Kitobni o'qish: «Теоретическая грамматика английского языка (Theoretical Grammar of the English language)»

Моделирование учебной дисциплины Б1. В6 «Основы теории 1 ИЯ: «Теоретическая грамматика английского языка»

Курс: 4

Семестр: 7

Общая трудоёмкость: 2 зачётные единицы

Общее количество часов: 72, из них аудиторных – 34

Лекционных: 10

Семинарских: 24

Самостоятельная работа: 38

Форма контроля: зачёт

Цели и задачи освоения дисциплины «Основы теории 1 ИЯ: теоретическая грамматика»

Рабочая программа составлена в соответствии с федеральным государственным образовательным стандартом высшего образования по направлению подготовки 45.03.02 Лингвистика (уровень бакалавриата), профиль «Перевод и переводоведение».

Целью освоения дисциплины является формирование профессиональных компетенций бакалавра лингвистики, которые способствуют успешному решению профессиональных задач в различных сферах производственной деятельности. Курс дисциплины даёт студентам систематические и углубленные сведения о грамматическом строе современного английского языка, раскрывает наиболее важные и сложные проблемы, возникающие при его изучении, учитывая достижения отечественного и зарубежного языкознания. Основными задачами курса теоретической грамматики английского языка являются следующие:

– теоретически осветить основы грамматического строя английского языка в соответствии с современным состоянием лингвистических знаний;

– ввести студентов в наиболее важные проблемы современных исследований строя английского языка;

– способствовать развитию у студентов умения самостоятельно перерабатывать текущую научную информацию по грамматическим исследованиям языка, анализировать и сопоставлять языковые явления с учетом теоретических положений, усвоенных в ходе изучения курса теоретической грамматики.

Место дисциплины в структуре ОП ВО

Дисциплина входит в вариативную часть профессионального блока и является составляющей дисциплины Б1.В6 «Основы теории 1 ИЯ», изучается в 7 семестре. Дисциплина «Теоретическая грамматика английского языка» тесно связана с другими дисциплинами учебного плана подготовки бакалавра лингвистики по профилю «Перевод и переводоведение». К числу таких дисциплин относятся: языкознание, история языка, лексикология, стилистика, практические дисциплины: практический курс 1 ИЯ, практическая грамматика, практическая фонетика.

Приступая к изучению специальных языковых дисциплин, студент должен войти в курс лингвистических проблем, овладеть основами теоретических знаний о языке. Высокие требования, предъявляемые к уровню владения языком на современном этапе, обусловили стремление вуза обеспечить комплексный подход к изучению языка, сочетающий как практические навыки, так и глубокую теоретическую базу. Чётко выстраивается зависимость между практическими языковыми навыками и теми теоретическими основами, без которых эти знания не могут быть закреплены и применены на практике.

Теоретическая грамматика тесно связана с лексикологией (поскольку изучает грамматические свойства слов; теоретической фонетикой (поскольку та изучает особенности фонетического оформления грамматических единиц), стилистикой (так как описывает стилевые закономерности употребления грамматических форм в разных жанрах речи). Изучение дисциплины «Теоретическая грамматика» следует за изучением теоретической фонетики и лексикологии английского языка и предшествует изучению курса стилистики. Это связано с логикой изучения основ теории 1 иностранного языка.

По окончании изучения дисциплины студент должен показать знания грамматического строя английского языка, основных единиц морфологического уровня и синтаксиса, основных категорий и классификаций грамматических единиц, семантические, структурные и коммуникативные особенности текста. Студент должен обладать умениями анализировать грамматические явления, выявлять системные связи языковых единиц, проводить дискурсивный анализ текста. Необходимо проявлять навыки лингвистического анализа морфологических, синтаксических, текстовых единиц, распознавать грамматические явления и использовать теоретические положения на практике.

Требования к результатам освоения дисциплины Б1. В6 «Основы теории 1 ИЯ: теоретическая грамматика»

Перечень планируемых результатов обучения по дисциплине, соотнесенных c планируемыми результатами освоения образовательной программы

Образовательные технологии

В процессе преподавания дисциплины «Основы теории 1 ИЯ: теоретическая грамматика» используется компетентностный подход, который помогает повысить мотивированность студентов, их ответственность за качество полученных знаний. При реализации различных видов учебной работы используются следующие образовательные технологии: активные и интерактивные формы проведения занятий, использование интерактивной доски с прямым выходом в Интернет (гиперссылки) на лекционных и семинарских занятиях; подготовка доклада-презентации, написание рефератов, оценивание ответов других студентов. Весь материал курса представлен на информационном сайте ЮФУ e-learning. Применяются современные методы контроля студентов (тесты, творческие задания, контроль с помощью технических средств). Используется рейтинговая система оценивания.

