English vs. Ukrainian Adjectives, Numerals, Pronouns
МІНІСТЕРСТВО ОСВІТИ І НАУКИ УКРАЇНИ
Запорізький національний технічний університет
Е. О. Кущ
ТЕКСТИ (конспект) лекцій з дисципліни
Порівняльна граматика англійської та української мов
для студентів спеціальності 7.030507“Переклад”
2010
Тексти (конспект) лекцій з дисципліни “Порівняльна граматика англійської та української мов” для студентів спеціальності 7.030507 “Переклад” /Укл.: Е. О. Кущ. - Запоріжжя: ЗНТУ, 2010. – 58 с.
Укладач: Е.О. Кущ, доцент, канд.філол.наук
Рецензент: Р. В. Васько, професор, докт.філол. наук, ректор КНЛУ
Відповідальний
за випуск: Е. О. Кущ, доцент, канд.філол.наук
Затверджено
на засіданні кафедри “Теорії та практики перекладу”
Протокол № 10
від “19” травня 2010 р.
CONTENTS
1. The scope of comparative grammar ………………………………...…4
1.1.General characteristics of comparative grammar. Basic grammatical notions....................................................................….....4
2. Comparative Morphology ....................................................…………...9
2.1. The problem of the parts of speech in English and Ukrainian. Word classes.................................................................................9
2.2.Noun as a part of speech in English and Ukrainian. The category of definiteness and indefinitness in the compared languages....12
2.3. English vs. Ukrainian Adjectives, Numerals, Pronouns ……........17
2.4. Comparative Analysis of the English and Ukrainian Verb. Verbals in the compared languages.............................................24
|
|
|
2.5. English and Ukrainian Adverb. Statives......................................32
2.6. Functional Words in the compared languages.............................37
3. Comparative Syntax............................................................................…..45
3.1. General Characterics of syntax. Basic syntactic notions. Types
of Word-Groups in English and Ukrainian………………........45
3.2. The Sentence. Types of sentences in English and
Ukrainian ....................................................................................52
Literature ......................................................................................................58
1. THE SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR
1.1. General characteristics of comparative grammar.
Basic grammatical notions
Grammar is the study of the rules governing the use of a given natural language, and, as such, is a field of linguistics. The origin of the word “grammar” can be traced to the Greek “gramma”, or “letter”, as in an alphabetic letter. This is a development of the word “graphein” which means “to draw” or “write”. The plural form of the word is “grammata” which evolved at one point to mean the rudiments of writing, and eventually to mean the rudiments of learning.
Traditionally, grammar includes morphology and syntax. Morphology deals with the internal structure of the words, peculiarities of their grammatical categories and their semantics while syntax deals with the rules governing combinations of words into sentences.
Grammar may be practical and theoretical , descriptive and comparative . Practical grammar is a collection of rules which enable us to speak and write correctly. The aim of theoretical grammar is to offer explanations for these rules. A fully explicit grammar exhaustively describing the grammatical constructions of a language is called a descriptive grammar. Comparative grammar, as the notion itself reveals it, represents a linguistic subject of grammar based on the method of comparison or contrasting. Comparative grammar aims ay establishing the most general structural types of languages on the basis of their dominant morphological and syntactical features. Apart from this, comparative grammar may equally treat dominant or common features only, as well as divergent features / phenomena only, which are found both in languages of the same structural type (synthetic, analytical) as well as in languages of different structural types (synthetic and analytical).
|
|
|
All Indo-European languages fall into two types: synthetic and analytical. Synthetic languages are those of internal grammar. All changes take place within their words. Analytical languages are those of external grammar. All grammatical relations and meanings are expressed by means of auxiliaries or function words in them. English is considered to be an analytical language, Ukrainian, full of inflexion, is a synthetic one. However, we cannot speak of purely synthetic or analytical languages. For example, in Ukrainian we can observe some analytical devices (зроблю – буду робити), in English – synthetic devices (easy-easier-the easiest).
