BISAC EDU000000 General
BISAC LAW000000 General
BISAC MAT000000 General
BISAC MED000000 General
BISAC NAT000000 General
BISAC PHI000000 General
BISAC POL000000 General
BISAC SOC000000 General
The article presents an analysis of the structural organization of dividing structures with a conjunction: considered the ratio of modal and temporal plans of predictive units, as well as modeling their components; a quantitative method of studying the linguistic material was carried out, which made it possible to draw conclusions regarding the features of the construction of the analyzed sentences
parallelism of structure, dividing construction, view-time plan, modal plan, predicative unit, conjunction
The term "structure parallelism" is ambiguous. In some cases, structural parallelism is understood as the similarity in the construction of the predicative parts of a complex sentence, manifested in the same arrangement of their members, in the use of the same words, phrases, in the repetition of conjunctions or particles, in the ratio of demonstrative and relational pronouns, in other cases parallelism is considered, firstly, as the formalization of all predicative units according to one structural scheme, and secondly, as the identity of modal-type-temporal plans of predicative units (parallelism of the morphological characteristics of predicates).
The article adopted a broad understanding of the term "structural parallelism", including:
1) modeling predicative units according to one structural scheme (the same arrangement of the main members);
2) the identity of the type-time plans of predicative units;
3) identity of modal designs of predicative units.
Purpose of the study: to characterize the predicative units of a compound dividing sentence in terms of their type-temporal and modal relationships and to establish whether structural parallelism is a defining property of the analyzed structures.
The material of the study is a card index of polypredicative constructions with conjunction или (ли… или) with a volume of about three thousand examples, extracted by continuous sampling from the texts of oral folk art (epics), from works of classical, Soviet and modern fiction, from articles of modern periodicals, as well as from scientific texts.
The work uses those research methods that, in our opinion, give the maximum efficiency and ensure the reliability of the conclusions:
1) descriptive-analytical method, which involves the description of the facts of the language, subjected to observation, analysis, comparison and typological generalization;
2) the method of linguistic experiment with methods of transformational modeling (exclusion, addition of any elements);
3) method of quantitative analysis.
The same arrangement of the main members in the predicative units of dividing structures with conjunction или is typical for 80% of the structures from the total number of illustrative material we have collected (mono-subject dividing structures were not analyzed in this case): Только иногда, вглядываясь пристально в нее, он вздрогнет страстно, или она взглянет на него мимоходом и улыбнется <…> (Goncharov); А не удастся, он оседлает своего любимого коня, фантазию, или конь оседлает его и мчится он в пространстве, среди своих миров и образов (Goncharov); <…> зашевелится кисейная занавеска в окошке и из-за герани выглянет чиновница, или вдруг над забором, в саду, мгновенно выскочит и в ту же минуту спрячется свежее лицо девушки (Goncharov); <…> вот откуда-то доносится отрывистый, тревожный крик неуснувшей птицы, или раздается неопределенный звук, похожий на чей-то голос, вроде удивленного «а-а!» (Chekhov).
However, the same structure of the parts of a sentence connected by conjunction или, is not always observed.
1. The structure of predicative units in constructions with conjunction или can be characterized by an unequal arrangement of the principal members in predicative units: И изредка разве покажется неуклюжая сеноплавка <…>, или каторжный бредет по колена в воде и тащит за собою на веревке бревно, – вот и все картины (Chekhov); <…> и изредка лишь фыркали сытые кони или охотник произносил во сне бессвязные слова, поворачиваясь на соломе под теплым полушубком (Lermontov); Выпадали среди зимы и теплые дни, когда снег таял или шли проливные дожди, но Марии не было от этого легче (Zakrutkin).
2. Multiple predicative units constructed according to the schemes of one-part and two-part sentences can also be combined into a single construction: Пока, думаю, опасности нет. Вероятно, грипп или выявится воспаление легких, – сказала Вера (Babenko); Познакомились на бегах. Он – деньги потерял или – выкрали (Gorky); Но вот приходит Андрюша или его приведут (Goncharov).
As you can see, parallelism in the meaning of the same composition and order of the main members within the framework of constructions with conjunction или is not their absolute structural feature: 20% of constructions are characterized by a non-parallel structure of predicative parts.
Type-time plans of predicative units connected by conjunction или, can be either the same (predicates have the same form of time and type) (I), or different (II).
