Complexed A complex proposal is called, parts of which are interconnected by writing alliances.
Communication according to the composition method gives parts of a complex sentence known syntactic independence, however, this independence is relative.
Parts of the proposal that are part of the complex, may be the same type (twisted, single-part) or different types (one part of a complex offer is a two-part proposal, the other is one-delivery). For example: Skeid foam, and splashes of water flew through the air (M. G.); It was better for me to throw a horse at the edge and hide on foot, but sorry it was to part with him (L.); Samovar would i put you, yes I have no tea (T.).
Complex proposals may be polynomials, i.e. Considerate several parts, for example: Topols were swore Gulko, and because of them the windows blew up, and the castle threw on all the sullen views (Cor.).
In complex proposals, the relationship is most often expressed.connecting, interpretation and dividing (cf. functions of writing unions and their classification). In addition, complex proposals may express relationships comparable, connecting, explanatory with different additional shades of values.
Connecting relationships. In the complex proposals expressing connecting relations, the means of communication of the united whole are union and yes nor (repeated), also, too (the last two with an attachment of the value).
and Most often express timese. relations. For the expression of these relations, verbal forms (temporary and species) are served, the order of parts in the composition of complex, intonation, an alliance, additional lexical means.
In some cases expressed simultaneity Two or more actions, phenomena, events. The value of simultaneity is usually transmitted by matching time forms of verbs-beyond (more often imperfect species, less frequently) in parts included in the complex; Sometimes the verb forms in these cases do not coincide. For example: And here in the foggy embroiderypatches birds, and eastozoloved (L.).
The value of simultaneity is emphasized by the presence of a complex proposal of a common secondary member (most often), for example: Around the sand Ware without any order hoops and sticking out empty barrels (Grieg.).
Another type of temporary relationship in a complex sentence - sequence actions or states expressed by the order of parts and species-temporal verb shapes in the parts of the proposal. For example: Latest reflections of evening dawnwent out completely and dark nightgo down to the ground (ARS.).
Analysis of the time sequence can be attached to the value of the value. corollary, eg: ... At the departure of the bridge, horses in the rotary wagon were jammed, and the whole crowd had to wait (L. T.).
Special intonation is inherent in complex proposals, which express a quick change of events or an unexpected result (the first part in them may be a nominative offer). For example: One jump - and lion is already on the back of the buffalo (KUPER.); A moment - and everything again drown in the darkness (Cor.).
Complex proposals with the union and may express causal investigative Relationships that are clearly detected in cases where in the second part of the complex sentence for the Union and follow the adverb because therefore, because et al. With a touch of joining. For example: The judge lips were under the very nose,and because his nose could sniff the upper lush how much the soul was (U.).
Soyuz and can also express relationships close to promotional, eg: Everyone knew herand Nobody noticed (P.).
Connecting Union yes used in complex proposals expressing timese. relations. At the same time, the shade of the connecting relationship is created, and by the side of the stylistic - the shade of spoken speech. For example: Cuckoo a cuckoo in the distanceyes How the insane dank screamed (N.).
Repeating Soyuz no no gives a complex proposal value negative listing and mutually exclusive, eg: N. She will not touch anyone,n. nobody touches her (S.-S.).
Unions also and also give the second part of the complex sentence attachment Tint value, for example: A strange old man spoke very long, the sound of his voicealso I amazed me (T.).
Compact relationship. Complex proposals with interpretation unions ( a, but yes, however, but et al.) express relationships opposition or composition, sometimes with different additional shades (inconsistencies, restrictions, concessions, etc.). This value of this type of complex proposals affects them: the order of words in the second part is due to the nature of its opposition of the first part.
It is widely used in complex suggestions with the specified values \u200b\u200bof the Union but, eg: Still lands saddeal viewbut breathing air breathing (Tyutch); Hours - light,but Unacceptable - Darkness (Ambassador).
The value of opposition, limitations, inconsistencies is expressed by the Union but, eg: Dubrovsky held an open book in his hand,but his eyes were closed (P.); Sun villagebut in the forest is still light (T.).
Close in their meaning to the union but Soyuz however (however,, eg: Shootout calmed downbut kernels and bombs continue to fly (S.-S.).
Soyuz yes gives the statement of a shade of colloquial speech, also occurs in folklore works, for example: I woke up,yes Laziness defeated (T.); Good porridge,yes Mala Bowl (Studies.).
Soyuz butIn addition to the overall oppression value, contains an additional shade of compensation, for example: It is visible on the sides of your shoulder whip not one strip,but On the courtyards of the innings, you attempted the oats (N.).
Unions and then, not that, and notCharacteristic to colloquial speech are used in contrasting in complex proposals in which the second part indicates the possible consequences of non-compliance with what is said in the first part. For example: ... it will be for you by Kalach, yes, look like, do not talk,and not that Generation (P.); Soberand that I will shoot you ... as a partpath (C.).
Soyuz sameExpressing opposition in a complex proposal, has the added value of the amplifying particle and allocates the first word in the sense relation in the second part, after which it is usually placed. For example: Birchs blossomed, oakssame Stood nude (C.).
Dividing relationship. Complex proposals with dividing unions ( or, or, whether ... whether, then ... then and others) indicate the alternation of events, consistently shift, incompatibility, etc.
Soyuz or (il)expressing mutually exclusion relationships may be solitary or repeated, for example: Only occasionally the deer is muttony through the desert runsor Horse Tabun playful silence gave outrage (L.); Or I do not understand,or You do not want to understand me (C.).
The same dividing relations are expressed by the Union or, eg: Or weave,or spin,or Songs sing (Studies.).
Double unions lee ... Lee, Lee ... or attach to the statement of the list of listings, for example: badlie You had Plushin,or, just, in your hunt, walk through the forests yes, do the passage? (T.).
Repeating Soyuz then ... that Indicates an alternation of actions or phenomena, to consistently shift them, for example: That fell as if fog,that Suddenly, scyed big rain (L. T.).
Unions either ... either, not that ... not that contribute to the statement of the hint of estimation, for example: Not that It was an early morning,not that Already came evening (Fad.).
Some writing alliances are used in a complex sentence for expressions of the connecting relationshipIn which the content of the second part of the complex supply is an additional message or an additional note associated with the content of the first part.