Занятия, проводимые в интерактивных формах составляют 100% аудиторных часов и 70% самостоятельной работы студентов.

Занятия лекционного типа составляют 30% аудиторных занятий.

Оценочные средства для текущего контроля успеваемости, промежуточной аттестации по итогам освоения дисциплины и учебно-методическое обеспечение самостоятельной работы студентов

Средствами текущего контроля являются устные опросы на семинарских занятиях, тесты, выполнение практических заданий, заданий для самостоятельной работы.

Полный комплект контрольно-оценочных материалов (Фонд оценочных средств) оформлен в виде приложения к рабочей программе дисциплины.

Темы курсовых работ

1. Категория определённости/неопределённости в английском языке.

2. Принципы классификации английских глаголов.

3. Особенности управления фразовых глаголов в английском языке.

4. Особенности функционирования наречий в предложении и тексте.

5. Способы выражения будущего времени в современном английском языке.

6. Срества выражения языковой модальности.

7. Средства выражения отрицания в английском языке.

8. Экспрессивность отрицания в современном английском языке.

9. Особенности глагола 'to get' как компонента пассивной конструкции в британском варианте анлийского языка.

10. Категория аспекта глагола, её роль в создании временного континуума текста.

11. Прагмалингвистические особенности английских междометий.

12. Проблема классификации бессоюзных сложных предложений.

13. Особенности сочинительной связи в предложении.

14. Семантические типы сочинительной связи.

15. Способы выражения коммуникативной интенции предложения.

16. Тема-рематическая композиция предложения.

17. Функционирование грамматических антонимов в тексте.

18. Способы выражения сравнительных отношений в английском языке.

19. Сложные предложения с разными типами связей.

20. Языковые средства выражения концептуального поля “семья”.

21. Гендерные особенности использования обращений в английском языке.

22. Гендерные особенности использования междометий в английском языке.

23. Концепт как базовое понятие когнитивной лингвистики.

24. Средства выражения сатиры и юмора в политическом дискурсе.

25. Категория состояния в английском языке.

26. Особенности проявления категории времени в английском языке.

27. Проблема лексического и грамматического значений союзов.

28. Особенности эллиптических и односоставных предложений.

29. Функционально-семантическое поле темпоральности.

30. Функционально-семантическое поле кондициональности.

31. Функционально-семантическое поле залоговости.

32. Особенности функционирования неличных форм глагола в различных стилях.

33. Синонимичность синтаксических конструкций с временным компонентом.

34. Многозначные синтаксические конструкции, их отличие от синонимичных, антонимичных, омономичных.

35. Межъязыковые синонимы.

36. Текст как объект лингвистического исследования.

37. Дискурс.

38. Особенности политического дискурса.

39. Средства реализации текстовой когезии.

40. Синонимия средств выражения категории завершённости.

41. Особенности диалогической речи как самостоятельной языковой подсистемы.

42. Инверсия как стилистическая особенности художественного текста.

43. Функционирование предложений с вводным ‘it’ и ‘there’ в английском языке.

44. Антонимичность в системе сложносочинённых предложения в современном английском языке.

45. Средства выражения побуждения в английском языке.

46. Грамматические свойства выражения эмфазы в современном английском языке.

Дисциплина состоит из 4 модулей.

Модуль 1. Грамматика как наука. Язык как система. Морфемная структура слова. Грамматические формы и категории.

Модуль 2. Существительное. Грамматические категории. Другие части речи. Классификация частей речи.

Модуль 3. Глагол. Грамматические категории. Неличные формы глагола.

Модуль 4. Синтаксис простого предложения и словосочетания. Сложное предложение и текст. Текстовые категории.