I) 1. Видишь, например, как стоит бутылка, или идет дождь, или едет мужик на телеге, но для чего эта бутылка, или дождь, или мужик, какой в них смысл, сказать не можешь (Chekhov); 2) Когда-то он (город – О.П.) играл значительную роль в местной истории; не раз его осаждали, как саранча, загоны татар, посылавших через стены тучи своих стрел, порой пестрые отряды поляков отчаянно лезли на стены или, наоборот, казаки бурно кидались на приступ (Korolenko); 3) Старый доктор схоластики попросил слова и, когда ему дали его, заметил, что спор ведется неправильно; ибо одно из двух: или вопрос об ископаемых животных принадлежит низшему знанию, чуждому метафизике, или же относится к истинному высшему знанию – к диалектике (Merezhkovsky).
In sentences (1-3), the predicates of both components are represented by the imperfective forms of the present (1, 3) and past (2) tense verbs. It is well known that imperfective verbs are used to express the simultaneity of events ("long series"). However, this provision needs to be clarified when it comes to dividing structures: the phenomena described in the components of these structures are carried out either alternately, at different time intervals (1, 2), or the implementation of one of them actually excludes, in the speaker's opinion, all the rest (3). In the first sentence, the parallel structure of predicates (или идет, или едет) contributes to the creation of a general verbal picture of possible events, which are based on procedural features with an internal dynamic structure of the course of each of them in time. Predicates of this type, according to AV Bondarko, express the process value [1, p. 383]. In the second sentence, predicates (осаждали, лезли или кидались на приступ) represent different-temporal, alternately performed in the past, but regularly repeated actions of the same nature, also not limited by a limit. In the third sentence, imperfective verbs in the generalized present tense (или принадлежит, или относится) serve as a means for expressing scientific laws that reflect active connections and relationships. But these connections are recognized by the subject of speech as mutually exclusive: if the question belongs to the lower knowledge, then it does not belong to the higher, and vice versa.
Perfect predicates denote completed actions bounded by a limit: 1) Может, у него жена померла, или еще какое горе случилось, а я ржу (Astafiev); 2) Марианна чуть-чуть свихнулась, сдвинулась. Ей казалось, что нянька утопит ребенка в ванне, выронит в окно, нечаянно, конечно. Или ребенок сам захлебнется во сне (Tokareva).
The symmetry of the perfect type of predicates in components 1 and 2 of sentences indicates that the events characterizing the situation as a whole are perceived by the speaker as supposedly accomplished facts in the past (1), or as possible in the future, equally unpleasant and terrifying for the subject of speech (2). The verbalized processes are of a complete nature, they represent holistic actions, limited by the limit, not divided into phases. The difference lies in the timing of their implementation: in the first construction potential events that have occurred in the past are verbalized, and in the second - possible in the future. The use of perfect predicate verbs in these sentences makes it possible to describe a situation with completed, time-limited actions, which, however, represent not a "chain" of consistently realizable events, but a number of potential phenomena, any of which can be real.
The function of the grammatical categories of predicate verbs, subject to their symmetry (92.4% of the number of examples of the entire sample) in the structure of the construction, is to create equivalence of the listed phenomena, which are perceived as alternative to each other. All the above propositions, characterizing any one denotative situation, reflect the speaker's general idea of a given situation located in a certain time plane and having certain boundaries for the flow of potential actions, correlated, as a rule, both in appearance and in time.
II) Cases of "non-parallel" type or type-temporal semantics of predicates are much less common (7.6% of the number of examples of the entire sample).
The discrepancy between the type-temporal characteristics of predicates in predicative units is explained by a number of factors.
1. The reason for the "non-parallelism" of predicates in the type plan may be the absence of a perfect form in one of the verbs: Если я долго не приезжал в город, то, значит, я был болен или что-нибудь случилось со мной, и они оба сильно беспокоились (Chekhov).