The connection value with the definition shade expresses the Union and in combination with index pronoun this is At the beginning of the second part of a complex proposal, for example: Both too lively and naturally listened and saidand this is not like Anna Pavlovna (L. T.).
Connecting value, as mentioned above, have unions also and also.
Attractive value can be expressed using the Union but, eg: You miss you don't find yourselfbut boredom and idle caution (C.).
Soyuz yes I. Expresses an attachment with a shade of adding, for example: I looked very cleverly and straight,yes I. in his voice he sounded power (L.).
Ministry of Higher and Secondary Special Education of the Republic of Uzbekistan
Uzbek State University
World languages
Department of Russian Language and Literature
Minbaev Shahrian Ahliir Coal
Structural and semantic types of complex proposals in Russian
(On the material of poetry I. A. Brodsky)
Graduation qualifying work
for a bachelor's degree in education:
511 13 00 - native language and literature (and literature in foreign language groups)
Russian Zabedroy ______ prep.
and literature __________ d. F.N., "_____" __________ 2017
"_____" __________ 2017
Tashkent - 2017.
Introduction ...................................................................................... 3-9
Chapter I. History of studying a complex proposal in linguistic science ............................................................ .10-23
The concept of a complex sentence as a unit.10-13 A complex offer .................................................... ... 13-14 Classification of SSP in modern linguistic science ....14-18
1.3.1. SSP with connecting unions ........................... ... 14-15
1.3.2. SSP with dividing unions .............................. 15-16
1.3.3. SSP with opponent unions ........................... ... 16-17
1.3.4. SSP with explanatory connecting unions ...... 17-18
1.4. Complex proposals of homogeneous and inhomogeneous
composition ................................................................................... ... 18-23
Conclusions on chapter I ................................................................................... 24-25
Chapter II. Structural and semantic types of complex proposals in poetry .........................................26-46
2.1. SSP homogeneous composition (with general connecting and
common separation value) .................................... 26-37
2.2. SSP inhomogeneous composition (with common confirction
meaning) ..................................................................... 37-46
Conclusions on chapter II .................................................................. ..47-48
Conclusion ......................................................................................... ... 49-52
List of used literature ........................................................... ..53-56
Application. "Study of complex proposals (on the material
poetry I. Brodsky) in the lessons of the Russian language "............ .57-66
Introduction
With the acquisition of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the state sovereignty of one of the main tasks of a nationwide scale was the formation of a new generation of personnel "with a high general and professional culture, creative and social activity, the ability to independently focus on social and political life, capable of putting and solving the task of perspective" 1, so As "... Only the country, that nation can achieve a great future, prosperity and well-being, which will be able to prepare knowledgeable, professionally competent and energetic personalities, real patriots of their country, enrich them with a huge spiritual heritage of the Great National Culture, bring to the treasures of world science and culture "2.
"Scientists of the republic are fundamental and applied research in many directions of modern science. The republic has created world-class scientific schools and research has been successfully conducted in many directions.
The development of its own intellectual, scientific and technical capacity, as the factors of the sustainable progress of our country, we directly associate with the further expansion of scientific, technical and cultural relations with the world with research centers, with joint research on many relevant issues. "3
Graduation qualifying work is devoted to the study of the problem of the characteristics of the types of complex proposals in the structural and semantic aspect on the material of poetry.
Brodsky is heterogeneous in its style and genre properties. Each variety of its species corresponds to a special worldship of the lyrical hero, its poetic language. The specific type of such a narrative is due to the imaginary psychological task of the author. Of particular importance, the author attached to the lexico-syntactic system of verse. Pretchedly approached each word used to them. Among the variety of all language funds used by the author in their poems, the mansion is worth using syntactic structures. They transmit all the diversity of phenomena, events, feelings, thoughts, experiences of lyrical heroes.
The syntactic structures in works illuminated by a generalizing thought are certain information about the nature of the native land, love, poetry, the place of the poet in the world.
In our final qualifying work, we made an emphasis on the study of complex proposals for homogeneous and inhomogeneous composition.
The relevance of this topic is that the current state of linguistics can no longer be closed in the field of studying isolated language units, it requires their research in the real field of functioning, in particular in one or another text.
The scientific novelty of the work is determined by the study and frequency of the use of types of complex proposals in poetic works.
The object of this work is the complex proposals in poetry.
The subject of research is the structural and semantic types of complex proposals in poetic works.
The purpose of this work is to identify and analyze the structural and semantic types of complex proposals used in poetic texts and the use of this material in practice (in the lesson in the Russian language).
In accordance with the goal, the following tasks were identified:
Make the selection of the required material for studying and analyzing; Classify syntax structures by type; Consider all types of SSP in the context of poems; To identify the features of the lexico-syntactic system of verse. Create a plan-abstract lesson on the topic "Difficult offer".
The following research methods are used in the paper:
The Linguistic Description method is used to analyze and describe the linguistic properties of the SSP; The semantic method is used to analyze and determine the semantic characteristics of the SSP in poetry; A comparative method is used to identify and analyze the universal and specific characteristics of the use of SSP varieties in poetry; as well as a systematization method.
The material of the study was the language illustrations collected by the solid sampling method, from the poems of Joseph Brodsky.
The theoretical base for this study was the classifications proposed and ,. So, demarcates the SSP, depending on the nature of the relationship between parts and allocates: SSP with connecting relations; SSP with interpreting relationships; SSP with dividing relationships; SSP with gradation relationships; SSP with connecting relations.
it gives the classification of the SSP, highlighting the openness / closure of the SSP structure as a lead: open structure, connective SSP (SSP with simultaneity and follow-up relations) and separation SSPs (SSP with mutually exclusion and alternation relations). Closed structure: SSP, allowing the second allied element (SSP without a second union element (SSP with the Union and SSP with unions A, but also synonymous) and SSP with the second allied element (SSP of the consequence, withdrawal; SSP SPE) -Ob; SSP restrictive; SSP identification-connecting; SSP connecting and additional)) and SSP non-second union element (SSP gradation (SSP actually graduation and SSP amplifier) \u200b\u200band SSP explanatory) .4
In our final qualifying work, we are guided by the structural and semantic classification of the proposed and. In the work of these researchers, uniformity / inhomogeneity of their composition acts as a decisive sign of the distinction of the SSP. It highlights:
SSP with a common connecting value, which, in turn, are divided into connecting and enumerable, connecting - identification, connecting and distribution, connecting - efficient, conditionally investigative, proposals of the connecting inconsistency, coupling - gradation offices; - SSP with a common separation value, divided into proposals of mutual computiation, alternation and alternative motivation; - SSP with a common prompt value that are divided into comparative, residual-restrictive, adequate and prompt and compactive proposals; - SSP with explanatory and connecting relations.