Дополнительная информация

В процессе преподавания дисциплины «Основы теории 1 ИЯ: теоретическая грамматика» используется компетентностный подход, который помогает повысить мотивированность студентов, их ответственность за качество полученных знаний. При реализации различных видов учебной работы используются следующие образовательные технологии: активные и интерактивные формы проведения занятий, мультимедийное обучение, сетевые компьютерные технологии. Текущий контроль включает в себя устные опросы, тесты. Рубежный подготовка доклада-презентации, оценивание ответов других студентов.

УЧЕБНАЯ КАРТА ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ

«Основы теории 1 ИЯ: Теоретическая грамматика»

2 зач. ед.; ак.ч. всего: 34, в т.ч.10 лекционных., 24 практических

Преподаватель Науменко М.Г.

Кафедра лингвистики и профессиональной коммуникации

Курс 4, семестр 7

Направление подготовки: Лингвистика, профиль «Перевод и переводоведение»

Критерии оценки

«зачтено» – выполнено 60–100 % модуля

«не зачтено» – выполнено менее 60 % модуля.

Theoretical part

Module 1

Grammar as a science. Relationship between normative and theoretical grammar. The connection of grammar with other sciences. Morphology and syntax.

Grammar in general is a branch of linguistics which deals with the grammatical structure of the language. Grammar rules organize a chain of words into a phrase and a sentence. Practical (normative, prescriptive) grammar prescribes, gives rules for practical use, teaches how to speak or write, but it doesn’t explain the rules theoretically and scientifically.

Theoretical grammar analyzes the facts of the language, tries to explain them without giving any prescriptions. Unlike practical grammar, theoretical grammar does not in all cases give a ready-made solution. It gives the analysis of the structure on the basis of general principles of linguistics. It outlines the main problems on which there are different opinions expressed by different linguists. In the language there are a number of phenomena interpreted differently by different linguists. To a large extent, these discrepancies are due to the fact that in linguistics there are different linguistic schools with their methods of analysis and approach to the material. But in a number of cases this is due to the fact that some facts of the language cause difficulties in analysis and then only a possible but not conclusively proven way of solving them is suggested. It is this circumstance that determines the existence of different theories on the same language phenomenon of language, whereas in practical grammar there are no such discrepancies. Thus, the tasks of theoretical grammar are to show the structure of the language as a system, to provide an adequate and systematic description of linguistic factors; to acquaint the students with various interpretations and theories on the same linguistic factors; The aim of theoretical grammar is not only to transfer certain knowledge, but also to try to teach how to critically treat different interpretations of the same problems, to evaluate the correctness and accuracy of existing theories.

Grammar is connected with other branches of linguistics: phonetics, as every word and sentence is a combination of phonemes; stylistics, which studies many problems treated in grammar: grammati-cal synonymy, for example; lexicology (both lexicology and theoretical grammar study words, but from different aspects). For example, there are different opinions concerning word-building.The first states that word-building is a part of lexicology, the second states it’s partly a matter of grammar to study words; and the third one claims that word-building is a special sphere intermediate between lexicology and grammar.

Grammar consists of two parts: morphology and syntax. Morphology is a part of grammar which deals with the forms of words. Syntax deals with phrases and sentences and units which are higher than a sentence. These parts of grammar are connected with each other. The connection is shown in the fact that words don’t change when taken separately. They change only when they are connected in sentences.

The systemic nature of grammar. Language and speech. Synchrony and diachrony. Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. Plane of content and plane of expression. Levels of language units.

Human language is a verbal means of communication; its function consists in forming, storing and exchanging ideas as reflections of reality. Being inseparably connected with the people who create and use it, language is social and psychological by nature (Blokh, 2000).

Language incorporates three constituent parts. They are the phonological system, the lexical system, and the grammatical system. The phonological system determines the material (phonetic) form of its significative units; the lexical system comprises the whole set of nominative means of language (words and stable word-groups); the grammatical system presents the whole set of regularities determining the combination of nominative units in the formation of utterances (Blokh, 2000).

Modern linguistics is essentially based on the systemic conception of language. System in general is defined as a structured set of elements related to one another by a common function.

The interpretation of language as a system develops a number of notions, namely: the notions of language levels and language units, paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations, the notions of form and meaning (function), of synchrony and diachrony, of analysis and synthesis, and some others.