2. The choice of "non-parallel" forms may be associated with the "competition" of type meanings, in which it is possible to replace one type form with another without prejudice to the meaning of the statement [1, p. 59]: Но неумышленно, когда он не делал никаких любовных прелюдий, а просто брал ее за руку, она давала ему руку, брала сама его руку, опиралась ему доверчиво на плечо, позволяла переносить себя через лужи и даже, шаля, ерошила ему волосы или, напротив, возьмет (mid. брала) гребенку, щетку, близко подойдет (mid. подходила) к нему, сделает (mid. делала) пробор и, пожалуй, напомадит (mid. помадила) голову (Goncharov). The first part of the structure (before conjunction или) conveys the measured course of events; it uses imperfect verbs with the meaning of repeated use of actions in reality. In the second part, information is introduced that is opposite to the previous one in semantic fullness (mid. ерошила волосы – возьмет гребенку, etc), which is supported by the introductory word "напротив" and a change in the view-time plan. The future simple tense of perfective verbs, presented in predicates after the separative conjunction, denotes actions related to the past tense, and indicates the brevity and completeness of episodically repeated actions. The designation of repetitive actions, atypical for the perfect form of verbs, brings them closer, makes them synonymous with the verbs of the past imperfect form.
3. The reason for the discrepancy between the type values of the predicates may be the need to convey differences in the way actions occur in the real space-time world: Он писал о Даше в Москву, ее сестре Екатерине Дмитриевне, но письма не доходили, или с ней приключилось тоже что-нибудь недоброе (A. Tolstoy). In this sentence, the predicate of the first component (писал) indicates the repeatability of the described writing process. Accordingly, it is natural to formulate the predicate of the next part, which informs about the possible fact that the addressee did not receive all letters sent to him, in the form of an imperfect verb (не доходили). The third predicate (приключилось) has the form of a perfect form, its choice is conditioned by the speaker's ideas: the supposed "unkind" is perceived by him as something one-time, already accomplished, having a limit. For comparison, an example can be given, which also lists the hypothetical reasons for the silence of the addressee, which, however, are verbalized by the addressee using verbs of the same kind: Ни на одно он ответа не получил. Или товарищ Киров не считает нужным отвечать, или письма до товарища Кирова не доходят (Rybakov).
Modal plans for separating sentences with conjunction или find their expression in the mood forms of predicate verbs. The modal meaning of reality is based on the forms of the indicative mood (hereinafter IM), the meaning of unreality is based on the forms of the subjunctive (SM), conditional mood (CM). The general meaning of unreality, presented in more specific meanings of potential modality (will, desirability, necessity) is expressed in the forms of incentive (hereinafter IM), desirable (DM) and obligatory (OM) moods.
Components of dividing structures with conjunction или are characterized by both real (r.) and irreal (ir.) modality. Within the same construction, predicates can have either the same or different modal characteristics.
Наш материал позволил выявить следующие соотношения модальных планов предикативных единиц: I) [r. / r.], II) [ir. / ir.], III) [ir. / r.], IV) [r. / ir.], which in this work, taking into account its tasks, we will consider rather quickly, since a more deep and detailed analysis is presented by us in the article "Modal designs of predicative units of dividing sentences with conjunction или" [2, p. 191-193].
I) [r. / r.]: 1) <…> ее (дудки – О.П.) переливы так нераздельно сливались с тихими вздохами степи, что порой Петрусь сам не мог отдать себе отчета, ветер ли навевает издалека смутные думы, или это он сам извлекает их из своей свирели (Korolenko); 2) Хлипнула вода – или лопнул плававший с вечера пузырек, или содрогнулась, умирая, рыба: по траве пробежала и убежала узкой полоской незнакомая рябь (Rasputin); 3) Я посидел на террасе, поджидая, что вот-вот за цветником на площадке или на одной из аллей покажется Женя или донесется ее голос из комнат (Chekhov). In the above sentences, in each of the predicative parts, there is a modal plane of reality, represented by the forms of the indicative mood of the present (1), past (2) and future (3) tense, forming a syntactic indicative.
II) model [ir. / ir.] is less common than the correlation of real ones, and finds its expression in a limited range of syntactic mood combinations.