The number of different languages which may be subjected to comparative analysis is always predetermined by the aim pursued. The latter may be either theoretical or practical and involve the investigation of common or both common and divergent features/ phenomena of the compared languages. The final aims of investigations are the following:
1) to identify and classify accordingly main common and divergent features of languages under investigations;
2) to draw from these common and divergent features respectively the isomorphic regularities and the allomorphic singularities in the languages compared;
3) to explain isomorphic and allomorphic features of the languages compared;
4) to establish on this basis the universal features / phenomena, which pertain to each single language or groups of languages.
|
|
|
Comparative grammar as a branch of linguistics employs different grammatical (linguistic) terms and notions. The principal and the most occurrent of them are the following: language and speech; functions of language; language as system and structure; paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations; grammatical form; meaning and category; the notion of opposition; absolute and near universals; isomorphic and allomorphic features.
Language is a collective body of knowledge. It is a set of basic elements and rules which can go into great variety of combinations. Speech is closely connected with language. It is the result of using the language, the result of a definite act of speaking. Language is opposed to speech and accordingly language units are opposed to speech units:
 |  |
potential
 |  |
Any human language has two main functions: the communicative and the representative or thought-forming. People use language to communicate. That is why it performs the communicative function. The representative function (thought-forming) of the language is performed by means of linguistic signs. That is why we say that language is a semiotic system. There are other examples of semiotic systems but all of them are much simpplier (traffic lights, computer languages). Language is universal, natural. It is used by all men of society, while any other sign systems are artificial and depend on the sphere of usage.
Language is a complex system of linguistic units (phonemes, morphemes, words, word combinations, sentences) that exist only in their interrelation and interdependence. System is a group of things or parts working together in a regular relation. Language is a structural system. Structure means hierarchical layering of elements in constituting the whole. In the structure of language there are four main structural levels: phonological, morphological, syntactical and super syntactical. The levels are representes by the corresponding level units:
| Levels | Units | Definitions |
| Phonological | phoneme | the smallest distinctive unit |
| Morphological | morpheme | the smallest meaningful unit |
| word | the smallest naming unit | |
| Syntactical | word combination | |
| sentence | the smallest communicative unit | |
| Super syntactical | text |
|
|
|
The level units are built up in the same way. That is why the units of a lower level serve the building material fot the units of a higher level.
As members of the system linguistic units get into paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. Paradigmatic relations are associative in nature, they are observed in classes of units which can’t be used in an utterance at a time (for example, cases of the noun, tenses of the verb). Paradigmatic relations exist between the units that substitute one another. Syntagmatic relations are found between the elements of utterance. They are linear, those relations which are observed in speech. For example, in the sentence (utterance) “The spaceship was launched five days ago” the relations between the and spaceship, five and days, etc. are syntagmatic.
Each notional word is a unity of two types of meaning: lexical and grammatical. Lexical meaning is of individual character, peculiar to the certain word. Grammatical meaning is of general character. It is common for many words which have different lexical meanings. For example, the class of nouns have the grammatical meaning of thingness, the gramatical meaning of adjectives is qualitativeness, of verb – verbiability. Grammatical meaning is always expressed by a grammatical marker. A notional word may have several grammatical meanings: children’s – plurality, possessive case, мальчикам – masculine, plural, Dative case. There are some classes of words which have no lexical meaning because they have no references in the objective reality. These are functional words that possess only grammatical meaning. All functional words belong to the following groups: articles, particles, conjunctions and prepositions. The grammatical meaning can be explicit and implicit. The explicit grammatical meaning is always marked morphologically: table s – s is the explicit marker of plurality. The implicit grammatical meaning is not expressed formally. For example, the word table doesn’t possesses the implicit meaning of inanimateness, however this meaning is not expressed in the form of the word. The grammatical form is revealed through the grammatical variations of a word having the same lexical meaning (plays, play; c толы , столам). Two or more grammatical forms opposed to each other make up a grammatical category. All grammatical categories find their realization through the oppositions. Oppositions may be defined as pairs of grammatical forms opposed to each other in some way. For example, the grammatical category of number is realized through the opposition of singularity / plurality – table / tables. One member of the opposition is called marked (table s), because it has a special grammatical marker of plurality “s”. The meaning of the marked member is quite definite. Another member of the opposition is unmarked (table). The meaning of the unmarked member is less definite, therefore it can sometimes convey the meaning of the marked one ( for example, cat / cats – one / more than one, at least two or more). A two member opposition is called binary. An opposition may consist of more than two members (studies / studied / will study – tense opposition)
Absolute univerals, i.e. features or phenomena of a language level pertainig to any language of the world. Near universals, i.e. features or phenomena common in many or some languages under investigation. Isomorphic features are common features in languages which are analysed form the grammatical point of view. Isomorphic in English and Ukrainian are, for example, the categories of number, person, tense, the existence of different types of entences, etc. Allomorphic featuresare the ones observed in one language and missing in the other. For examle, the dual number of nouns in Ukrainian and the gerund in English. An exhaustive list of isomorphic and allomorphic features of a foreign language and of the native tongue can constitute a reliable basis for comparative grammatical analysis useful in the translating practices.
2. COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY
2.1. The problem of the parts of speech in English and Ukrainian. Word classes
The identification of the parts of speech in the compared languages is not always an easy matter though the main subdivision of words into notionals and functionals seems to be indisputable. The ambiguity of form and meaning of many English notional words, however, brought some grammarians to the assumption that there exist no proper grounds and justification for singling out some notional parts of speech in present-day English. C. Fries, for example, suggested a purely functional approach to the classification of English words. He singled out class 1 words (those performing the function of the subject), class 2 words (those performing the function of the predicate), class 3 words (adjectivals), i. c. attributives, and class 4 are were in Fries' classification adverbial function words or word-groups. C. Fries tried to avoid even mentioning the usual term of “parts of speech”. The term is also avoided by this grammarian in his classification of “function words”, which are allotted to 15 different groups and include also some pronouns, adverbs and verbs.
A typologically more relevant classification has been suggested for English notionals by C. T. Hockett who distinguishes in English “parts of speech” and “classes of words”. Among the notionals three pure “classes of words” (or regular parts of speech) are distinguished: “class N words”, “class V words” and “class A words” These “classes” are mainly singled out with regard to the morphological properties of these notionals which, having the structure of mere roots or stems, can “show more than one pattern of usage”, as C. T. Hockett puts it. In other words, they may follow either the noun or the verb and an adjective pattern. Hence, the grammarian singled out apart from the N, A, V classes of words some double and triple word stem classes. These are, for example, the NA class, represented by many words, such as American, human, innocent, private, sweet, which may function both as nouns and adjectives (American scien tists, an American). The NV class are words which can respectively have the meaning and perform the function of the noun and verb (a book, to book smth.). The AV class represents words which can show the adjective and the verb pattern (clean hands, to clean the room). The NAV class represents words which can follow the noun, the adjectlive and the verb pattern respectively (cf. the fat of meat, fat meat, to fat (up) fowls). Thus, “classes of words” clearly reflect the amorphous grammatical nature of many English nouns, verbs, adjectives and sometimes adverbs which in the course of their historical development have been reduced, as a rule, to regular roots or stems. As a result, their true lexico-grammatical nature, i. e. their proper lexical meaning, and consequently their formal and functional characteristics can not be discriminated when taken out of a word-group or sentence. The word “export”, for example, may be noun or verb (when indicated by stress or determined by the particle "to"). “Negro” may also be noun (a Negro) or adjective (Negro and white schools): "blue" may be noun (the blue of the sky), adjective (the blue sky), or verb (to blue smth.).
In Ukrainian, on the other hand, the lexical meaning and “formal” (morphological) characteristics of such notional words as експорт , негр , c инь , синій, синіти, синіючий , синіючи , etc. arc always explicitly displayed already at language level, i.e. when taken separately, out of context (as in dictionaries). Therefore, many notionals in English, unlike their Iexico-grammatical equivalents in Ukrainian, are variable, i. e. they may change their nature depending on the contextual environment and their functional significance which they acquire in a word-group or sentence.
The variability of some English notionals, which can often shift from one part of speech to another without any morphological changes in their form/structure is certainly the main allomorphic difference pertaining to the nature of some notional words as compared to the corresponding classes of words in Ukrainian. It becomes especially evident when dealing with the conglomerates like NV, AN, ND, NVA and the like, which are in reality no regular parts of speech but one-lexeme units able to realize different functional meanings depending on their functionally relevant place occupied in a syntaxeme.
