In this analysis, the researcher asks the question: what is that abstract pattern, that formula or that structural scheme, in accordance with which this sentence is built as a communicative predicative unit? The purpose of constructive syntax is to create a finite list of block diagrams of a sentence.
At this level of abstraction, for example, the following sentences will be of the same type:
1) Streams run.
2) This year the plant will produce new model car.
3) You better shut up!
4) These poems were written by V. Mayakovsky.
Their commonality in the constructive-syntactic aspect is explained by the fact that the abstract scheme on which they are built includes two components connected by predicative relations and expressed by the nominative case of the name (the component with the meaning of the carrier of the predicative feature) and the conjugated form of the verb (the component with the meaning of the predicative feature itself ). Thus, the block diagram that underlies all four proposals can be represented as:
In "Russian Grammar"-80, a block diagram is defined as an abstract pattern, according to which a separate minimal relatively complete sentence can be built. The word “relatively” emphasizes that the components necessary from the point of view of lexical semantics may not be included in the structural scheme, however, the predicative meaning, i.e. the main grammatical meaning of the sentence, will be expressed by it, i.e. really abstract block diagram as a carrier of predicative meaning.
If the block diagram includes one component, it is one-component scheme, if two, - two-component. The components of the scheme are denoted by alphabetic characters corresponding to the Latin names of the corresponding parts of speech or morphological forms:
Vf - conjugated form of the verb;
Vf3s - conjugated 3rd person singular verb
N - noun;
Fdj - adjective;
Pgon - pronoun;
Adv - adverb;
Advo - adverb in -o (cold, hot etc.);
Praed - predicative;
Part- participle;
Interj- interjection;
Neg - negation, negation;
Sor - a bunch;
quant - quantitative (quantitative) value.
With the symbol N, the numbers from 1 to 6 indicate case forms; with the symbol N, the number 2 with an ellipsis (N 2 ...) means "a noun in the form of one of the indirect cases with or without a preposition."
(Adv quant N2) - “A quantitative adverb in combination with the genitive case of a noun” (the number of the noun is not essential here). According to such a formula, the scheme is built, for example, the following sentences; A lot of things, Today I have a lot of things, Tomorrow our whole family will have a lot of things to do. Little time, U You are never enough time for me Enough arguing...
(Inf + Vf3s) - “Infinitive in combination with a conjugated verb in the form of 3rd person singular. numbers." The proposals are structured like this: Smoking is prohibited; Friends, smoking is prohibited in our university; It is impossible to meet; Friends never manage to meet; Will be able to meet and so on.
(N1) - "A noun in the form of the nominative case." The proposals are structured like this: Night, Memories, Silent summer night, Dark summer night on the Crimean coast and so on.
(Inf cop Inf) - "Infinitive - copula - infinitive." For example: To be friends means to trust.
the block diagram of a simple sentence is an abstract syntactic pattern, according to which a separate minimal relatively complete sentence can be built. Structural schemes are differentiated according to the sets of the following features: the formal structure of the scheme (the forms of words included in it and in schemes organized by two forms, the relationship of these forms to each other); schema semantics; paradigmatic properties of sentences constructed according to this scheme; regular implementation system; distribution rules. Sentences completed according to one or another structural scheme are combined into a certain type of simple sentence. The structural scheme of a simple sentence is organized by the forms (perhaps even one form) of significant words that are its components; in some schemes, one of the components is a negative particle - alone or in combination with a pronominal word.
Note. In specific sentences, the place of a schema component can, under certain conditions, be filled with some other form or combination of forms; there are certain types and rules of such substitutions. They are described in the chapters on individual types of simple sentences.
In addition, each block diagram has its own meaning - the semantics of the diagram. The semantics of the structural scheme of a sentence is formed by the mutual action of the following factors: 1) the grammatical meanings of the components in their relation to each other (in single-component schemes, the grammatical meaning of the scheme component); 2) lexico-semantic characteristics of words specific to the given scheme, which occupy the positions of its components in specific sentences.
You can download ready-made answers for the exam, cheat sheets and other study materials in Word format at
Use the search form
21. Block diagram of the proposal.
relevant scientific sources:
- Answers to the exam in modern Russian
| Answers for the test / exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.09 Mb
1. The meaning of the word and its compatibility. The concept of valence 2. Semantic valency and grammatical compatibility predicative unit 4. Sloform, phrase, sentence, compound
- The syntax of the Russian language. Exam Answers
| Answers for the test / exam| 2017 | Russia | docx | 3.15 MB
Syntactic units in their relation to language, speech and text. Orientation to multidimensionality in the study of syntactic units. The essence of the word form. general characteristics"Syntactic Dictionary" G.
- Modern Russian language and its history
Unknown8798 | | Answers to the state exam| 2015 | Russia | docx | 0.21 MB
- Answers to the state exam in the history of the Russian language
| Answers to the state exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.11 MB
1. Articulation characteristics of the sounds of the Russian language and features of its articulation base. 2. Supersegmental units of the Russian language and their features (syllable structure and syllable division, stress,
- Answers to the state exam in Modern Russian
| Answers for the test / exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.21 MB
I. Modern Russian Language The section on phonetics is written on the basis of the textbook by Pozharitskaya-Knyazev 1. Articulatory characteristics of the sounds of the Russian language and features of its articulatory base.
