new lexeme with a passive value of the verb appears. In the word building, activity/pas-sivity are the components of the category of valence, participation of cases in derivative processes is “valence reasoned” and “predicative mediated” [27, 44]. According to I. Vykhovanets: “The lexical transformation of the verbal predicate of the action to the predicate of resultative voice... affects the syntactic communicative rank of substantial arguments caused by the semantic syntactic valence of predicates and prominent on the basis of semantic and syntactic relations, and formal syntactic positions of parts of the sentence expressed by the cases of nouns and allocated on the basis of syntactic relations” [28, 243-244]. The Russian researchers also support this view and define the voice as “inflectional category that opposes the forms of one lexeme” [29, 481]. In this concept, the element -ся, -сь of reflexive verbs is interpreted as a suffix.

The controversial issue is still a subordination and mutual interaction of categories of transitivity and voice. According to V. Vinogradov, the connection of transitivity and voice is not the primary in determining the status of a category of transitivity. The researcher noted that “the issue about transitive and intransitive meanings directed to the depths of semantic system of the verb can not be exhausted with the category of voice. It falls outside the scope of the study of grammatical relations between the subject and object of the action. This is one of the central problems of verbal semantics. It touches the categories of voice only with one edge” [19, 646]. As B. Norman notes, systems “subject — verb” and “verb — object” in the trinomial “subject — verb — object” is heterogeneous and independent. The subsystem “verb — object” forms grammatical category “transitive — intransitive”, the subsystem “subject — verb” is the part of the category of voice [10, 41].

There are opinions according to which the category of voice is subordinate to the category of transitivity:

1) voice is a category, derivative from the transitivity, which is the result of syntactic changes and redistribution of syntactic functions. At the level of deep lexical semantic structure the voice is a morphological category, diathesis is a semantic and syntactic category. The “terminal” transitivity is a property of the verb that appears at the level of its deep lexical and syntactic structure, the “deriva-

19

Section 1. Linguistics

tive” transitivity is the result of syntactic transformations and redistribution of syntactic functions [21,79];

2) category of voice reflected in the syntactic and morphological forms is closely connected with the category of transitivity and is subj ect to it [30, 211];

3) according to M. Lutsenko, “transitivity-intransitivity is the category of system, which analogue in usage is a voice" [31, 84]. The researcher stresses that in dictionaries the grammatical tags: type, subjectivity and transitivity are represented in one line, and in his opinion, it is not accidental. The category of transitivity is in the logical (correlative) relation with the categorical system attributes of type and subjectivity. These categories are determined on the basis of the following parameters: cause, direction, purpose. The concept of reason is a logical basis of the category of subjectivity (action that in thinking is not connected with the cause, does not require the subject (agent)); the concept of direction of the action concerns the transitivity (direction of the action from the subject to the object (purpose)); the concept of actional purpose determines the type [31, 82-87].

With the development of the functional grammatical theory of O. Bondarko, the voice and transitivity are examined in the functional semantic field of subject-predicate-object relations. The functional semantic field of voice through various means (morphological, syntactic, word building, lexical) expresses the relation of performance to the subject and object. The center of the field includes the oppositions (active-passive, reflexive-irreflexive verbs, transitive-intransitive verbs), the periphery — self-reflexive and reciprocal reflexive verbs [32, 27-33]. The category of transitivity in this interpretation concerns the notion of the functional semantic field of the voice and serves as a part of the whole, or as a generic concept to species. The concept of voice covers various types of relations of the action

to the subject and the object, whereas the transitivity is one of these types of relations — characteristics of the action in relation to the object [33, 121-122]. There is an opinion that the consideration of connection of the category of transitivity with other categories is possible only in case of diachronic approach in describing the linguistic phenomena. The category of transitivity with this approach should be considered in the chain «diathesis — “hidden” causativity — “open" causativity — voice», which is compatible with the historical development of these categories [34, 33].

There is a number of studies that resolve the matter of interaction oftransitivity and the aspect ofthe verb, however, this problem did not become the final outline. The interaction between the aspect and transitivity, according to M. Lutsenko is based on that the actional target (completion of the action) is derived from the substantial goal (focus of the action from the subj ect to the object) [31, 87]. Some authors associate the change of the aspect with the change of the valence capabilities of the verb: for example, during the prefixion of the intransitive verbs in Ukrainian (грати — виграти/програти/розкрати) [35, 28] or in pair oppositions of the category of transitivity/intransi-tivity and the verbs of perfect/imperfect type in Lithuanian: gulti (to lie) — guldyti (to lay down) [11, 410]. In their theory, P. J. Hopper and S. A. Thompson proposed 10 signs of the prototype transitive construction, among which one of the most important sign is a specific aspectual characteristics [36].

We accept the idea that the diathesis as the category that touches on the issues of transformation of the sentences and change of the communicative rank of the substantial components, and transitivity — the indication to the direction of the verbal action specified in the semantics of the verb, are determined by the valence of predicate, and therefore, under the certain circumstances, they correlate at different levels of the sentence structure.