Nevertheless, the existence of the kind of morphologically indistinct notionals in present-day English does not deprive the language of the regular system of notional parts of speech in general and those of nouns, verbs, and adjectives in particular.
There is much common ground for the comparative analysis of the functional parts of speech as well, which in English and Ukrainian have often their lexico-grammatical nature quite explicit already at language level. This is observed, for example, in case of conjunctions (and, but, or, if either - or, neither - nor, etc.), prepositions (at, in, on, under), interjections (ah, oh, alas, humph), and some particles (not, to). Most of these functionals, except for the articles, have absolute semantic and functional equivalents in Ukrainian. For example: and – i; but – але , np от e, or чи ; if— якщо / якби ; either...or, чи чи ; in - в /y, on — н a, under — ni д , ah/oh—ax/ox , etc. As a result, these and a number of other functionals in English and Ukrainian are isomorphic, in other words common.
It must be pointed out, however, that some parts of speech both among the notionals and among the semi-notionals/functionals are still disputable in the compared languages. Far from unanimously recognized as a separate part of speech by most Western and some Ukrainian and Russian linguists (A. Hryshchenko and co-authors, L.S. Barkhudarov, M.Y. Blokh) is, for example, the stative (alike, asleep}, which is considered by these grammarians to be a "predicative adjective". Still other Western grammarians are not quite sure about the numerals which they arc inclined to identify as nouns (cardinals) or as relative adjectives (ordinals).
On the ground of identical or similar semantic, morphological/formal and syntactic/functional properties pertaining to common lexico-grammatical classes of words, the number of notional parts of speech in English and Ukrainian may be consideredall in all the same - seven. Namely: noun, adjective, pronoun, numeral, verb, adverb, slative – іменник , прикметник , займенник , числівник , дієслово , прислівник , слова категорії стану .As to the functionals (semi-notional words, as they arc still sometimes called) their number in the compared languages is not identical because present-day English has the article which is missing in Ukrainian. The rest of functionals are all common: conjunctions, prepositions, modal words and modal expressions, particles, exclamations, articles (in English), сполучники, прийменники, модальні слова та вирази, частки, вигуки.
2.2 Noun as a part of speech in English and Ukrainian. The category of definiteness and indefinitness in the compared languages
The noun is the central lexical unit of language. It is the main nominative unit of speech. As any other part of speech, the noun can be chracterized by three criteria: semantic (the meaning), morphological (the form and grammatical categories) and syntactical (functions, distribution).
Semantic features of the noun. The noun possesses the grammatical meaning of “thingness”, “substantiality”. According to different principles of classification nouns fall into several subclasses:
1. According to the type of nomination they may be proper and common;
2. According to the form of existence they may be animate and inanimate. Animate nouns fall into human and non-human.
3.According to their quantitative structure nouns can be countable and uncountable.
This set of subclasses cannot be put together into one table because of the different principles of classification.
Morphological features of the noun. In accordance with the morphological structure of the stems all nouns can be classified into: simple, derived ( stem - affix, affix + stem - thingness]: compound (stem+stem -armchair ) and composite (the Hague). The noun has morphological categories of number and case. Some scholars admit the existence of the category of gender.
Syntactic features of the noun. The noun can be used un the sentence in all syntactic functions but predicate. Speakinng about noun combanibility, we can say that it can go into right-hand and left-hand connections with pratically all parts of speech. That is why practically all parts of speech but the verb can act as noun determiners. However, the most common noun determiners are considered to be articles, pronouns, numerals, adjectives and nouns themselves in the common and genitive case.
The noun is characterized in English and Ukrainian by a common lexico-grammatical nature of “substantivity” or “thing ness”. This meaning (thingness) finds its realization not only in concrete nouns (book, boy, house, tree, fish, meat, etc.) but also in abstract nouns (love, hatefulness, business, information, etc.). Hence, isomorphic are also the main paradigmatic classes of nouns, which are two: 1) common nouns and 2) proper names.