- Lectures on the Syntax of the Modern Russian Language
| Lecture | | Russia | docx | 1.31 MB
General characteristics of a complex sentence Compound sentence Compound sentence Non-union difficult sentence Ways of transmitting someone else's speech Complex forms of organization of speech List
- Answers to the test in the syntax of the Russian language
| Answers for the test / exam| 2017 | Russia | docx | 0.05 Mb
Syntax subject. Basic syntactic units. Types of syntactic connection in a phrase and a sentence The main members of a two-part sentence. Types of predicate Secondary members
The central concept of syntax, its main unit is the sentence. Offer- the minimum communicative unit, reports something and is designed for auditory or visual (in writing) perception
Predicativity- correlation of the content of the proposal with objective reality. Due to predicativity, the meaning of the sentence is interpreted as real, possible, desired, etc. A sentence structure can be defined as an abstract pattern consisting of the minimum of components necessary to create a sentence.
Sentence structure- this is its grammatical form, which can be inherent in several sentences.
The lexical content of this structural scheme is always individual, depends on the personality of the subject of speech, on the goals and objectives of communication, the characteristics of the object of communication, etc. Structural schemes of sentences are of two types: minimal and extended. Extended structural schemes include minimal and non-constitutive ones, i.e. essential for communication components. In other words, there are inclusion relations between the minimal and extended structural diagrams, namely, the minimal diagrams are included in the extended ones.
The components of the minimum structural scheme of the proposal are:
Indicators of predicativity: conjugated verbs, infinitive, linking verbs.
Definitive nominal forms with linking verbs.
Nouns vIm.p.
Current division of the offer- used in linguistics, the principle of dividing a sentence into:
the original, initially given component (what is considered known or can be easily understood), called the theme, starting point or basis;
a new component approved by the speaker (what is reported about the starting point of the utterance), called the rheme or core;
transition elements.
For example: "he (theme) turned out to be (transition) an excellent teacher (rhema)."
The actual division of the sentence comes from the expression concrete meaning in the context of this situation - as opposed to the formal division of the sentence into grammatical elements.
If the topic precedes the rheme, the word order in the sentence is called objective, otherwise - subjective, for example: "father (topic) is coming (rheme)" - if they are waiting for the father; “father (rhema) is coming (theme)” - if you heard steps.
The actual division of a sentence can be expressed by word order, intonation, and other means.
main members of the proposal. Types and forms of the predicate. Secondary members of the proposal and the principles of their classification. Syncretic members of the sentence. Determinants. Practical part.
The main members of the proposal is the subject and the predicate. They form the grammatical basis of a sentence. The main members do not depend on other words in the sentence, and the form of the remaining words in the sentence may depend on the subject or predicate. The predicate of the Russian language is represented by three types - simple verbal predicate, compound verbal and compound nominal.
When classifying secondary members of a sentence, the method of their morphological expression and the nature of the syntactic relations that develop in the phrase are taken into account.
IN Lately the doctrine of the members of the sentence is increasingly associated with the doctrine of the phrase. Attribute, object and circumstantial relationships, allocated in subordinating phrases, are the basis for highlighting and delimiting the secondary members of the sentence. Depending on the syntactic role in the sentence, the secondary members of the sentence are divided into definition, addition and circumstance.
Syncretism in the system of sentence members - this is a combination (synthesis) in one member of the sentence of differential features of different members of the sentence, their different functions.
The syncretism of the members of the sentence could not but attract the attention of researchers, since this is an objectively existing and widespread fact of language and speech.
Determinant[lat. determinans (determinan-tis) - defining] - a member of the sentence, relating to the entire composition of the sentence, distributing it as a whole and not associated with any of its individual members.
Structural scheme of a simple sentence and its regular implementations
The grammatical basis of a sentence can be a combination of a form of a word with a form of another word, or one form of a word: Morning has come. It's getting light. Night. flowers and others. The main members of the sentence in the Russian language are expressed by different, but not by any word forms. The structure of the Russian sentence can be explained by listing these word forms that form the block diagram of the sentence, i.e. abstract(abstract) sample, “by which a separate minimal relatively complete statement can be constructed”1. So, a number of proposals with different informative content Spring is coming. The birds are flying. The trees are starting to bloom. Peasants rush to sow grain built according to one abstract pattern, uniting the form Im.p. noun and conjugated verb form. They all have the same meaning - subject and action(state). Sentences are built according to a different structural scheme The night is quiet. The path is narrow. Life is Beautiful and amazing. This is a compound of forms Im.p. noun, verb copula and forms of the name (short adjective) expressing relationship between an object and its predictive feature. According to a separate structural scheme, sentences of the type Here is the lake. A warm summer night in 1952. One component expresses meaning in them existence, the existence of an object or phenomenon.
Such samples of structural schemes of a simple sentence are described by N.Yu.
To record the structural schemes of a simple sentence, symbols are used - abbreviated names of the Latin parts of speech or individual word forms: Vf (verbum finitum) - the conjugated form of the verb (indices at the symbol indicate the person and number: Vf 3 s - the form of the 3rd person singular); Inf - infinitive; N (lat. nomen) - a noun (numbers from 1 to 6 indicate cases: N 1 - a noun in the nominative case, N 2 - in the genitive, etc.); Adj (adjectivum) - adjective; Adv (adverbium) - adverb; Praed (praedicatum) - predicative; Cop (copula) - a bunch; Neg (negatio) - negation; Part (participium) - participle; Pron (pronomen) - pronoun; s (singularis) - singular; pl (pluralis) - plural and others.
At the same time, it must be taken into account that there free structural diagrams of a simple sentence - grammar patterns with live syntactic links between components and relatively independent statements , which do not reproduce the structural schemes of the sentence, do not rely on the grammatical patterns of a simple sentence.