References:

1. Буслаев Ф. И. Историческая грамматика русского языка./Ф. И. Буслаев. - М.: Изд-во АН СССР. Отд-ние лит. и яз., 1959. - 624 с.

2. Karcevski S. Systeme du verbe russe: Essai de linguistique synchronique/S. Karcevski. - Prague, 1927. - 167 p.

3. Бондарко А. В. Русский глагол./А. В. Бондарко, Л. Л. Буланин. - Л.: Просвещение, 1967. - 184 с.

4. Буланин Л. Л. Категория залога в современном русском языке: учеб. пособие/Л. Л. Буланин. - Л.: Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та, 1986. - 88 с. - (ЛГУ им. А. А. Жданова).

5. Вандриес Ж. Язык. Лингвистческое введение в историю./Ж. Вандриес. - М.: Соцэкгиз, 1937. - 410 с.

6. Петерсон М. Н. Лекции по современному русскому литературному языку./М. Н. Петерсон. - М.: Моск. гос. пед. ин-т. им. К. Либкнехта, 1941. - 172 с.

7. Шапиро А. Б. О залогах в современном русском языке./А. Б. Шапиро//Ученые записки Моск. гос. пед. ин-та. Каф. русского языка. - 1941. - Т. 5, вып. 1. - С. 22-61.

20

Correlation of the verb transitivity with other grammatical categories

8. Моисеев А. И. О категории залога в русском языке. (К постановке вопроса)/А. И. Моисеев//Ученые записки ЛГУ. Серия филологических наук. - Л., 1958. - № 235; Вып. 38. - С. 209-221.

9. Буланин Л. Л. О соотношении переходности и залога в русском языке./Л. Л. Буланин//Ученые записки МОПИ им. Н. К. Крупской. - Т. 278, вып. 17. - С. 213-219.

10. Норман Б. Ю. Переходность, залог, возвратность/Б. Ю. Норман. - Минск: Издательство Белорус. университета, 1972. - 132 с.

11. Степанов Ю. С. Вид, залог, переходность (Балто-славянская проблема 1)/Ю. С. Степанов//Известия АН СССР. - 1976. - Т. 35, № 5. - С. 408-420.

12. Ахманова О. С. Словарь лингвистических терминов./О. С. Ахманова. - М.: Сов. энцикл., 1969 [б]. - 607 с.

13. Булаховський Л. А. Нариси з загального мовознавства./Л. А. Булаховський. - К.: Рад. шк., 1955. - 247 с.

14. Исаченко А. В. Грамматический строй русского языка в сопоставлении со словацким. Морфология.

Ч. II./А. В. Исаченко. - Братислава: Изд-во Словацкой АН, 1960. - 577 с.

15. Истрина Е. С. Глагол./Е. С. Истрина//Грамматика русского языка. Т. 1. Фонетика и морфология. - М., 1952. - С. 409-605.

16. Кузнецов П. С. Современный русский язык. Морфология/П. С. Кузнецов. - М.: Изд-во Моск. ун-та им. М. В. Ломоносова, 1952. - С. 251-361.

17. Перельмутер И. А. Залог древнегреческого глагола: теория, генезис, история./И. А. Перельмутер; РАН, Ин-т лингв. исслед. - СПб.: Ноах, 1995. - 272 с. - (Ист.-филологические моногр.).

18. Перельмутер И. А. Об оппозиции «переходность-непереходность» в системе индоевропейского глагола./ И. А. Перельмутер//Вопросы языкознания. - 1974. - № 3. - С. 70-81.

19. Виноградов В. В. Русский язык (Грамматическое учение о слове): учеб. пособие для вузов/В. В. Виноградов. - М.: Высш. шк., 1947. - 784 с.

20. Бенвенист Э. Общая лингвистика./Э. Бенвенист. - М.: Прогресс, 1974. - 446 с.

21. Циммерман И. Синтаксические функции актантов, залог и переходность./И. Циммерман//Проблемы теории грамматического залога. - Л.: Наука, 1978. - С. 71-79.

22. Теньер Л. Основы структурного синтаксиса./Л. Теньер. - М.: Прогресс, 1988. - 656 с. - (Языковеды мира).

23. Холодович А. А. Проблемы грамматической теории./А. А. Холодович. - Л.: Наука, 1979. - 304 с.

24. Долинина И. Б. Залог и диатеза: критерии разграничения./И. Б. Долинина//Сопряженность глагольных категорий: сб. науч. тр. - Калинин, 1990. - С. 56-67.

25. Храковский В. С. Пассивные конструкции./В. С. Храковский//Типология пассивных конструкций. Диатезы и залоги. - Л., 1974. - С. 5-46.

26. Сильницкий Г. Г. Глагольная валентность и залог./Г Г. Сильницкий//Типология пассивных конструкций. Диатезы и залоги. - Л., 1974. - С. 46-53.

27. Загштко А. П. Система i структура морфолопчних категорш сучасно! укра!нсько! мови (проблеми теорн): навч. поабник для студ. спец. «Укра!нська мова i лггература»/А. П. Загштко. - К.: 1СДО, 1993. - 343 с.