Each of these two main classes of nouns is subcategorized in English and Ukrainian into several minor groups
Common nouns:
1) concrete nouns (arrow, doll, tree; стріла, лялька, дерево);
2) abstract nouns (fear, knowledge, news; страх, знання, вість);
3) collective nouns (cattle, crew, militia; худоба, екіпаж, міліція);
4) names of materials (air, salt, snow; воздух, сіль, сніг);
5) class nouns (bird, desk, flower; птах , c тіл, квітка)
Proper nouns:
1) Names / Nicknames of people(s), nationals (Ann, Ukrainians, Yankeys; Ганна, українці, янкі);
2) Family names (Adams, Smith; Аврамчук, Лукаш);
3) Geographical names (Alaska , Chicago; Аляска, Чикаго);
4) Names of companies, newspapers, journals (Ford, The Daily Telegraph; Форд, Всесвіт).
Isomorphism is equally observed in the existence of some other gramatically relevant groups of nouns in English and Ukrainian. Among these are, first of all, life nouns (boy, girl, cat; хлопець , дівчина , к im ) ; inanimate nouns (atom, bell, door; amo м , колокол , двері ); count nouns (pen, star, tree; ручка, зірка , depe в o), and non-count nouns (air, honesty, slavery; повітря, чесність, рабство ).There is some allomorphism, however, in the realization of the meaning (and category) of number and quantity in some groups of nouns in the compared languages.
Among these are some collective nouns, which may be used in English both in singular and in plural (when the constituent members of these collective nouns are meant). Compare: My family is small — My fam ily are early risers. The crew has prepared the aircraft for the take off— The crew are all young. Hence, in plural these collective nouns become nouns of multitude, as militia, police, cattle, having always, however, a singular meaning in Ukrainian (вся родина зійшлася, поліція / міліція слідкує за порядком).
The most characteristic divergent feature of English nouns as compared with the Ukrainian ones is their usually indistinct lexico-grammatical nature at language level. As a result, determiners (usually the definite or the indefinite article or demonstrative pronouns) are used to identify these nouns: the bear, the round of talks, that round of talks. Besides, English nouns are often determined by the –’s/’ element (today ’s weather, ladies’ gloves).
The only morphological category of the noun which is almost always marked in present-day English is that of number. Like in Ukrainian, it is mostly realized synthetically, i.e. through zero and marked inflexions respectively. Eg: child - children, ox - oxen, and correspondingly baths, jubilees, bushes, watches, countries , etc. An irregularity can be observed in the position of the English inflexion -s in various compounds, eg: take-off - take-offs, sit-in - sit-ins, forget-me-not - forget-me-nots, merry-go-round - merry-go-rounds, commander-in-chief - commanders-in-chief; passer-by - passers-by.
Completely allomorphic, i.e. pertained only to the English language is the formation of plural number by way of sound interchange (ablaut) as in the following seven English nouns: foot -feel, tooth - teeth, goose - geese; man - men, woman - women; mouse – mice
A few simple life nouns have in English one and the same form for singular and plural (sheep, deer, swine, plaice). Usually, these nouns also have the zero marked plural form: carp, pike, trout, deer, salmon. Apart from the genuinely English there are some borrowed noun inflexions. These are Latin: -a — -ae: alga-algae, larva - larvae; -us — -i: stimulus - stimuli, terminus - termini; -um — -a: curriculum-curricula, erratum – errata, etc. Several Greek borrowings preserve in English their singular and plural inflexions as well: -is- —es (analysis - analyses, basis — bases, ellipsis — ellipses) and –on — a (criterion - criteria, phenomenon - phenomena), though some nouns often take regular English plural forms (memoran dums, solos, tempos, metropolises, etc.). Unlike English, Ukrainian number inflexions are partly predetermined by the declension groups to which the nouns are allotted, and partly by the gender of nouns and final consonant or vowel, which can respectively be hard, soft or mixed (sibilant).
It should be emphasized that far from all Ukrainian singularia tantum nouns have corresponding equivalents within the same semantic groups in English (and respectively in Ukrainian). Among them are the following:
1. English and Ukrainian nouns denoting parts of the world (the North, the South; північ, південь, т.п.);
2. Names of materials (gold,water; золото, вода);
3. Collective nouns (hair, peasantry; волосся, селянство)
4. Abstract notions as: courage, knowledge; відвага, знання і т.п.
No complete coincidence can be observed in the semantic classes of the pluralia tantum nouns in English and Ukrainian where common lexico-semantic classes are not completely the same either. Completely coincide only nouns belonging to the so-called summation plurals (scissors, tongs, skates; ножиці, щипці і т.п.). Besides, common are also the pluralia tantum nouns belonging to the group of geographic names (Athens , the Netherlands , the Bahamas; Афіни, Нідерланди, Багами) ; nouns denoting remnants are only partly common too (leavings, remains; недопитки,недоїдки, залишки).