This structural-semantic classification allows us to take into account the structure of both parts, syntactic means of communication and semantic values \u200b\u200bof the pressing parts. She is currently leading. five
The methodological base of the study was fundamental work in the field of general and Russian (V. von Humboldt, F. de Sosurur, E. Sepir, etc.), legislative documents, decrees of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan and the government decree on the development of science and education.
Theoretical significance is that this linguistic material can be used in the study of complex proposals.
The practical significance of the study is that this linguistic material refers to the number of software. Results and materials research can be used in the educational process of general education schools, lyceums, colleges in the Russian language classes.
Protection issues:
In the poetic texts I. Brodsky there are complex offers of an open and closed structure, that is, a homogeneous and inhomogeneous composition; SSP of a homogeneous composition with a common connecting value in poetry have an additional value of simultaneity and following. The value of simultaneity is always expressed by the verbs-fag, and the value of the relative to the semantic filling of predicative parts, the connecting unions in which serve as a link for predicative parts; Preferred to use the SSP with the value of simultaneity, and the SSP with the value of the following is much smaller, and the author preferred the author to express the union and, and the Union yes was used only once in the poetic material analyzed by us; The designs of a homogeneous composition, that is, an open structure, with additional values \u200b\u200bof mutually exclusion and alternation (in the SSP with a common separation value), are extremely rarely used; The SSP of the inhomogeneous composition with a common prompt value in poetry has an additional value of comparison, limitations and concessions. The configuration value is always pronounced with the help of unions, as well as semantic filling of predicative parts; Preferred to use opposition's opposition's interpretation, and the SSP with the meaning of restriction and concession is much smaller, moreover, the author expressed the author to the Union, but; Designs with an explanatory value in the SSP of the heterogeneous composition are not characteristic of the syntax of the poet, in contrast to the SSP with gradual relations.
The structure and volume of final qualifying work: consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion, a list of used literature and applications (methodological development of the lesson). The list of references includes 46 items and 4 Internet sources used in the process of working on the theme of the final qualifying work, the total amount of which is 66 pages.
Parts of the complex sentence are located in various semantic relationships. Thus, under the connecting unions, the values \u200b\u200bof simultaneity of action, phenomena, events are expressed: the dream did not go, and fragments flashed some distant-distant memories (Mark.); And the sequence: the boats would crept the bottoms in the sand, they treated the oars, and from somewhere already from the fog came from a broken voice (Mark.).
With the oppositional unions, the values \u200b\u200bof the mapping are expressed: Ivan offered to go back to his homeland. Fortunately, there were huts, and the fields and gardens did not have time to also infant Byrian and thistle (Mark.); opposition: no one was waiting for, and she was all waiting (Cossack.); Or inconsistencies: the sun village, but in the forest is still light (T.)
In complex proposals with dividing unions, it is indicated for the alternation of actions, phenomena, events or their incompatibility: he was going to enter the zoological garden to study at the tamer of Lviv, he was drawn to the firefighter (Caver.).
The main values \u200b\u200b(connecting, interconnect and separation) can be complicated by additional shades. For example, a combination union is but - with a gradual tint of meaning: she [Naida] was a little scary, but a stronger feeling - a living interest in people, once lived here, pushed her ahead and forth! (Mark.); The interconnected union - with an amplifying value of the value: from our battery only salty will go on the barge, we are with a terrain part (C.).
Connecting union and with a causal tint of importance: then it became quiet, and people went further (Cossack.).
The oppositional union is concluded with an extra touch of compensation: autumn came out. The days became shorter, but the night is longer and cooler (Mark.).
In addition, in some cases, some unions can be used with different values, for example, the connecting union and in the meaning of the opposing: it disappeared into the dark door, and instead of her the old, a bred Armenian with a red face and in green harshs (C.) .
Exercise 623. Read expressive text. Determine the semantic relationships of parts of complex suggestions with the union and and rewrite the proposals in the following order:
a) sentences with the expression of simultaneity of action; b) proposals with the expression of a sequence of actions; c) sentences with the value of causal; d) proposals with the meaning of opposition (in which case the union is possible and the Union A).
1. Soon the boiler Zabulkal, the burdens, and the aroma of the resin (Mark.) Smashed all over the shore. 2. The work has broken from him, and he went on to everyone (Mark.). 3. Aleshka sketched a fur coat on his shoulders, she put Erameich's head, and he stepped him down his hat to the most ears (Mark.). 4. Leaving, he illuminated a lantern piece of the forest, and Herkin, raised, managed to choose the path among the trees, where the Germans seem to be less (Cossack.). 5. Division, coming, deepened in the endless forests, and they were absorbed by her (Cossack.). 6. Indeed, the tool opened fire, and Herbin reported on the phone Gurevich (Cossack.). 7. The whole group, silently hidden in the impenetrable pattern, disappeared, disappeared, and the traces of her closed rain (Cossack.). 8. Slowly occurred dawn, and the movement in a hat stopped (Cossack.). 9. In the morning it was raining, and Herkin decided to give reconnaissance reconnaissance (Cossack.). 10. They knew about the upcoming task of Herkina, and he did not read some apolism in their eyes without annoyance (Kazak.). I. War became for them by life, and this platoon family (Cossack.). 12. Oaks, covered with young foliage, buzzed under the gusts of the wind, and thousands of streams ran under their feet, similar to the packs of mice (Cossack.). 13. Newspapers were born nearby, almost under your hands, and from this they were especially expensive and significant (S. bar.). 14. A hot cloud, like from the steam tube, Shibano up, and the steam enveloped the ship (B. Paul.).