The discrimination of language and speech is the fundamental principle of linguistics. This principle has sustained throughout the whole history of the study of language. With a special demonstrative force it was confirmed by I.A. Beaudoin de Courtenay (end of the XIX c.) and F. de Saussure (beginning of the XX c.) who analyzed the language-speech dichotomy in connection with the problem of identifying the subject of linguistics. The two great scholars emphatically pointed out the difference between synchrony and diachrony stressing the fact that at any stage of its historical evolution language is a synchronic system of meaningful elements, i.e. a system of special signs (Blokh, 2000).

Language vs Speech (verbal behaviour)

Saussure made what became a famous distinction between langue (language) and parole (speech, or verbal behaviour). Language, for Saussure, is the symbolic system through which we communicate. Speech refers to actual utterances. Since we can communicate an infinite number of utterances, it is the system behind them that is important, this is the primary object of study for the linguist. According to F. de Saussure, there is langue versus parole. Bylangue, best translated in its technical Saussurean sense as language system, is meant the totality of regularities and patterns of formation that underlie the utterances of a language; by parole, which can be translated as language behaviour, is meant the actual utterances themselves (URL: ht-tps://www.britannica.com/science/linguistics/The-20th-century).

The impact of Saussure's ideas on the development of linguistic theory in the first half of the twentieth century cannot be understated. Two currents of thought emerged independently of each other, one in Europe, and the other in America. The results of each incorporated the basic notions of Saussurian thought in forming the central tenets of structural linguistics.

The most important of the various schools of structural linguistics to be found in Europe in the first half of the 20th century included the Prague school, most notably represented by Nikolay Sergeyevich Trubetskoy and Roman Jakobson, both Russian émigrés, and the Copenhagen (or glossematic) school, centred around Louis Hjelmslev (URL: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ferdinand_de_Saussure).

Syntagmatic vs paradigmatic relations

Lingual units stand to one another in two fundamental types of relations: syntagmatic and paradigmatic. Syntagmatic relations are immediate linear relations between units in a segmental sequence (string). One of the basic notions in the syntagmatic analysis is the notion of syntactic syntagma. A "syntactic syntagma" is the combination of two words or word-groups one of which is modified by the other. To syntagmatic relations are opposed paradigmatic relations. They exist between elements of the system outside the strings in which they cooccur. The function of a grammatical paradigm is to express a categorial meaning (Blokh, 2000).

Plane of Content and Plane of Expression

This dichotomy was first studied by Louis Hjelmslev (1899-1965) – Danish linguist, the founder of the Copenhagen School of linguistics. Together with Hans Uldall he developed a structural theory of language which he called glossematics. The main interest of glosssematics was describing the formal characteristics of the language. L. Hjelmslev’s sign model is a development of F. de Saussure's sign model. Saussure considered a sign as having two sides, signifier and signified. Hjelmslev's famously renamed signifier and signified as respectively expression plane and content plane, and also distinguished between form and substance (URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Louis_Hjelmslev).

The plane of content comprises the semantic (meaningful) elements of the language; the plane of expression comprises the material (formal) units of the language. Each language sign has a form and a meaning. The two planes are inseparably connected. Grammatical elements of language present a unity of content and expression, a unity of form and meaning.

Levels of Language Units

Units of language are divided into segmental and suprasegmental. Segmental units consist of phonemes, they form phonemic strings of various status. Suprasegmental units do not exist by themselves, but are realized with segmental units and express different modificational meanings reflected on the strings of segmental units (Blokh, 2000).

The segmental units of language form a hierarchy of levels. Units of each higher level are formed of units of the immediately lower level.

Professor M.Ya.Blokh: the lowest level of lingual units is phonemic: it is formed by phonemes. The phoneme has no meaning, its function is purely differential. The second level, located above the phonemic level, is morphemic. The morpheme is the elementary meaningful part of the word built up by phonemes. The morpheme expresses abstract, "significative", meaning. The third level is lexemic. Its differential unit is the word. The word realizes the function of nomination. The fourth level is denotemic, its constituent unit is denoteme (notional part of the sentence). The fifth level is proposemic. It is built up by sentences. As a sign, the sentence simultaneously fulfils two functions – nominative and predicative. The sixth level is the level of topicalization, its constituent element is the "dicteme" ("utterance"). The function of the dicteme is to build up a topical stretch of some text. Being an elementary topical unit of text, the dicteme fulfils four main signemic functions: the functions of nomination, predication, topicalization, and stylization (Blokh, 2000).

The main units of language are considered to be the word and the sentence. Words are studied by morphology, sentences are studied by syntax.