A. [ir. IM / ir. IM]: 1) Мне надоела эта длинная церемония. – Послушайте, – сказал я, – Или застрелитесь, или повесьте пистолет на прежнее место, и пойдемте спать (Lermontov); B. [ir. CM / ir. CM]: Если б нам отдали детей! Если б она отдала их, если б у нас хватило жестокости отнять у нее или если бы они сами оставили ее ради нас… три “если”, и ни одно из них не осуществимо (Nikolaeva); C. [ir. SM / ir. SM]: 1) Соня, она (Наташа – О.П) знала, со своим строгим и цельным взглядом, или ничего бы не поняла, или ужаснулась бы ее признанию (Tolstoy); D. [ir. DM / ir. DM]: 1) Хоть бы что-нибудь новое! Хоть бы французы пришли и разорили Милан, или пономарь выудил рыбу, или дядя нашел золото…Боже мой, какая скука! (Merezhkovsky); E. [ir. OM / ir. OM]: Ситуация должна измениться к лучшему. Ты или помоги ей по дому, или своди ребенка в парк. Constructions with the obligatory mood of predicative units, the content of which "incorporates the obligation, the compulsion, the prescription of the implementation of something with the help of the forms of the incentive mood of the verbs" [3, p. 116], are extremely rare and typical only for colloquial speech.
III) The ratio of various modalities – [ir. / r.] – is observed in constructions with conjunction или, in the prepositive part of which the predicate is used in the form of the impulsive mood, and in the postpositive part - in the form of the future indicative mood: И я закричал: – Отвечай, или я убью тебя! (Andreev); Ты сходи меду возьми, или я немую пошлю (Tolstoy).
In these constructions, when considering the modality of the related parts, one cannot ignore the implicit logical link that has its own modality. A non-verbalized semantic link manifests itself during transformation: 1) Отвечай, если не ответишь, то я тебя убью;2) Сходи меду возьми, если не пойдешь, я немую пошлю – [ir. IM / r. IM / r. IM].
IV) The collision of two different-modal plans – [r. / ir.] – is observed in constructions with an interrogative second part attached by a conjunction particle или: Как меняется человек! Отяжелел подбородок, а лоб словно убавился, – или это костер играет тенями? (Andreev); Ведь они же никаких молитв христианских, чай, не знали, или вы их выучили? (Leskov).
Asymmetry of the structure of components in terms of modal characteristics of predicates [ir. / r.], [r. / ir.] is typical for an insignificant amount (3.75%) of proposals collected by us, ie. most of the constructions (96.25%) have a unidirectional modality of predicative units: either real or surreal. Moreover, the number of constructions with a parallel ratio of real modal plans in general is 85.6%, and with a ratio of unreal plans - 10.65% of the analyzed language material.
Table
|
Parallel modal plans for PE |
Non-parallel modal plans for PE |
|
|
[r. / r.] |
[ir. / ir.] |
[ir. / r.], [r. / ir.] |
|
85.6 % |
10.65 % |
3.75 % |
Due to the fact that the overwhelming number of predicates in the components of sentences with conjunction или are represented by indicative forms representing the real modality, the predominant structural feature of the named structures is the identity of modal plans of predicative units.
Taking into account the results of the study regarding the parallel (identical) / non-parallel (different) structure of the predicative units of the analyzed structures at the level of the ratios of their components, temporal and modal plans, we will clearly present what has been said in the form of the following diagram:
The diagram of the ratio of the frequency of manifestation
parallelism in the structure of constructions with conjunction или
So, the results of the study indicate that parallelism, as the uniformity of the components of the dividing sentence connected by conjunction или, is not all-encompassing: in 20% of structures there is an asymmetric arrangement of the main members, in 7.6% of structures we record cases of "non-parallel" type or temporal semantics, 3.75% of constructions are characterized by a different ratio of modal plans. However, as we can see, the dominant formal feature of the organization of sentences with conjunction или is still the symmetry of the structure, which determines the grammatical equality of the components.
The structural parallelism of predicative units serves as an additional confirmation of their close interaction and determines the semantic equality of the content of the parts: the reflected events are presented as equiprobable, potential in a certain case, which are alternatives to a real denotative situation.
1. Bondarko, A.V., Bulanin, L.L. Russian verb: A guide for students and teachers / Ed. prof. Yu.S. Maslov. - L.: Enlightenment (Leningrad department), 1967. - 192 P.
2. Pochinyaeva O.A. Modal Predicative Units Designs for Separating Clauses with conjunction ili // Science and Culture of Russia: Materials of the VI International Scientific and Practical Conference dedicated to the Day of Slavic Written Language and Culture of the Memory of Saints Equal-to-the-Apostles Cyril and Methodius (May 25-27, 2009). - V. 1. - SamSSTU, 2009. - P. 191 - 193.
3. Russian grammar. Syntax. - M.: Science, 1980.