Exercise 624. Read expressively text. Determine the semantic relationships of parts of complex proposals with the Union A (opposition, inconsistency). Rewrite, in brackets after each sentence, mark these semantic relationships.
Sample. Mamochkin did not know her, and he knew all women here will inquire (Cossack.) (Inconsistency).
- It was in the summer, and now the Earth lay under the snow, composed by frost, and the sky was shimmer than the highlights of the star tracks (Mark.).
- Porfiry Ignatievich swallowed in the sand, crushed them, and I still did not come off (Mark.). 3. While in the summer I swim in taiga rivers - nothing, tolerant, and in winter, even a wolf howl (Mark.). 4. But a day passed and another day, and Porfiry Ignatievich was not returned (Mark.). 5. He said goodbye to her and went towards his hollow, and the girl remained standing under the tree (Cossack.). 6. All take a "language", and everything does not come across (Cossack.). 7. Brazhnikov was keenly silent, and Mamochkin, having learned about this conversation, spread his hands (Cossack.). 8. The sky rushed and flashed, and the lighter was all hiped and sparkled (S. bar.).
Sample. The light of the lantern was aimed at almost the very face of herbian, but the slespheld did not notice anything (the Cossack.) - Although the light of the lantern was directed almost in the very face of herbian, the Suspendent German noticed.
1. Through the MGLU everything is visible, but it is difficult to disassemble the color and outlines of objects (C.). 2. The winter was not inferior, but one warm day rearranged, finally, and flowed the streams, drank birds (Ch.). 3. Aleshka said it's not chance, quietly, herself under his breath, but he was still heard not only those who were sitting at the table, but also on the back of the wage (Mark.). 4. The exams of these recently, it has endured, but she did not have time to think about school trials (N. ANT.). 5. She listened to him carefully, but thought about her (Mark.). 6. Probably, the supian should have abandoned the invitation, but she was wondering and well with this man (Mark.). 7. Maddy tried to impart carelessness, but her heart beat anxiously (Mark.). 8. True, the troops were well disguised, but anxiety caused the most reinforced exploration by Russians of these places (Cossack.).
- I decided to wait for the train and trains, but the train was still not shown (Cossack.). 10. He could admire the exaggerated by the Mamochka exaggerated by the exaggeration, but only this closed, young and slightly incomprehensible lieutenant (Cossack) was a model for him. 11. Marchenko began to return at night, but Herbin, struggling with a severe half, was waiting for him in a trench (Cossack.).
Sample. After tea, the grandfather went to bed, and I got out of the house and sat on the porchko (Ch.). Union A is used here in comparative meaning; Possible replacement: "After tea, the grandfather went to bed, I went out of the house and sat on the porch."
1. Do I have an arrow pierced, Il will fly by (P.).
- He must leave, or I died (T.). 3. The sun bit into my head, and in the chest, and in the back, but I did not notice this (C.). 4. The station was no longer blocked by the West, the field was open, but the sun was already the village, and the smoke black clubs were stable along the green velvet oozima (Ch.).
- ... strangely rolled the wires on the pillars, and the signs were hung (A.N.T.). 6. Several people entered the barn, no one was notes (Cossack.). 7. It was necessary to say something, yes no words (hump.).
- The sun was sitting behind the birch, and the birch rose to the clouds whites, the spring, taking the shape of a cummy (arrived.). 9. The steamer was the right bank, and the left, rocky, shouted on top of the rare naked fools, was visible with the striking clarity (B. Paul.). 10. He shouted several times, but whether the voice of the sirens drowned him, or the cabin was empty, no one responded (B. Paul.). I. People were published indistinguishable, but cars could be considered (B. Paul.). 12. People in our country are the most important, most importantly, and in his green town the oven smoke, in the seams of tents blowing (B. Paul.).
Sample. He sees the eye, yes tooth nemet (kr.) - sees the eye, yes (but) tooth nemet. Spoken color has a union yes.
- It will be for you by Kalach, but see, do not hang, and not that healing (P.). 2. Ile the plague I will pick me up, il frost oshetenit (P.).
- I even wanted to make me a college astronor, yes, I think why (G.). 4. Good porridge, but Mala Bowl (root.). 5. The rumper on the goats slept, a hungry wolf in the forest wilderness piercingly moaning, and the wind beat and roared, playing on the river, and foreman sang somewhere in a strange language (N.). 6. The bones of thinned, yes, they say, the soul is the good man is nonploven (Mark.). 7. Stars were poured, yes needles ranging (pl.). 8. Tanya sat behind the wheel, Whether the battery was weak noto, or Tanya was worried, "the car did not start at anywhere (Cossack.).
1. The concept of SSP. Classification of SSP on a potential quantitative composition: complex offers of an open and closed structure (V.A. Beloshapkova).
2. Traditional SSP classification in accordance with semantic groups of unions.
2.1. SSP with connecting unions of an open and closed structure.
2.2. SNP with separation unions.
2.3. SPP with interpretation unions.
2.4. SPP with connecting unions.
2.5. NGN with explanatory unions.
2.6. Graduation SSP.
3. Ploban signs in the SSP.
Complex offer(SSP) is a complex proposal, parts of which are associated with writing alliances and, as a rule, equal to grammatically and in meaning. Writing alliances are not included in any of them, are not members of the sentence.
The classification of complex proposals in Russian linguistics has not changed significantly. Starting with grammar N.I. GREECH All descriptions of the SSP were built according to one principle: by the nature of the semantic relationship between components and in accordance with semantic groups of unions, connective, separation and combat proposals were allocated. It changed, only a description of semantic groups within these classes became more detailed.
In addition, two more two-year-old grades in the 50s of the 20th century were added to the traditionally allocated three classes: explanatory sentences, in which parts are related to explanations or clarifications (specific expressions of these relations are unions that is, namely And they functionally close to them other allied means), and the connecting proposals in which the second part contains an "additional message" about the content of the first part.
The most consistent and consistent classification of SSP, based on structural and semantic signs, gave Vera Arsenyevna Beloshapkova. The main structural feature of the SSP, it considers potential quantitative composition.
All SSPs are divided by two types: open and closed structure.