Free block diagrams are divided into two-component and one-component . The main ones are the following:
A) two-component schemes:
N 1 – V f – The forest was exposed, the fields were empty. A lot of people came;
N 1 cop N 1/5 – Father is a pilot. The brother was a student;
N 1 (cop) Adj 1/5 – The forest is mysterious. The forest was mysterious(th). The night is quiet. The night was quiet;
N 1 Inf – Our task is to learn. Its purpose is to fly;
N 1 (cop) Adv/N 2 – By the way money. The money came in handy. House without an elevator. The house was without an elevator;
Inf V f 3 s– Smoking is prohibited. I want to leave. Tired of leaving;
Inf (cop) N 1/5 – Flying is his dream. Leaving is a problem. Leaving will be a problem. To do so is selfishness;
Inf Praed – It's impossible to leave. It's scary to think;
Inf cop Inf – To love means to suffer. To leave means to offend friends;
Inf cop Adv/N 2 – It was not good to leave. It was not easy to leave today;
Inf/Neg (Adv/N 3 Pron) – There is nowhere to go. There is no one to go to;
Hem N 2 – There is no happiness in the world. Already the old woman is gone;
Hu N 2- Not a soul around;
b) one-component schemes:
V f 3 s –It's getting light. Freezes. The pipe is blowing. The air smells like thunder. Again it blew easily;
V f3pl– They knock. There is noise in the street;
inf– Garden bloom. Keep quiet, young man! Get up! Him to take an exam;
N 1 – Night. Silence. Freezing. Here is the front entrance;
Praed– It's easy and fun for him. Peace of mind;
No. 2 (Gen. quantit.)– To the people! Laughter! Colors!
It can be seen from the examples that the division of block diagrams into two-component and one-component does not always coincide with the traditional classification of proposals into two-part and one-part. Wed: Want to leave. Should leave(Inf V t 3 s). Impossible to leave(Inf Praed) - two-component block diagrams, but one-component (impersonal) sentences.
Each structure has its own regular implementations , or modifications of the original form of the sentence. Yes, proposal Father is calm(N 1 – Adj full f.) has its own regular realizations: Father was calm(th). The father seemed calm. Father looked calm etc. These modifications are sometimes due to the non-replacement of the position of one or another component of the block diagram: - Who's come?(N 1 V f) – Father. The reciprocal remark is an incomplete regular implementation of the scheme (N 1 V f) in which the position of the predicate is not replaced.
Among the statements that do not reproduce the structural schemes of the sentence are: expressions of affirmation and negation belonging to the dialogue ( Yes. No. Yes sir. Eat! No way etc.), greetings, wishes, requests and answers to them ( Hello! Good morning! Hello! Farewell! Thank you. Sorry. Please. Best wishes etc.), expressions of will, call to action ( March! Hush! Aida! Shh! Hello! etc.), expressions of various emotions ( Ah1 Oh! Alas! Hooray! That's it! Wow!), expressions of a general question and an answer to it ( What? Well? Well? How so?) and others1.this V.A
In this regard, V.A. Beloshapkova suggests using the concepts minimum block diagrams s(predictive minimum) and extended block diagram (nominal minimum, including a variety of expanders). The minimum structural diagram, reflecting the predicative minimum of a simple sentence, is formed exclusively by the main members: The forest is exposed(N 1 V f), Morning(N 1). But the predicative (formally syntactic) minimum does not always reflect the semantic sufficiency of the sentence. Wed: They ended up here and N 1 V fin ( they found themselves).
The main expanders of the structural scheme of the sentence are of three types: 1) substantive-subjective, 2) substantive-objective, 3) adverbial.
Substantive-subjective expanders. The sentence usually has a subjective component denoting the hero of a given event or situation. Often it is represented in the minimum block diagram if it is expressed by N 1 ( The forest is noisy. Sky is blue). But there are structural schemes in which there is no N 1, and the subject component is expressed in oblique cases. Wed: To him unwell(V f 3 s Pron 3), To him be on duty tomorrow(Inf Pron 3) - dative case; He has the flu (N 1 N 2) - genitive case; His be sick(V f 3 s N 4) - accusative; With him fainting(N 1 N 5) - creative.
But there are situations (names natural phenomena) that do not have their subjects ( It's getting light. frosty), they designate an activity or feature, torn off from the carrier.
Substantive-object expanders are represented by oblique cases of nouns that are associated with predicates or other word forms by an obligatory verbal connection. For the verb expander, there is a typical form of the unprepositional accusative: Workers build a house(N 1 V f N 4). But it is not the only one for expressing an object. Wed: He is into music(N 1 V f N 5) - instrumental; Children are afraid of the dark(N 1 V f N 2); He hoped to win(N 1 V f N 4) - accusative; Brother is older than sister(N 1 Adj N 2) - genitive case.
There are two types of adverbial expanders: 1) expanders that arise on the basis of a mandatory verbal subordination: The headquarters is located covertly (N 1 V fAdv), They found themselves in the meadow (N 1 V f N 6 (Adv) – local expanders; Friends have spoken hour (N 1 V f N 4) – temporal expander; 2) expanders, which, in combination with the verb form, form a certain type of sentence: In the mouth dries. in the pipe howls. In eyes darkened(V f3s N 6 (Adv). Here the local expanders in the mouth, in the pipe, in the eyes indicate a certain type of sentence (impersonal), and individual verb forms ( dries, howls, darkened) do not give an idea of the form of the sentence.
It follows from the foregoing that the analysis of structural diagrams of a simple sentence must be carried out in a certain sequence, that is, first, select the minimum structural diagram (predicative minimum), then the extended structural diagram (nominative minimum) indicating the expanders of the structural diagram.