Unlike the category of number, the category of case in present-day English has always been disputable. So was for some time the question of expressing case relations which has also remained for a longer time disputable. Some grammarians found in present-day English two cases (O. Jespersen, V. Yartseva, B. Rohovska), others found in English four cases (G. Curme, M. Dcutschbcin), and still other grammarians were inclined to see in English five, six and more cases (J. Nesfield, F. Sonnenschein). The Russian grammarian G. N. Vorontsova recognized no cases in English at all, since the -'s sign she treated as a postpositive particle expressing possession. R. Quirk, S. Greenbaum and co-authors speak of common and genitive cases (-'s genitive and of-genitive). As to Ukrainian nouns they may have 6 or 7 marked singular and plural oppositions in the nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental, locative and vocative case: x м apa, x м apu, хм api, x м ap у , хм apo ю , (на) x м api, x м apo; or in plural: cmenu, cmeni в , cmena м , cmenu, emena м , cmena ми , (y) cmenax, cmenu .
No identity exists in the compared languages in the expression of the category of gender either and manu languages make these distinctions different and unequal. Thus, in Ukrainian, Russian, German and other languages there are three grammatical genders — masculine, feminine, and neuter. In Italian, Spanish, French, Danish — two genders (masculine and feminine), in Estonian, Finnish, Japanese and Turkic languages no gender distinctions arc made, but in the Bantu language, as E. Sapir points out, there are about 42 genders realized with the help various inflexions.
The morphological category of gender in Ukrainian is identified either through separate inflexions of the adjunct/attribute or through the inflexion of the finite form of the verb that conjugates with a noun (каштан цвів, яблуня цвіла, жито цвіло). In present-day English no gender distinctions of the kind are possible (the actor plays, the actress plays, the child plays).
The noun in English and Ukrainian possesses the category of definiteness and indefiniteness. The category of definiteness and indefiniteness may be identified in English and Ukrainian both at language level (when the noun is out of a concrete context) and at speech level, i.e. in oral presentation or in a written microtext. The main means of making the noun definite in English is to use the definite or indefinite (zero) article or any other determining or identifying adjunct. For example: Bristol (zero article) means the town of Bristol, whereas the Bristol is the name of a hotel or a ship, etc. Similarly even with such a proper noun as Україна which, when used without the definite article, means the country of Ukraine, but when presented in inverted commas it will mean anything: готель “Україна”, концертний зал “Україна”.
The category of definiteness may be also indicated by syntactic or lexico-syntactic means. Namely, by an appositive noun or a substantivized numeral, an adjective or any other adjunct: the Tory government, King Henry V; уряд торі, король Генріх.
The category of indefinitness apart from being indicated in English by the indefinite article a/an, may also be made explicit by the indefinite pronouns any, some, etc., and by the numeral one as well as by the indefinite article plus an adjectival, participial or any other adjunct (There is some boywants to see you; Was there a Mr Palgrave? Там ніякого містера Палгрейва не було ? ). The expression of indefniteness in Ukrainian is likewise realized with the help of the indefinite pronouns якийсь (якась, якесь), through the indefinite numeral один (одна, одне).
Unlike English where indefiniteness is expressed via corresponding markers, in Ukrainian it may sometimes be expressed also through grammatical shifting of the indefinite noun into the final position of the sentence. To express indefiniteness, the noun will be shifted to the final position.
English vs. Ukrainian Adjectives, Numerals, Pronouns
The adjective as a part of speech is characterized in English and Ukrainian by its common lexico-grammatical nature and common functions in the sentence. It expresses the quality of things or substances (a nice flower, urgent measures) and can serve as a predicative complement after the copula-verb (the child was small, дитя було маленьке), etc. Adjectives split into some isomorphic and allomorphic classes presented in the table below.
Table 1
Дата добавления: 2022-11-11; просмотров: 33; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!