Parts of complex offers open The structures are an unclosed series, they are situated at the same name. Communication means are self-connecting and separation unions that can be repeated. Such proposals may have an unlimited number of parts and they can always be continued. For example: yes Somewhere shouted a night bird ...Let's try to continue this offer. Pinkly splashing water yes somewhere shouted the night bird, yes In the bushes she moved something white(Korolenko). In the SSP of the open structure there may be more than two predicative units (PE): That Long bitter her neck hooked off suddenly that From the ears, malicious earrings will cut by force; that In fragile snow, a wet shoe will get bogged down with a sweet leg; that She will relieve a handkerchief ... (P.).
In suggestions closed The structures of the part are a closed row, these are always two parts, structurally and semantically interdependent, related. The second part of them closes a number and does not imply the presence of the third. For example: The need relates to people but Wealth share them; He wanted to say something to him but fat man already disappeared (). Means of communication - non-refining unions: but, but, however, and; not only butand etc.
For alliances and in value, complexity is all of the six groups.
Complex proposals with connecting unions.
List of connecting unions (single and repeated): and, yes, too, also as well; As ... so, yes ... yes, and ... and.
Certain offers S. connectingunions may have an open and closed structure. They are called self-connecting and improper-connecting SSPs (on other terminology: homogeneous composition and inhomogeneous composition).
2.1.1. SSP Open Structure (self-connecting; homogeneous composition)
Such SSPs reflect different semantic relationships between ne. Unions and (and ... and), nor ... nor, yes (yes ... yes).
In such SSP, predicative parts express the connecting relationship; They are reported about:
but) simultaneous events and phenomena: N. [kalina not growing between them] n. [grass not zelenet] (I. Turgenev); AND [thought wind Fast Bournam] and [Snopami sparks raced on fogany] ... (A. Block). [Only ivivg. screaming], yes[cuckoo in vain count someone's universal years](M. Sholokhov). As a rule, in this case the relationship between parts of the SSP auto-semantic, i.e. They can act as independent simple sentences: (see the first sentence) Kalina does not grow between them. The grass does not green.
b) about them following each other, sequences: [Upalidwe-Three Large drops rain], and [suddenly lightning flashed] (I. Goncharov [A door Through the street in a brightly lit store slapped], and [out of it appeared togenerate] (M. Bulgakov). This value can be specified by the words then, then, following.
Connecting SSP of the open structure (homogeneous composition) can consist of two, three and more.
There may be a general secondary member of the proposal in such a SSP, or a common pressing part (in this case, the comma between parts of the SSP is not placed):
In the distance Dark and strict groves (I. Bunin): Union and uninvited monastery Darkand twisted Groves are strict.Determinant (General Member of SSP) in the distanceit clearly shows that uniform facts are listed.
(When the sun rose), [dew dried]and [Grass grilled].Subordinate clause When the sun rose Refers immediately to both neither connected relationships, so before the union and the comma is not put.
The simultaneity and sequence of listed facts is often emphasized by compliance of the species-time forms of the faranged in different pro (as a rule, the faugibles are expressed by the verbs of one species): At the same moment [above Sopnia soared Immediately dozens of rockets] and [mad patter foured machine guns] (Gray). In both parts of the SSP, the verbs-faded perfect species. Common sentence sentence (time circumstance) at the same momenthe emphasizes the relationship of simultaneity and prevents the decimal setting between ne.
2.1.2. SSP closed structure (incomprehensive-connecting; inhomogeneous composition) ..
Predicative parts are connected here by non-repeating unions and, yes, also, also, which are accompanied by specifies with specifiers of values. They consist only from two ne.Relationship between parts of SSP syseantomantic, i.e. One sentence within the meaning is associated with another, especially if there are words-specizers.
Stand out six types Incoming-connecting SSP.
1. Proposals with meaning consequences - withdrawal, conditions, consequences, result, rapid change of events. These specimen words are often used in them therefore, therefore, because therefore, it means(Spacers - words and phrases that are connected to the union and clarify its value). The second part reports the result, a consequence, withdrawing from the content of the first part: We are starving, and[so] Mother finally decided to send me and sister to the village(V. Cavery). He is now not the fiance you, you are outsiders, and thereforeyou can not live in the same house (A. Ostrovsky). Summate Create Relevant Conditions and You Delete Life Plants(Conditional relations: if you can create conditions, then extend ...). The artist raised the bow - and everything instantly smalklo.
2. SSP S. value value:the second part has the character of adding to what is said in the first part. In the second part, words concreters are often used - anaphoric pronouns and adverbs (stand in early 2 ne), pointing to the face, a sign, subject, the situation mentioned in the first part of the SSP: Now the street is completely dark, and this is It was beautiful(V. Cavery). At the beginning of 2, there may also be synonyms or repeat the same word as in 1 part of the SSP: Introduced new graphics, and this is an innovation Significantly increased productivity.
3. SSP S. connecting and promptwith Soyuz AND: parts contradict each other according to real content. Note words are possible yet, nevertheless, anyway, despite this, neverthelessetc.: a) Germans reached Moscow, and still They were driving(V. Nekrasov). b) I tried to cut her out, and nothing came out.
4. SSP S. identified value(Unions, too, also), parts of which report two similar, identical events taking place at the same time: People were greatly hungry, horses alsoneeded rest(Arsenyev). A strange old man spoke very long, the sounds of his voice also I amazed me(Turgenev).
5. NGN with connecting additional value (unions Yes, and):the second part contains additional information. In the role of native speakers protrude in addition, also, moreover, moreover, and under.: Compare you with men, yes yet And the old resentment will remember(Sholokhov).
6. NGN with connecting restrictive value. The event of the second part limits the completeness of the event mentioned in the first part. Specification words justand under.: The same courtyard, all the same laughter and only you lack a little bit (L. Oshanin). On the body it was not visible damage, and only Small scratch on the temple (A.N. Tolstoy). The words onlycan perform the function of unions.
Complex proposals with separation unions.