Morphemic Structure of the Word

The word is the nominative unit of language built up by morphemes and indivisible into smaller segments as regards its nominative function (Blokh, 2000). The morphological system of language reveals its properties through the morphemic structure of words. So, it is but natural that one of the essential tasks of morphology is to study the morphemic structure of the word.

In traditional grammar the study of the morphemic structure of the word is based upon two criteria – positional and semantic (functional). The positional criterion presupposes the analysis of the location of the marginal morphemes in relation to the central ones. The semantic criterion involves the study of the correlative contribution of the morpheme to the general meaning of the word. In accord with the traditional classification, morphemes at the upper level are divided into root morphemes and affixal morphemes (lexical and grammatical) (Blokh, 2000).

Synthetic and analytic languages

In linguistic typology, there are synthetic and analytic languages. Synthetic languages compose (synthesize) multiple concepts into each word, while analytic languages break up (analyze) concepts into separate words. The distinction is a matter of degree: the most analytic languages consistently have one morpheme per word while, at the other extreme, in polysynthetic languages, a single inflected verb may contain as much information as an entire English sentence (URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language).

The English language refers to the languages of the analytic type. The modern forms of the English verb (are doing, has been studying) are formed analytically, because they consist of a part devoid of lexical meaning and transmitting the required grammatical categories, and a part conveying a semantic meaning (root morphemes: do, run).

The categorial structure of the word. The notions of grammatical meaning, grammatical form, grammatical category. Oppositional theory. Oppositional reduction.

Notional words possess some morphemic features expressing grammatical meaning. These features determine the grammatical form of the word. Grammatical meanings are very abstract, general meanings, therefore, the grammatical form unites a whole class of words, so that each word of the class expresses the corresponding grammatical meaning together with its individual concrete semantics. The most general meanings rendered by language units and expresses by systemic correlations of word forms, are interpreted in linguistics as categorial grammatical meanings. For example, previousness and simultaneousness of action is expressed by perfect and non-perfect forms, so they form the category of correlation (категория временной соотнесенности), or retrospective coordination (Blokh, 2000).

Some grammatical categories exist only in a certain class. They are closed within this word class. They are immanent categories (constant) – the verbal categories of tense, voice, mood. Other categories may transfer from one class to another and reflect in it. They are called reflective categories. They are: gender, number. The category of number of nouns is reflected in the verb: boy goes – boys go. In Russian the category of number is reflected in the verb and the adjective.

The grammatical category presents a unity of form and meaning. A set of grammatical forms expressing a categorial function constitutes a paradigm. The paradigmatic correlation of grammatical forms in a category is exposed by the so-called grammatical opposition. See the example of aspect.

But sometimes a weak member of the opposition may turn onto a marked one. Example: He knocked, and knocked, and knocked. This is the stylistically marked member, as the idea of continuity is rendered, but by non-continuous forms.

The opposition may be defined as a generalized correlation of language forms, by means of which a certain function is expressed. The member of the opposition must possess two types of features: common features, and differentiating features. Because of common features they are included into one opposition. Example: in the category of aspect the common feature of the opposition of the continuous and non-continuous forms is to express the character of an action. One of the members of the opposition shows the action in progress; the other presents it as a fact – these are the differential features. They constitute the function of the whole opposition (as that of being able to distinguish between the character of an action).

The oppositional theory was originally formulated as a phonological theory by representatives of the Prague School. The method of oppositions has been successfully extended to grammar and semantics. Three main qualitative types of oppositions were established: privative (отрицательная); gradual (постепенная); equipollent (равная по силе).

By the number of contrasted oppositions they were divided into 1) binary, 2) more than binary. The most important for analysis is the binary privative type of opposition. The binary privitive opposition is formed by a contrastive pair of members in which one member is characterized by the presence of a certain differential feature (mark), while the other is characterized by the absence of this feature. The member in which the feature is present is called the marked, or the strong, positive member; the member in which the feature is absent, is called the unmarked, weak, negative member. Example 1: I study (weak member – non-past) – I studied (strong member – past). Example 2: a bird (weak member- non-plurality) – birds (strong member – plurality).

The gradual opposition exists only on semantic level. It’s formed by a contrastive group of members which are distinguished not only by the presence or absence of a feature, but by the degrees of it. Example: the degrees of comparison in adjectives: strong-stronger-strongest.