28. Вихованець I. Р. Теоретична морфологш укра!нсько! мови: академiчна граматика укра!нсько! мови./

I. Р. Вихованець, К. Г. Городенська; ред. I. Р. Вихованець. - К.: Ушвер. вид-во «Пульсари», 2004. - 400 с. -Бiблiогр.: С. 391-398.

29. Белошапкова В. А. Современный русский язык./В. А. Белошапкова. - М.: Высш. шк., 1989. - 800 с.

30. Русашвський В. М. Структура укра!нського дieслова./В. М. Русашвський. - К.: Наук. думка, 1971. - 315 с.

31. Луценко Н. А. Грамматические категории в системе и узусе./Н. А. Луценко. - Донецк: ДонДУ 2003. - 202 с.

32. Бондарко А. В. К теории поля в грамматике - залог и залоговость./А. В. Бондарко//Вопросы языкознания. - 1972. - № 3. - С. 20-35.

33. Теория функциональной грамматики. Субъектность. Объектность. Коммуникативная перспектива вы-сказывания./отв. ред. А. В. Бондарко. - СПб.: Наука, 1992. - 304 с.

34. Криницкайте С. А. Проблема переходности в исследованиях по индоевропейским языкам./С. А. Криниц-кайте//Проблемы внутренней и внешней лингвистики. - М.: Наука, 1978. - С. 11-34.

35. Мозгунов В. В. ПерехНшсть як тип валентност дieслова (на матерiалi украшсько! мови): дис. на здо-буття наук. ступеня канд. фглол. наук: спец. 10.02.01 «Укра!нська мова»/В. В. Мозгунов. - Донецьк, 1997. - 223 с.

21

Section 1. Linguistics

36. Hopper P. J. Transitivity in grammar and discourse./P. J. Hopper, S. A. Thompson//Language. 1980. -Vol. 56 -№ 2. - P. 251-299.

Muradova Aynur Valiaddin, Azerbaijan State University of Economics (ASUE),

Senior Lecturer of ASUE E-mail: aynurmuradova.1975@mail.ru

New stage in the study of the problem of thematic progression (TP)

Abstract: In the article the problems of originating of the texts in modern linguistics are esteemed. The writer has decided to show huge capabilities of theme progression in originating the text in English, using recent works of the modern scholars. The writer indicates that most relevant of these capabilities is the problem of attachment behaviour, which is the most important tag of the text.

Keywords: Text, thematic progression, cognitive linguistics, problem of affection, theme, transitions.

The issue of text creation is considered as one of the major problems in modern linguistics. Here the opportunities of thematic progression (TP) are so extended. The most important of these is the problem of affection. Affection is the main indication of the text, and the study and determination of its different types (semantic, syntactic, logical, linear and global affection) in the text syntax of TP in terms of place and position, provides ground to the overall research of the mentioned problems.

Low level of loading of thematic elements in terms of information allows using them in text creation as a “construction material”. According to many linguists, any text may be presented in the form of sequence of text themes (or text fragment). Also, the thematic structure of the text is characterized by a specific affection of its themes. This affection is the indication of the relations of separate parts or a whole text.

As seen, the next stage in the study of the problem of thematic progression (TP) is mostly associated with the inclusion of it into the text sphere. In this regard, recently some aspects — the meaning of the text, its structure (affection among the sentences, relation, attitude, communication issues) — of TP associated with the text have been reviewed in the works ofV. Mateizus,

F. Danesh, J. Firbas, A. M. Peshkovsky, K. Abdullayev,

A. Mammadov, A. Abdullayev and other linguists. Namely modern development of the text theory leaning the ideas of these scholars allows principally new attitude toward the creation and understanding mechanism of the text.

As far as we are concerned, our researches regarding text creation of TP on the basis of English materials may be considered urgent in terms of some aspects:

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

• Firstly, TP enables to see the condition of the components of “known” and “new” which are necessary in the definite section and in the process of organising of the text;

• Secondly, TP enables to clarify other linguistic indications of the text which is a whole and dynamic phenomenon;

• Thirdly, TP is rhetoric and it specifies the opportunities of some language events such as the notion of lexical-semantic theme and genre, certainty and uncertainty in the theme, predication and TP, reference and cohesion.

It is clear that, language in linguistics has been studied as an abstract notion until recent years. Rapid development of ideas of structural linguistic school, which are satisfied with the principal of “language in itself and for itself”, is not so far away in terms of time. Until recent years, because much attention has not been paid on interaction and attitude problems of language and meaning and language and understanding process, this problem has almost remained unnoticed. Even the appearance of pragmatic tendency in linguistics in the 80s of the last century did not allow full implementation of these theoretical considerations occurred in this field. One of the main reasons is that, namely paradigm of scientific researches has changed. While before fundamental sciences nominated theoretical ideas which were periodically implemented by relevant technologies, now situation has slightly changed-any technological development process itself makes necessary the theoretical researches in one or another direction.

Such a rapid development in linguistics has resulted in application of new science fields into the linguistics. This should not seem unusual, because differentiation and inte-

22

i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.