List of dividing unions: or, or, and then, not that, and not that; or ... or, or ... either; Lee ... Lee, Lee ... Or, at least ... at least that ... what, whether ... or; And even, not ... so, if (and) not ... then; not that ... not, or even ... either; then ... then;analogs of Unions : and maybe (be), and may (be) and; Maybe (to be) ... may (be), maybe (be) ...:
These are the proposals of the open structure. The main relationship between nepo in the SSP with separation unions is the relationship of mutually exclusion and alternations:
1. Relations consistence:unions or, or, not that ... not that; either ... either: Or pan, or disappeared. Then winter, then Spring, then fall(K. Simonov). Ile Plague me pickering me, Ile Moroz Okey, Ile Il in the forehead Barrbum will shift a disabled person(A. Pushkin). I will not return to you anymore, maybe I'll stay with you(City 312).
2. In dividing SSP with meaning alternatingit is reported about the sequence of replacing each other events that are not combined in time: That Sun dimly glitters, thatcloud black hanging(Nekrasov).
Exercise 1.Give the characteristic by the complex proposals of the open structure from their structure and semantics. Specify the shades of values. For example: Either you are stupid, or you cheat me.This SSP consists of 2 ne: 1 ne You're stupid and 2 ne You're lying.Formal Communication - Repeating Separation Union or either.Between parts of the SSP relationship of mutually computiation.
1. For the night, the sea calmed down a little, the wind verse, and the fog began to dissipate.
2. Let or he leaves, or we will leave.
3. None of the insects are discovered in the grass, no bird will stick on the tree.
4. Pines diverged, and Margarita quietly drove into the air to the chalk cliff (Bulg.)
Task 2. Describe the SSP with the Union and, indicating the structural type (open or closed structure), the structural-semantic discharge (relationship between parts of the SSP) and the shades of the value (semantic varieties). For example: Shells rareand bullets whistled, / and loudly rocked the machine gun, / and the girl Masha inprovisible overcoats / fighters of all in the attack leads.This is a SSP open structure, as there are more than 2 more and you can add others. Structural and semantic discharge: NGN with self-connecting relationships. Tint value - the value of simultaneity.
1. He was taken apart from him, and he settled in the fortress (Lerm.).
2. The night was windy, rainy, and it contributed to success.
3. Silence reigned around the circle, and only the water rustled on the carpaths.
4. One jump - and the lion is already on the head of the buffalo.
5. The river is completely listed by the fin, and, therefore, it was possible to freely go from one shore to another.
6. Some fur coats were given six, and the cheapest of them, according to Grandma, cost three hundred rubles (A.P. Chekhov)
7. I have a wife, two girls, and moreover, the wife is a lady unhealthy (A.P. Chekhov)
Task number 3. Make a complete syntactic parse of SSP.
Sample parsing.
And smells of a sluggish grass, from Inea Crystal, and, distinguishable, the star shines sad (V. Tushmanova)
1. For the purpose of the statement - narrative.
2. According to emotional color - non-promotional.
3. Complex, because Consists of 2 ne: 1 ne: AND[smells of sluggish grass, from Inea Crystal]. 2 Pe. - I.[distinguishable barely star shines sad]. There are interconnected union and, therefore, this is a complex proposal (SSP). Union and connecting, therefore, in the most general form, the relationship in the SSP can be described as connecting. Parts of the SSP are an unclosed series, that is, the proposal of the open structure: can be continued by attaching other pro with the same grammatical value (translucent). Relationship auto-semantic. Situations reflected in PE think of speaking as simultaneous. The grammatical means of expressing simultaneity are the form of non-verbs. Veda verbs-faded: smells - glitters.
Scheme: And, and.
4. Analysis of each ne.
1 ne: And smells of a sluggish grass, from Inea Crystal.
grass smells
b) full.
c) Completed: Grass (what?) sloggy
from Inea Crystal, pronounced adjective with dependent words.
2 ne: and, distinguishable barely, the star shines sad.
a) Two-part offer. Subject starexpressed by the name noun in I.P. Simple verbal faithful blovetexpressed by the hidden verb. BP. Nesov.
b) full.
c) Common: Star (what?) sad - a consistent definition expressed by adjective.
d) complicated by a common separate definition distinguished hard, pronounced involved in turnover.
Suggestion suggestions
1. I don't want to think about anything, or they roam thoughts and memories, muddy and unclear, like a dream (A. Serafimovich).
2. A shock short - and the ball at the gate.
Complex proposals with interpretation unions.
Complex proposals for closed structure from propateunions: a, but yes(= but), however, but, but yes(in meaning but).
According to the characteristics of the structure and by major grammatical values, all complex proposals with oppositional unions are divided into two groups: 1) comparable and 2) interpreting proposals.
Comparative relationscharacteristic for SSP with interchangeable unions a (meanwhile),(Union-particle), where they are compared in something in something phenomena, but with all nursing they do not cancel each other, and, as if coexist: The need relates to people butwealth share them(Need relatives to people, wealth same They share them). Comrades belonged to it disliked, the comrades loved(Kuprin). Often, relations are based on antithesis (antonymy). Hence the presence in the predicative parts of the comparative proposals of typed lexical elements - compared the words of one thematic group.
The most common among such proposals are suggestions with the most widely in their meaning and stylistically neutral union. but. For example: The bottom of the tower was a stone, and the top of the wooden ... (Chekhov); He is long for forty, and her thirty ... (Chekhov).
Soyuz sameassociated with its origin with an amplifier particle same, preserves its excretory-enhancement value; The origin of this union causes his position; It is not worth between predicative parts, but after the first word of the second part, highlighting it. Such proposals are called comparable-excretory. For example: Comrades related to it disliked, soldiers same Loved truly(Kurpros); From our battery salty will go on a barge, we same with a crash part(Chekhov).
Offers S. interpreting relationships According to semantics (i.e., according to the nature of the relations between the parts of the SSP), they are based on the contradictions of the events referred to in predicative parts, and are divided into four groups.
1) counter-restrictive Offers (Unions however, but yes)In which the phenomenon of the second part limits the possibility of implementation, the effectiveness or completeness of the manifestation of the phenomenon called in the first part. This is the most clearly grammatical meaning traced in structures with forms of subjunctive or "invalid" (with a particle it was) inclinations, with auxiliary verbs want, desireand under.: Perhaps I. would eat a little snow but on Sukharevka snow was dirty(V. Cavery). It he began to pour her tea but She stopped(V. Kaverin). In other cases, restrictive attitudes are issued by lexical means: Good flower, yes Shipok.