Any simple sentence tends to refer the message to a certain time plan. This is done with the help of syntactic forms of tense and mood. So, the forms of the present, future, past tense correlate the reported with the real time plan. These are forms of syntactic indicative. Wed: Coming dawn. will come dawn. Has come dawn. Forms of the imperative and subjunctive mood referring the message to an unreal, indefinite plane of reality: Let it come dawn. would come dawn. If only it would come dawn. If the dawn came.
At the same time, each of these forms (or modifications) of the sentence retains the main meaning of predicativity (the ability to refer the message to a specific time plan) with a difference in the particular grammatical meanings of reality (present, future, past tense) and irreality (incitement, subjunctiveness, desirability).
Hence, the paradigm of a simple sentence is a set of forms of a syntactic indicative and syntactic unreal moods of a sentence that have one common meaning of predicativity with a difference in particular grammatical meanings of reality or unreality. At the same time, the present tense form of the syntactic indicative opens the paradigm of a simple sentence: Nightingales sing. The nightingales sang. Nightingales will sing. Nightingales would sing. Let the nightingales sing. If the nightingales sang.
N.Yu.Shvedova in full force simple sentence paradigm, proposes to distinguish between five varieties of modal meaning or five syntactic moods:
1. indicative, expressing reality and having the forms of the present, past and future tenses: Snowing. Outside the window is evening. It's already late. It was snowing. It will snow.
2. Subjunctive mood, denoting potentiality, i.e. the possibility of carrying out what is reported in an indefinite time plan: It would snow. It would be evening outside the window.
3. obligatory mood, denoting the obligatory implementation of the reported, regardless of the will of the speaker: Be outside the window in the evening. He is a soldier and be a soldier.
4. Desired inclination, expressing "emotionally colored abstract aspiration to any activity": If it were snow! If it were evening outside the window!
5. motivating mood denoting will: Let it be evening outside the window.
Therefore, the complete paradigm of a simple sentence includes seven forms: three forms of the indicative and four forms of the irreal mood. For example:
1. Factory running(present). 1. The night is quiet(present).
2. The plant worked(past). 2. The night was quiet(past).
3. The plant will work(bud.). 3. The night will be quiet(bud.).
4. The plant would work(adj.). 4. Would the night be quiet(adj.).
5. work factory(obligatory). 5. Be quiet at night(obligatory).
6. If(if only) worked for- 6. If the night were silent(desired).
waters(desired).
7. Let the factory work(wake up). 7. May the night be quiet(wake up).
However, not every sentence model can have a complete paradigm. So, there are sentences that have an incomplete paradigm: six-membered: 1) Learning is interesting(present); 2) It was interesting to study(past); 3) Learning will be interesting(bud.); 4) It would be interesting to study(exiled); 5) If it were interesting to study(desired); 6) Let it be interesting to study(prompt.) - there is no obligatory mood; four-term: 1) Saving is great(present); 2) Savings was great.(past); 3) Savings would be great(bud.); 4) Savings would be great(exil.) - no duty, desired, induce. inc.; binomial: 1) Blossom gardens(present); 2) Gardens would bloom(adj.). in one form
In addition, there are proposals that do not have the form of change presented in one form: Longevity is exercise. Oh she's a snake! Hey wife!(expressively colored sentences); Be silent! Keep quiet!(infinitive with the meaning of categorical will); Here comes the winter(nominative sentences complicated by the particle here, here and); How is your health? What is love?(interrogative sentences of this type).
4. The system of types of a simple sentence
According to the purpose of the statement (communicative setting), simple sentences are divided into narrative, interrogative, motivating And optative: Quietly splashing wave. What does the future hold for us? Sleep, dear brothers. Rain, the night whispered, rain.
By objective modality stand out affirmative(I received an award) And negative offers ( I didn't get an award). Simple sentences can be characterized by subjective modality, i.e. the attitude of the speaker to the reported (confidence, uncertainty in what is being expressed, joy, grief, sadness, etc.: I must have rushed. To the delight of everyone, the holidays have come. The handwriting is definitely feminine. and so on.)
The predicative stem of a simple sentence may consist of two main members - the subject and the predicate in a two-part sentence, only one main member in a one-part sentence, or from a syntactic unit that cannot be decomposed into sentence members in an indivisible sentence: Snow ennobles world(I. Selvinsky); The children were inseparable (Yu. Nagibin); smells planed log(N. Zabolotsky); Wounded, right?? – Yes it seems like (V. Nekrasov).
Accordingly, by nature grammar basics three most generalized structural types of simple sentences are distinguished: 1) two-part; 2) one-component; 3) indivisible.
The predicative stem has the most complete and typical expression in two-part sentences, since the category of predicativity is expressed here both morphologically - by the form of the predicate, and syntactically - by the connection of the subject and the predicate, most often in the form of predicative coordination. It is believed that one grammatical center of a two-part sentence may include several homogeneous subjects or homogeneous predicates (although not everyone shares this term). For example: The city was still closed shops, hairdressers, beer bars ... (Yu. Bondarev); half delirious crossed we are Theater Square, went around The Bolshoi Theater next to the Artistic Entrance… went out to the modest entrance of the branch(Yu. Nagibin).
In simple one-part sentences, the predicative stem is represented by an intonation-shaped semantic category of predicativity. The formal expression of this category here has no special syntactic connection: It's getting light. Night. To the people!
The structural diagram of an indivisible sentence cannot be represented in terms of the members of the sentence: Yes! No! Nothing! Two-part, one-part simple sentences are opposed to indivisible ones by the presence / absence of sentence members. In the first there are main and secondary, in the second there are no members of the sentence at all.
In addition, stand out uncomplicated And complicated simple sentences on the presence / absence of separate and homogeneous members sentences, introductory and plug-in components, comparative turnovers, appeals and other units.