The equipollent opposition is formed by a contrastive pair or group in which the members are distinguished by different positive features. Example: to be-forms: am – is – are – they are equal in value.

The meaning of the weak member of the privative opposition is more general and abstract as compared with the meaning of the strong member, which is more definite and concrete.

In various contextual conditions one member of the opposition can be used in the position of the other. This phenomenon is called oppositional reduction, or oppositional substitution. E.g.: Tonight we start for London.-the weak member– Present tensereplaced the strong one- the Future tense. Such case is called neutralization of oppositions. E.g.: She is constantly grumbling. – It’s an exaggeration, not a continuous process. Here a strong member is used in the meaning of the weak member for stylistic purposes. This kind of oppositional reduction is called transposition (Blokh, 2000).

The means employed for building up member forms of categorial oppositions are traditionally divided into: 1.synthetical, 2. analytical. So the grammatical forms themselves are classed into synthetical and analytical grammar forms. Synthetical grammar forms are realized by inner morphemic composition of the word. Analytical forms are built by a combination of at least two words, one of which is an auxiliary, and the other – a notional word. Synthetical grammar forms may be:

– Inner-inflectional: goose-geese,

– Outer-inflectional:boy-boys,

– Suppletive: good-better-best, is -was, were-been.

The first type is not productive in Modern Indo-European languages, it is used in English in forms of irregular verbs: keep-kept-kept, forms of singular and plural: man-men.

Suppletivity is not productive either. It is based on the correlation of different roots: be-was, were-been.

Outer-inflectional forms belong to the productive means of affixation. There are quite a few grammar suffixes which are used to build up the number and case forms of the noun; the person, number, tense, participial and gerundial forms of the verb; forms of comparison of adjectives and adverbs.

The analytical grammar forms are traditionally considered to be a combination of an auxiliary and a basic word, and it’s one of the most typical ways of form-building.

Module 2

Grammatical Classes of Words. Parts of Speech. Principles of differentiation

The entire vocabulary of the English language, like in all Indo-European languages, is divided into certain lexico-grammatical classes, called parts of speech ( Ivanova, 1989).

Prof. A.I.Smirnitsky calls these classes of words “lexico-grammatical categories”. The term “part of speech” is purely traditional and conventional, it was introduced in Ancient Greece. The theoretical study of language in the history of science began with the attempts to identify and describe grammatical classes of words called "parts of speech". The fi rst classifications were made by ancient philosophers of Ancient Greece. They were hardly based on any clear criteria, it was a natural classification reflecting the result of the cognitive activity of a person. The grammatical system of European languages was formed on the basis of the grammatical teaching of the Ancient Greeks and Romans.

The existence of such lexico-grammatical classes has never been a debatable issue among the linguists, although there are different views on the principles of classifications. The representative of the English scientific grammar H. Sweet stressed the need to take into account the meaning, form and function of words, but he emphasized the priority of the form over the other criteria. The representative of structuralism Ch.Fries emphasized the priority of the function (syntactic criterion).

In modern linguistics parts of speech are also differentiated either by a number of criteria, or by a single criterion.

Traditional classification

The polydifferential ("traditional") classification of words is based on the three criteria: semantic, formal, and functional. The semantic criterion presupposes the evaluation of the generalized (categorial) meaning of the words of the given part of speech. The formal criterion provides for the exposition of all formal features (specific inflectional and derivational) of all the lexemic subsets of a particular part of speech. The functional criterion concerns the typical syntactic functions of a part of speech. Contractedly the set of these criteria is referred to as "meaning, form, function" (Blokh, 2000).

In accord with the traditional criteria of meaning, form, and function, words on the upper level of classification are divided into notional and functional.

Prof. Blokh calls the notional parts of speech the words of complete nominative value; in the utterance they fulfill self-dependent functions of naming and denoting things, phenomena, their substantial properties (Prof. Blokh). Opposed to the notional parts of speech are the functional words which are words of incomplete nominative value, but of absolutely essential relational (grammatical) value. In the utterance they serve as all sorts of mediators (Blokh, 2000).

To the basic functional parts of speech in English are usually referred the article, the preposition, the conjunction, the particle, the modal word, the interjection. Functional words are limited in number. On the lines of the traditional classification they are presented by the list, each of them requiring its own, individual description.