These SSP are close to semantics offers with a connecting and restrictive value where the word onlyperforms the function of the Union: Good flower, only the sharp ships.
Unions and then not that comply with the meaning of the words otherwise, otherwise;offers with them are usually used in colloquial speech: 1) You, quiet, come, come, And that mama will be scorn again(Acr.).2) Truth say not that you will get.
2) In counter-grade SSP Constive value complicated by seigning (such a SSP can be replaced by a complex proposal, in the subordinate part of which there are unions Although, despite the fact that ): [I had my own room in my house] but [I lived in the yard in the hibarke](A.P. Chekhov ). – (Although I had my own room in my house), [I lived in the yard in Hibarke] . Note words are possible yet, nevertheless, despite this, meanwhile, with everythingand etc.: Pthaha talked to you nonsense, but anyway He is good man (N. Ostrovsky) .
3) B. propolistic-paying SSP (Unions but, but yes) Events are given an estimate: in one part positive, in the other - negative: Rust in gun arsenals, but Current sparkle(K. Simonov). Caiver is a solid high headdress of some military units.
4) B. promptivatives SSP The second part complements the first. As in the connecting and distribution proposals, the word-specizer is observed in the second part. this is: I turned back to him, but this is, it seems that strengthened his suspicion(V. Cavery).
Complex proposals with gradual relations
In gradation, closed structure is computer strengthening, increasing or vice versa, weakening The significance of the second part in relation to the phenomenon called in the first part. Usually expressed with doublewriting unions not only but; Not that, ... but (a); If not, ... .to; not so much ... how much; . not to say ... but; You can not say ... but: now around Judah in the windows not onlysparkled windows, but Already heard Slavostovia(Bulg.). Not that I am so but So, hurt after all(Const.). Not really An old man was frightened but From the voice of a clear and confident cold (Sholokhov).
Complex proposals with explanatory unions
Here the second part explains, clarifies the value of the first with the help of alliances namely, that is: Romashov is looking for Katya, i.e does the same as i(V. Cavery) . In addition to plants, there are rooms for different animals in the garden, namely: A lot of turrets with lattice tons for pigeons are built, and a huge wire cell is set for pheasans and other birds.(M. Gorky). Introductory words are possible rather, more precisely, in other words, in other wordsetc.
With the help of the Union i.eexcept the specified value that says can express the value of the amendment, reservations: We slept, that is, the sister slept, and I lay with open eyes and thought(Korolenko).
This offers closed structure.
Complete proposals with connecting unions
They join the additional thoughts, which are: a) passing remark; b) something unexpected, suddenly came to mind. Before alliances with an attachment value, the voice decreases and a pause is made: So continues, until everyone gets together,finally he himself. (Rock.) (Soyuz and in conjunction with the word finally Connecting conclusion in the time sequence.) Specotizers often appear. and so, and moreover, and therefore, after that: the water was warm, but not spoiled, and still It was a lot (Garin ).
Very often, unions with an attachment joine not part of a complex proposal, but a new offer, for example: 1) On all corners there are lights and are burning with a complete potassium.AND the windows are lit. (K.S.)(Soyuz and Joins a new offer; The connecting link allows you to highlight something very surprising and very important at the moment for the narrator, which has not seen the illuminated windows. Wed: At all corners there are lights, burn with a complete potassium, windows are lit.) 2)It's time, my child, get up! .. Yes, you, beautiful, ready? (P.) (Soyuz yes Begins a new question offer caused by something unexpected; here yes approaches the meaning to question particles is it really.)
Additional to connecting values \u200b\u200bcan express the SSP with alliances yes, and, and then, not that, not that.
In sentences with the union yes I. Expressed add-on amplifying value: It[SINSETS] no longer asked - yes I. What to ask here? (Simonov)
In suggestions with alliances and then, not that, not that the value of the warning is expressed : You must talk to my father today, and that He will worry about your departure(Pisemen). Answer me, and not that I will worry(Pushkin).
Tasks for self-analysis (lecture check)
Exercise 1.Give the characteristic by the complex proposals of the closed structure from their structure and semantics. Specify the shades of values. For example: All winter, I disassembled these diaries, and meanwhile, my life in the Polar lady walked(V. Cavery) . This SSP consists of 2 ne: 1 PE [ I disassembled all the winter these diaries] and 2 ne [ my life in the plague went ashing]. Formal Communication Tool - Privatic Union meanwhile.Between the parts of the SSP, counter-comparable relationships.
1. Sun is shining, yes fresh wind, autumn(Korolenko).
2. An hour passed, the other, and the path did not come across(ARS.)
3. These vortices have become less likely, but each subsequent was stronger than the previous(ARS.)
4. In the words of a little man, not only friendship and joy was, as herbal thought, and also buried and the cunning plan of his salvation(Svienne)
5. This time the evening was adorable, and there were quite a lot of public(Cost.) .
6. Our conversation unexpectedly interrupted, that is, we themselves finished her(Kataev).
Task 2.Determine the semantic varieties of SSP with the Union but.
2. Korchagin, besides the mother, no one caressed, but they beat a lot (N. Ostrovsky)
3. [Although, despite the fact that] The legs are tired, but I did not want to go home.
4. They danced, but it was in this dance something wooden, dead ...(Kurrun)
Task 3. Syntactic disclation
In the apartment at Pani Kozlovskaya, besides her and son, the infantry lieutenant Romualda, no one lived, but there was closely close (Paust.)
Complex proposals are such proposals whose parts are associated with writing relations and are connected with the help of writing unions. Communication in the composition method gives parts of a complex sentence known syntactic independence. Unions used in this type of sentence, the same as with homogeneous members of the sentence. "Semantic relations that are established with the help of these unions between the predicative parts of complex proposals, also mainly coincide with relationships between homogeneous members. These are connective, interconnect, dividing, connecting and explanatory relationships. However, as part of a complex proposal, they acquire some additional shades caused by a special (compared to homogeneous members) the nature of the united parts, each of which has a grammatical value of predicativeness. "
The structural unity of various complex suggestions (created by intonation and allied means) is heterogeneously. If a double union is used in the proposal not only ... But or or interdependent repeated unions neither ... neither, not that ... not, then it functions as a structural integer that cannot be divided into components of predicative units with the same solution. The link between readers in complex proposals with connecting relations transmitted by a single alliance and is less noticeable.