Thus, in the type system of a simple sentence, two-part and indivisible sentences are antipodes. Bipartite in the formal-syntactic aspect are maximally articulated. Conversely, indivisible sentences do not divide at all.
One-part sentences occupy an intermediate place between two-part and indivisible ones. They do not express predicativeness formally syntactically, since they do not have multifunctional main members of the sentence, between which a formal predicative connection can be established. The only carrier of predicativity in a one-part sentence is its main member. Thus, two-part And one-component the sentences are opposed to each other according to the structural features of the segmented predicative stems.
With regard to the completeness of the expression of predicativity, indivisible sentences constitute the periphery of the system of simple sentences. So in sentences like Oh!; My God!; Ugh! etc., the modal aspect is not established, and in the temporal aspect, what is reported in them can conditionally be correlated as a kind of reality only with the present time.
In simple segmented sentences, the main members that make up their predicative basis are at the same time supporting components with respect to composition of the subject And composition of the predicate, as well as relatively composition of the main member of a one-part proposal, within which they reveal themselves different types subordinating, coordinating and determinant connection at the level of secondary members.
By the presence / absence of secondary members, all segmented sentences are divided into common And uncommon. A non-distributed sentence embodies the grammatical minimum of a sentence, and a common one embodies its extended composition, which, in addition to the main ones, also contains secondary members. For example, suggestions Thunderstorm began And Suddenly, a hurried summer thunderstorm began with gusts of wind and a loud rustle of wet leaves. implement the same structural scheme, but the first contains only the mandatory main members of the sentence, and the second and optional secondary ones.
With various speech realizations of a simple sentence, opposition is also associated on the basis of completeness/incompleteness, due to the presence or absence of a verbal expression of the necessary or previously mentioned members of the sentence in the context. Both the main and secondary members of the sentence may not be verbally expressed. Compare two possible answers to different questions about the same extralinguistic situation: 1) What did grandfather bring?? – Present(here the syntactic positions of the main members - the subject and the predicate - are not verbally replaced);
2) Who brought the gift? – Grandfather(here, open syntactic positions of the main and secondary members of the sentence - the predicate and the object are free).
The number of predicative stems differs monopredicative(simple) sentences and polypredicative(complex of different types).
2013 Yu. Belyaev
1 See L.Tenier for details. Fundamentals of structural syntax. - M., 1988.
2 Lekant P.A. Modern Russian language. Syntax. – M., 2010. P.45.
1 Grammar of modern Russian literary language. In 2 vols. -M.: Nauka, 1970. - Vol.2. P.92.
1 Grammar of the modern Russian literary language: in 2 volumes. - M.: Nauka, 1970. - V.2. - S. 574.
1 Grammar of the modern Russian literary language. – M.: Nauka, 1970. – P.579.
A sentence as a syntactic unit has a grammatical meaning and a grammatical form. grammatical meaning sentences is predicative; the grammatical form that provides the realization of this meaning is a block diagram (otherwise it is sometimes called a formula, a model).
The structural scheme is a concept for the theory of syntax at the same time old and fundamentally new. On the one hand, this is a kind of concept of a model (type, kind ...) of a sentence.
In fact, it was precisely this that was meant in the typologies of the Russian sentence that existed before, first of all, in the typology of A. A. Shakhmatov, who based it on the opposition two-part vs. one-part sentence with further differentiation
ation of types of one-component. However, in this typology, as in other descriptions of Russian syntax, the types of two-part sentences were practically not detailed in any way. The ways of expressing the subject, the types of predicates,
but how certain types of subject are connected with certain types of predicate, whether there is such a connection at all, what are the specific models of two-part sentences - all this was not described.
The block diagram of a sentence is a concept, in contrast to the concept of a two-part or one-part sentence, much more specific. It fixes the way of connecting and shaping significant components, necessary and sufficient for expressing the predicative meaning. Significant components are the word forms of certain parts of speech. Therefore, the components of block diagrams are the designations
Parts of speech with indices indicating their form, mandatory for this component to participate in
organization of the predicative center of the sentence:
V - verbum (verb);
Vf - verbum finitum (conjugated form of the verb);
indexes for verb forms:
s - units hours (singularis); pl - pl. hours (pluralis);
1 ... 3 - person (Vf3s - verb in the form of 3 l. units);
n - neuter (neutrum);
Inf - infinitive;
N - nomen (noun);
indexes for name forms:
1 ... 6 - case (I., R., ... P. p.); cr. - short
Adj - adjectivum (adjective);
Pron - pronomen (pronoun);
Adv - adverbium (adverb);
Adv0 - predicative adverb in -o (word of the category co-
standing, formed from the adverb);
Praed - praedicatum - predicative (the word of the category of
niya, formed from a noun, adjective-
Part - participium (communion);
AdvPart - gerund;
Praedpart - participial predicate;
Interj - interjection - interjection;
Neg - negation (negation);
Cop - copula (bundle).
The structural scheme fixes only the predicative minimum of the sentence, that is, it is abstracted from all possible distributors of the predicative center.
N. Yu. Shvedova, editor of two academic grammars (1970 and 1980), set the task of presenting a closed list of structural schemes of sentences in the modern Russian language.
1 Of course, this symbol can also be used to denote any word of the state category.
And although this task is implemented in different ways in the named Grammars (and it is hardly possible to speak of a “closed list”2), the named initial principle is the same in them: the structural scheme represents only the grammatical sufficiency of the sentence - only the predicative minimum.