The syntactic (monodifferential) classification of words is based on syntactic featuring of words only. The syntactic classification of words, in principle, supplements the three-criteria classification specifying the syntactic features of parts of speech. For the Russian language the basic principles of the syntactic classification of words were outlined in the works of A.M. Peshkovski. In English the syntactico-distributional classification of words was worked out by structuralists L. Bloomfield and his followers Z. Harris and Ch. Fries. The syntactico-distributional classification of words is based on the study of their combinability by means of substitution tests. As a result of this testing, a standard model of four main syntactic positions of notional words was built up. These positions are those of the noun, verb, adjective, and adverb. Pronouns are included into the corresponding positional classes as their substitutes. Words incapable to occupy the said main syntactic positions are treated as functional words.

The noun as a part of speech

The noun as a part of speech has the categorical meaning of “substance. The noun is characrerised by the syntactical function of a subject, object, predicative, adverbial modifier, attribute. Typical of nouns is the prepositional combinability with another noun, with adverb, and adjective. The noun is characterized by the following grammatical categories: gender, number, case and article determination (prof. Blokh).

English nouns are divided into several subclasses.

Prof. Blokh states that the order in which the subclasses are presented is chosen by convention: the given set of subclasses cannot be structured hierarchically.

The category of gender

There are two approaches to the category of gender:

1. There is no grammatical gender in English, as there are no special grammatical forms to express it. This point of view is expressed by Profs. A.I. Smirnitsky, B.A. Ilyish, I.P. Ivanova, and others.

2. Other linguists (Strand, Blokh) recognize the grammatical category of gender in English nouns because it is possible to substitute a noun by a personal pronoun indicating sex.

According to Prof. Blokh, the category of gender is oppositional. It’s formed by two oppositions related to each other on a hierarchical basis:

The scholar proves that the category of gender exists in the English language, but is is purely semantic, as different from the socalled “formal gender” synthetic languages (Russian, German).

There are some nouns in English which are referred to as nouns of common gender – they are capable of expressing both feminine and masculine person genders (person, friend, cousin, doctor, president). There are some nouns which can show the sex lexically: either by means of being combined with certain notional words used as sex indicators or by suffixal derivation: boy friend – girl-friend, he-bear -she-bear, lion-lioness, widower-widow, tom-cat – pussy-cat.

Sometimes we can come across grammatical personifying transposition (олицетворение).

Thus, according to Prof. Blokh, gender can be considered a lexicogrammatical category.

The category of number

The category of number is expressed by the binary privative opposition of the plural form of the noun to the singular form. The strong member of the opposition is the plural; its formal mark is the suffix – (e) s. It correlates with the absence of the suffix in the singular form.

In the cases of oppositional reduction we have Pluralia Tantum and Singularia Tantum nouns. The Pluralia tantum nouns have only plural form.

The Singularia tantum nouns have only singular form. With them the predicate is always in the singular. Sometimes nouns of substance can be used in the plural form or take an indefinite article denoting an object made of the material.

Collective nouns denote groups of human beings (family, government, police); they can be used to denote the group as a whole (singular) ( e.g. His family is friendly) or a group consisting of a certain number of individuals (plural) (e.g.: My family are having dinner now).

The category of case

There exist different views on the category of case.

1. There are two cases in English.

2. There are more than two cases.

3. There are no cases in English at all.

Case is the category of the noun expressing relations between the thing denoted by the noun and other things or properties or actions, and is manifested by some formal sign of the noun itself. The minimum number to form a category is two cases.

1. Such scholars as J. Nesfield, M. Deutchbein present the so-called theory of positional cases. They state that there are 4 cases expressed not only by – ‘s but by prepositions (of, to) and word order. Nominative, Vocative, Dative and Accusative are distinguished on the basis of the position occupied by the noun in the sentence. These cases are illustrated by the following examples:

1. Nominative case (subject to a verb): rain falls.

2. Vocative (address): Are you coming, my darling?

3. Dative (indirect object to a verb): I gave John a penny.

4. Accusative (direct object and object to a preposition): The cat killed a rat. The ground is covered with snow.

This theory substitutes the functional characteristics of the part of the sentence for the morphological features of the word class (Blokh, 2000).

2. G. Curme presents the second viewpoint- the theory of prepositional cases. According to this theory combinations of nouns with prepositions should be viewed as morphological case forms. He distinguishes