The structural and semantic unity of the complex proposal can also be supported by various lexical elements that participate in the differentiation of semantic relations between the reader and, at the same time, are carried out in its composition the role of the construction elements, these are placed adverbs because, therefore, the introductory words consequently, it means that The particles are still, nevertheless, because.
Structural and semantic classification of a complex proposal S. E. Kryukhkov and L. Yu Maksimova (as well as a number of other linguists) is based on the differentiation of a complex proposal in accordance with those values \u200b\u200bthat are created by semantics of individual groups of unions, as well as various ratios of viewed forms Taken (last, however, quite rare). It is customary to allocate 6 major structural and semantic groups:
1. Complex proposals with connecting relationships.
In the complex proposals that express the connecting relationship, the means of communication of the united whole are union and, yes, nor (repeated).
Single Soyuz and It can connect homogeneous statements, that is, such that in the meaning of relative independence and equilibrium. In these proposals, the relationship is reversible: it is possible to rearrange the parts (the structure of their "flexible", according to the terminology V. A. Beloshapkova):
Examples of SSP connecting type with unions and, yes, nor.
This subtype of the structural circuit is found quite often both in the early and in subsequent periods of creativity M. Tsvetaeva.
We have noticed that almost always such proposals in the context of the newspaper publication are "divided" into several independent syntactic units.
In addition, the Union and It can carry the shade of the closing value, which is also quite not typical for the poetic text:
The human body is full of riddles, and we still practically do not know anything about its hidden reserves. EXAMPLE
The next subtype of connecting relations is complex sentences with the union and serving to express causal relationships. In the second part of the proposals for this type of the union and should be adverbly because therefore, because of it. In poetic texts, these words are usually omitted, but it is easy to restore logically:
I was interested in myself, and I wanted a little one to open for the viewers of the page not the well-known history of Russia EXAMPLE
The complex proposal of this structural and semantic type most fully disclose the relationship between phenomena, events, which allows the reader to better understand the author's idea. A similar type is widespread in the publications of the most different ideological genre species. However, mainly they are resorted to materials that are analytical in nature, revealing the causes of political, social change.
Connecting relations can also be expressed using unions Yes (with a tint of time), and ... and, and (with a shade of opposing relationships), but these structural and semantic subtypes of complex proposals are quite rare. EXAMPLE
Thus, it is not necessary to talk about the diversity of the structural and semantic types of complex proposals that serve to express connecting relations. According to our observations, M. Tsvetaeva prefers simple proposals, and not the proposals of this species, widely using only one subtype: proposals with the union and serving to express causal relations.
2. Complex proposals with interpreted relationships.
Complex proposals with interpretation unions (A, but, however, but others) express the relations of opposition or comparison, sometimes with additional semantic shades (inconsistencies, restrictions, concessions). The structure of a complex supply of this type is also associated with this semantic value: the order of words in the second part is due to the nature of its opposition first. This is one of the most impressive groups of complex proposals in the classification of S. E. Kryuchkova and L. Yu. Maksimova, which includes: complex proposals connected to the Union A (with an additional indicative value), but (conformity value), however (with the added A tint of the introductory word), yes (the shade of spoken speech), only, but, and then, not the others. Of these, only two are used in modern printed media:
with the Union A:
West countries with a circle of democracy, and we have the word "Democrat" immediately turned into a cursory example
The community led by all economic affairs, and the church was engaged in a spiritual life examples
Then the girls were taken away, and Nina commander allowed to leave my assistant from me
with the Union, but:
Of course, not all materials can be published yet, but we did not hide any examples.
The commander of the English detachment told Governor John Waire about the disappearance of the village, but he did not believe him and ordered the arrangement of additional searches
The noble time was founded on other values, but she also did not teach the examples
I do not think about it yet, but I went to the Institute examples
I did not have the attitude towards her, but I was convicted for 1.5 years examples
Everything was fine, but suddenly the company commander changes and puts the eye to my nino primera
Such a "preference" seems to us with nothing justified, since the widespread use of some unions and full (or almost complete) ignoring others suggests that the semantic and syntactic capabilities of the language are not fully used by the poetess.
Interesting is, in our opinion, such a phenomenon, as a complete lack of complex proposals expressing dividing, explanatory and comparable relationships. Instead, synonymous structures are widely used, however, we decided to briefly tell about these types of complex proposals.
3. Complex proposals expressing the oppositional relationships.
Complex proposals with dividing unions (or, or, whether ... whether, then ... and others), indicating the alternation of events, consistently shift, incompatibility.
4. Comparative relations
express the inconsistency, the limit, the opposite of the predicative parts compared or with the help of opposing unions (not that, not that).
5. Explanatory relationship
it is expressed in complex proposals with the help of alliances, namely. These unions indicate the identity of the first and second part, as well as differentiate the content of the parts, signalize that the second part specifies or discloses the content of a more general first part.
6. Attachment.
Some writing unions are used in complex proposals to express connecting relations, in which the content of the second part of the complex supply is an additional message or an additional note associated with the content of the first part. The nature of the connecting relationship depends on the degree of proximity of the content of simple proposals that are part of the complex, and from the Union: the value of the connection with a certain tone expresses the Union and, with the connecting - alliances also, too, with a constitution - A, the union yes has an attachment with a shade of adding . Especially often in modern printed media there are complex suggestions with a connecting and configuration:
I live, and this is the main examples
Improved peripheral blood circulation, and as a result, the activities of all organs and life processes were activated.
The first chucks from the carp was a small thick carp, and then I immediately made a six-kilogram carp examples
Thus, in this part of our work, we stopped in detail on the classification of structural and semantic types of complex proposals in poetic texts, on the example of publications of the poems of M. Tsvetaeva. We noted that from six subspecies of the structural and semantic types of complex suggestions M. Tsvetaeva use only half, and no more than two models of proposals, which indicates that the semantic and syntactic capabilities of the language are used by the poetess not fully. In addition, we tried Determine with which the preference for one or another type, the proposal model is.
Loading...