The informative sufficiency of the model fixed by the block diagram is not taken into account. So, the sentences: The music stopped (D. Merezhkovsky) and the Father opened - differ in that the first is informative enough, while the second does not have this property (for informative completeness, a controlled component of the phrase is needed: opened - a door, a window, a book ...). However, in the concept implemented in both Academic Grammars, ed. N. Yu. Shvedova, both of these proposals are brought under the same block diagram (N1 Vf). The problem of a possible discrepancy between grammatical and informative sufficiency in one structural scheme was successfully (theoretically, but not completely practically) overcome by V. A. Beloshapkova, introducing the concepts of a minimal and extended structural scheme, more precisely, a structural scheme and its minimal or extended implementation. Using this concept
machine, you can interpret the above examples as follows:
The music is quiet: block diagram N1 Vf, implemented in a minimal form;
Father opened the door: the block diagram is the same, but implemented in an expanded form: N1 Vf N4.
The main reason for the appearance of extended implementations of basic structural schemes is that the lexical units that represent their components may or may not require mandatory propagation. For example,
the verb open requires the obligatory extension of the nominal word form in the accusative case - therefore, the use of this verb in a sentence entails an extended implementation of the basic scheme; in the absence of a mandatory
of the distributor, the sentence turns out to be incomplete (for example, the Father opened the sentence incomplete, since the obligatory object is omitted in it). On the contrary, the verb to calm down does not require obligatory distribution (possible distribution: gradually calmed down, calmed down from sudden noise, etc. - is not mandatory and does not affect the nature of the implementation of the scheme; in the absence of such distributors, the sentence does not become incomplete). Therefore, when using this verb, the scheme is implemented in a minimal form3.
The theory of the structural scheme was not formed by chance. There are at least two reasons that predetermined it. The first one is related to the general linguistic orientation to the level comprehension of the whole language system, which requires finding in the syntactic subsystem, as in all others, a reproducible and countable unit. Sentences actually used in speech - statements are very diverse.
Hence the question: what is reproduced in the language system at this level?
The second reason was the need to develop and improve the doctrine of the main members of the sentence, which were considered, as a rule, in isolation from each other (subject and ways of expressing it, predicate and ways of expressing it). It was also necessary to more clearly contrast them with the so-called minor members and to generalize the nature of the relationship of the main members.
3 There are experiments of a different calculation of the structural schemes of the Russian sentence, interpreting what V. A. Beloshapkova calls extended implementations as separate structural schemes. Let's name in this case "Russian Grammar", created by Czech scientists (Prague, 1979). The number of schemes in such a calculation, of course, increases significantly.
Analysis of the structure of a sentence based on the concept of a block diagram
Consider a few examples of sentences and their block diagrams.
The evening is calm.
The round lamp is on (D. Kharms).
Both sentences are organized by subjects, expressed nouns in I. p., and predicates - verbs in conjugated forms. Therefore, both of these proposals correspond to the block diagram N1 Vf. In both cases, the scheme
implemented in a minimal way.
I hate the oppression of violence
The ringing of shackles frightens me (K. Balmont).
The first sentence is organized by the subject, the expressed personal pronoun in I. p., and the predicate - the conjugated form of the verb. It is possible to interpret the structural scheme of this sentence, taking into account the fact that the subject is expressed by a pronoun, not a noun, and also that the pronoun of the 1st person is used, therefore the verb has the corresponding form: Pron1 - Vf1. However, such a level of detail is unlikely to correspond to the very idea of a block diagram as a very abstract abstraction. high level, as a model receiving realization in a variety of statements. After all, if
thread the pronoun of the 1st person with the pronoun of the 2nd or 3rd person, the verb will automatically take the appropriate form; if you replace the pronoun with a noun, the verb will also necessarily take the form of the 3rd person4. Therefore, it is advisable to recognize this proposal as corresponding to the same scheme as in the previous example: N1 Vf. However, the scheme is implemented in an expanded form, since the verb to hate requires mandatory distribution (oppression): N1 Vf N4.
4 When expressing the subject of a noun, the sentence has the meaning
chenie 3rd syntactic person.
Structural scheme of the offer
The same should be said about the second sentence from the above example.
The situation in Orenburg was becoming terrible (A. S. Pushkin).
The subject here is expressed by a noun in I. p., the predicate is a compound nominal with a semi-significant link, that is, it is a modification of one of the two basic types of predicates - a compound nominal with a formal link
(cf .: The situation in Orenburg was terrible). Hence,
the proposal corresponds to the scheme N1 Cop Adj1/5. Why Adj1/5 and
not just Adj5? Because when changing grammatical tense
the form T. p. can be replaced by the form I. p.: Position
Orenburg is terrible. The scheme is implemented in a minimal, but modi-
fixed form (because instead of SIS with a formal connection
which used SIS with a semi-significant ligament): N1 Vf semi-lun.
Adj1/5. (Since there is only one true link - formal,
that is, the verb to be in a conjugated form, - it is expedient that everything is os-
tal types of copulas are denoted as a conjugated form of the verb with
an index indicating the type of link.)
So, the structural characteristic of this proposal is
looks like this:
basic scheme: N1 Cop Adj1/5
circuit modification: N1 Vfpls. Adj1/5
schema implementation: minimal.
Next example:
And I do not regret anything in the past (S. Yesenin).
This is an impersonal sentence, its main member is expressed in words
noah bundle (cf. in the past temp.: And there was nothing in the past for me
it's a pity). With the main member, there are two obligatory distributions
wanderer (subjective determinant to me and direct object
nothing), therefore, the scheme is implemented in an extended form.
Distributor form - name in R. or V. p. (genitive pa-
dej replaces the accusative in denial). Characteristic
structural organization of the proposal:
base scheme: Cop Praed
circuit implementation: extended: N3 Cop Praed N2/4.
One can, however, consider the introduction to the proposal from
denials as a modification of the basic schema; in this case character-
teristic will take the following form:
base scheme: Cop Praed
circuit modification: Neg Cop Praed
circuit implementation: extended: N3 Neg Cop Praed N2.
(The absence of an indication of the possibility of V. p. in this case
is explained by the fact that when introducing into the scheme the denial of distribution
the pager can only be in the form of R. p.)
Next example:
I can't sleep. Light a candle?
Yes, but there are no matches (G. Ivanov).
The first sentence (I can't sleep) is impersonal, its main
ny member is expressed by the conjugated form of the impersonal verb. Important-
but that this is the form of the 3rd l. units h .: besides her, here it is only possible
unit form h. wed R. past temp. - any other conjugated forms
excluded. This fact should be reflected in the diagram: Vfs3/sn. WHO-
however, another option is also possible: Vf bezl. , it is clear that for
of an impersonal verb, only the named forms are possible, in others
forms of impersonal verbs are not used. Modification
there is no scheme (the presence of negation, in contrast to the previous
th example, does not affect anything). The scheme is used in the expansion
in a fixed form: with a verb there is an obligatory distributor -
subject determinant. Hence:
basic scheme: Vfs3/sn or Vf bezl.
schema modification: none
circuit implementation: extended: N3 Vfs3/sn or N3 Vf bezl.
The second sentence in this example (Light a candle?) -
infinitive. No schema modification, addition
(in this case, a candle) with the verb to light is obligatory
noun, without it the proposal would be incomplete. So
base scheme: Inf
schema modification: none
circuit implementation: extended: Inf N4.
Third sentence (Yes, only there are no matches) - a very widespread variety impersonal offer. Its only main member, at first glance, is the word no. Changing the sentence over time shows that in
in this case, no negative form present temp. the verb to be (cf .: There were no matches; There will be no matches). It is important to take into account that the verb to be here does not act as a formal connective (after all, there is no nominal part of the predicate), but as a full-fledged verb of existence - an analogue of a simple verbal predicate(It cannot be called a predicate, since we have before us the main member of a one-part sentence). It can be replaced by context
by synonyms: There were no matches; Matches not found / not found, etc.
However, the most significant thing is that the verb form is not the only main member of this sentence. Without name form genitive case such suggestions are meaningless. If we remove the negation from the sentence, then the form
R. p. “turns into” the form of the nominative case and “turns” into the subject (!): There are matches / Matches were found / There were matches in the pocket. The form of R. p. is thus due solely to the presence of negation in the sentence. We know that
the form R. p. regularly replaces the form V. p. direct object (I have already read this book / I have not read this book yet). However, here the form of the R. p. replaces not the V. p. of the direct complement, but the I. p. of the subject, that is, it is not a distributor, but an obligatory
body component of the circuit; it denotes not an object, but a subject of existence/non-existence.
We cannot call this sentence a two-part sentence, since a two-part sentence must have a subject, and it is impossible to bring the form of the R. p. under the category of the subject. But in the theory of structural schemes, the opposition of two-component - one-component
In the concept of G. A. Zolotova, which significantly expands the interpretation of the subject (actually identifying the subject with the carrier of the predicative feature, regardless of its form), this is possible. removed; instead, block diagrams are divided into one-component, two-component - and among the two-component diagrams there are many such that are models of one-component sentences. Thus, we can say that we have a sentence with a two-component block diagram: N2 Vf exist. (The exist index fixes the fact that not any verb in the conjugated form can appear in the scheme
me, and a verb with an existential - existential - meaning; this meaning may also be the result of the “pressure” of the scheme: for example, in the sentence There was no box of matches in the whole house, the existential meaning is “induced” by the use of non-existential
the meaning of the verb can be found in this particular model.) The question of the implementation of the scheme requires separate consideration. In the context of the statement Yes, only matches are not perceived
toils as informatively sufficient: we know who can't sleep, who is thinking about whether to light a candle, and who, accordingly, has no matches. However, in order to resolve the issue of completeness / incompleteness of a sentence, it is necessary to remove it from the context - and only then it will be possible to judge both its completeness / incompleteness, and, accordingly, the minimum or extended implementation of the scheme. Out of its context, this sentence is undoubtedly incomplete: the scheme requires a distributor pointing either to the subject (who has no matches) or to the place (where there are no matches, e.g.: There are no matches in the house). The component pointing to the place will turn out to be a local determinant, which is conveniently denoted as Dloc: in this case, all possible ways of expressing it (adverb, pronominal adverb, prepositional form of the name) will be covered. Outcome: basic scheme: N2 Vf exist scheme modification: no implementation of the scheme: extended: N2 / Dloc N2 Vf exist ), we can also consider this sentence as a modification of the scheme N1 Vf, which regularly arises when negation is introduced into the sentence. Then we get following characteristic: basic circuit: N1 Vf circuit modification: N2 Neg Vf exist
circuit implementation: extended: U N2 / Dloc N2 Neg Vf exist
Last example:
Despite the late hour, they did not sleep in the village (A. Gaidar) This is an indefinitely personal sentence, organized by the main member in the form of a simple verbal predicate, expressed in the past form. temp. pl. h. Form pl. hours and 3rd l. (if the time is not past) is required for an indefinitely personal proposal, therefore, these signs should be reflected in the block diagram: Vf3pl. There is no schema modification (so
how negation does not affect the structure of the sentence, and one of the two basic models of the predicate is used in the main member).
The scheme is used in an extended form: it is distributed by a determinant that combines local and subjective meanings (in the village - villagers); without this distributor, the offer would be incomplete. Thus:
basic scheme: Vf3p
schema modification: none
circuit implementation: extended: In N6 Vf3pl.
The B component of N6 can also be represented more generally: Dloc (local determinant). In this case, under this extended scheme, proposals such as the House will be summed up and did not sleep.
The above illustrations show the way to analyze the structural organization of the proposal based on the concepts of the block diagram, its modification, as well as its minimal or extended implementation. We emphasize once again that in order to determine
The basic structural scheme of the sentence needs to be supported by the concept of two basic types of predicate, assuming that the remaining types of predicates are modifications of these basic types. The use of a modified predicate, as well as negation, which entails changes in the structure of the sentence, is considered as a modification of the basic scheme.
This approach makes it possible to describe with sufficient accuracy the diversity of the Russian sentence, while keeping the set of initial (basic) structural schemes relatively compact. When mastering this conceptual apparatus and the methodology based on it for analyzing the structure of a sentence, it is advisable at first to rely on any of the existing lists of block diagrams. This does not mean that it is necessary to learn
memorize all the schemes in the list: such a list is needed in order to get a primary idea of \u200b\u200bwhat the original set of sentence models is, but not in order to serve as a bearer of the ultimate truth, beyond which nothing can be. It is hardly possible in principle to build a complete list of initial supply models. Therefore, any such list is only a guideline. But the landmark is important and extremely necessary.
One of the successful experiences of typology of the structural schemes of the Russian sentence is the list proposed by V. A. Beloshapkova. We will give it - with some clarifications (examples without authorship belong to V. A. Beloshapkova, examples
but from literary sources - ours).
I block (two-component - nominative)
On the eve of departure, a snowstorm arose (B. Pas-
But in a sweet spring the snow will melt again (G. Ivanov).
2 N1 cop6 Adj1/5
The first time after the wedding, Pushkin was happy
(P. Shchegolev);
Moscow is empty (A. S. Pushkin);
But my steps were light (A. Akhmatova);
[War walks through Russia,]
And we are so young! (D. Samoilov).
Thought uttered is a lie (F. Tyutchev);
Love is a dream, and a dream is one moment (F. Tyutchev);
Every joy will surprise me
(A. S. Pushkin).
6 The bundle is considered as a service element of the scheme and when counting
The number of its components is not taken into account.
Structural scheme of the offer
4 N1 cop N2 All furniture - highest quality, red de-
5 N1 cop prep7 N2
The windows of the huts were without glass (N. Gogol);
I, comrades, am from the military bureau (V. V. Mayakovsky)8.
6 N1 cop Adv We'll be far away in an hour.
II block (two-component - infinitive)
1 Inf Vfs3 You should not remain silent.
2 Inf cop Adjcr. It was wise to remain silent.
3 Inf cop Inf To refuse was an offense.
4 Inf cop N1/5 Getting through was a problem.
5 Inf cop prep N2 / Adv It was inopportune to remain silent.
6 Inf cop Pronneg No one to consult with.
III block (one-component)
1 Vfs3 / Vf bezl. It was getting dark.
2 Vfpl3 Call.
3 Inf Get up!
So how can you not laugh?
Do not burst into tears, how to live,
[When it is possible to part,
When it is possible to stop loving] (I. Severyanin).
5 Cop Praed It was dark.
6 Cop Praed Inf Gotta get up…
7 Cop Adjpl He was welcome.
8 Cop Adv It was easy with him.
9 Cop N1 Silence.
As the above composition of block diagrams shows, it is generally focused on the traditionally distinguished main members of the sentence, which helps in the use of block diagrams in practical analysis. However, attention should be paid to
three examples where this principle is violated: we are talking about block II.
7 Prep - preposition (preposition).
8 The profanity of the character's speech, successfully imitated by the poet, is compensated by the general expressiveness of this example.
Example one: You should not keep silent.
The infinitive to remain silent in this case is dependent (the core word should not be), such a sentence qualifies as a one-part impersonal one.
Example two: There is no one to consult with.
This is a structure of a special kind, with mutual subordination of components: the infinitive consult and the pronoun no one can equally claim the main role. Such sentences are also usually qualified as one-part impersonal sentences.
The third example: It is necessary to stand up - impersonal, the core component is not the infinitive, but the category of the state must (with lexically expressed semantics of obligation).
In addition, it should be noted that the scheme Cop Praed Inf (You have to get up, It's time to get ready for work, It's a shame to offend the little ones, etc.) should be classified not as one-component, but as two-component, since the criterion is
after all, the scheme does not fully correspond to the models of a one-part / two-part sentence, but the number of significant components that form the predicative core.
Phraseological sentence schemes (according to "Grammar-70")
With pronominal words With prepositions With conjunctions With a bunch To all pies
pie. Why not the groom? What's that noise? Wow chair. A holiday is not a holiday. Everyone is not up to sleep. People are like people. No to keep quiet! A wife is a wife. The bride is the bride.
In "Grammar-80" the system of block diagrams is presented in a somewhat new way. It appears that in educational purposes its application would be less successful, not to mention the fact that some structural diagrams raise a number of additional questions. Thus, the selection of the block diagram No sound (Ni N2) as an independent one raises an objection: this is the implementation of the original scheme No sound (the above sentence corresponding to this scheme was analyzed in detail).
More on the topic 4. Structural scheme of the proposal and the components of its presentation. The question of the minimal and extended structural scheme in the concept of V. A. Beloshapkova. The concept of phraseologized block diagrams.:
- 4. Block diagram of the proposal and the components of its presentation. The question of the minimal and extended structural scheme in the concept of V. A. Beloshapkova. The concept of phraseologized block diagrams.
