Complex parts of the sentenceIn both contrasted languages parts of the sentence are of similar types. But one of the peculiarities of the English syntax is the existence of the so called “complex” parts of the sentence. Each part of the modern English sentence can be simple or complex. The simple part of the sentence can be expressed not only by a separate word but also by a group of words that make up the lexical and grammatical unity. Unlike this the complex part of the sentence (e.g., the Complex Subject, the Complex Object) are always the combination of two parts of the sentence, one of which points towards the person or the object, and the second – towards the action preformed by this person or object. Thus two members of the sentence that enter this complex are in predicate relations. Compare: I hate him to go away. Our arrival having been noted, we had a lot of guests. The predicate relation between the elements of such a complex part of the sentence is not formed in a grammatical way; from the morphological point of view they do not create the word combination but enter into word combination with the part of the sentence on which they together depend. Most frequently complex parts of the English sentence are expressed by predicative word combinations with non-finite parts of speech, performing the syntactic function of the secondary predicate. According to its meaning such a complex part of the sentence can be compared with a subordinate sentence or a simple sentence. In Ukrainian there are no similar complex parts of the sentence and similar relations are rendered with the help of subordinate sentences. Thus, the mentioned complex parts of the English sentence are usually expressed with the help of predicative word groups, known in traditional grammars as: 1) Complex Object (with the Infinitive, Participle I, Participle II, Gerund, non-Verbal), e.g.: She wants him to study better. 2) Complex Subject (with the Infinitive, Participle I, Participle II, non-Verbal), e.g.: The delegation was reported to have already arrived. 3) For-to-Infinitive Construction, e.g.: For you to do this is of the utmost importance. 4) Absolute Constructions/Prepositional Constructions (with Participle I, Participle II, Infinitive, non-Verbal), e.g.: She was staring at him, her hands trembling with fear. 5) Gerundial Predicative Construction, e.g.: He was aware of her being constantly late for her job. According to their structure all the mentioned constructions are quite different and can hardly be put into one group, taking into account their traditional names. Thus, for example, Complex Object and Complex Subject are predicative word groups called according to the syntactic function they perform in a sentence, whereas Absolute Participial Construction, For-to-Infinitive Construction and Gerundial Predicative Construction have got their names rather according to the constituents they are made of. Besides, For-to-Infinitive Construction can perform different syntactic functions in the sentence and therefore called Complex Subject, Complex Object, Complex Adverbial Modifier, etc. The same is true concerning the Gerundial Predicative Construction. As to Absolute Constructions, since their main syntactic function is to modify, they may be called Complex Adverbial Modifiers. Nevertheless, what unites all these constructions is that they constitute word combinations made of the constituent parts resembling the subject and the predicate. Since these constructions are never used independently, entering the sentence which already has its predication center, the subject-like and the predicate-like constituents of these constructions obtain the status of secondary ones, and therefore are called the “secondary subject” and the “secondary predicate”. As a result, the mentioned predicative word-groups can be called – structures of secondary predication (структури вторинної предикації – СВП). Their unification into one group of “structures of secondary predication” (further SSP) is made on the basis of the following characteristics: – SSP function only within the sentence at availability of the primary predication and in the formal sense are subjugated to the structures of the primary predication (SPP); – sentences, containing SSP are semantically and formally complicated and poly-predicative phenomena; – SSP are semantically equivalent to the subordinate sentence; – in their surface structure there is the violation of coordination of subject-predicate relations and their deep structure contains subject-predicate relations equivalent to those of the simple sentence; – SSP are structures that consist of the secondary subject and the secondary predicate; the secondary predicate can be expressed both by the verbal (that is Infinitive, Participle I and II, Gerund) and by the non-verbal part of speech. Since each structure of secondary predication (SSP) functions only within the limits of the sentence, that is at the availability of the structure of primary predication (SPP), – the most general model of the sentence containing SSP will be the following: S1 + P1 + S2 + P2 (+ complements), where S1 – is the primary subject of the sentence; P1 – is the primary predicate of the sentence. The SSP in its turn consists of S2 + P2 (+ complements),where S2 – is the secondary subject that can be expressed by a pronoun (most often by the pronoun in the objective case), by a noun (a common noun or less often by a proper name), by the noun group; P2 – the secondary predicate which is most often expressed by verbals: Infinitive (with the marker “to” or without it), Participle I, Gerund, Participle II and the non-Verbal (e.g., noun, adjective); complement(s) – very often after the secondary predicate there can be a compliment or the object of this verb, which is “demanded” by the semantics of the given verb and helps to reveal its meaning. Since Secondary Predication Structures are dependent ones and enter the sentence performing different syntactic functions, they can be classified according to the type of the syntactic structure they enter in the sentence. Before presenting this type of classification the types of syntactic structures should be mentioned. Considering the syntactic structure of the simple sentence, the Ukrainian linguist A.K. Korsakov (А.К. Корсаков) distinguished 4 types of syntactic structures: the structure of predication (структура предикації), the structure of complementation (структура комплементації), the structure of modification (структура модифікації) and the structure of coordination (структура координації). In foreign linguistics the notion of the syntactic structure and its four types was introduced by W. Francies in 1958 within the frames of the structural approach towards language study. The views of W. Francies were in their turn based on the ideas of Otto Jespersen and L. Bloomfield. A.K. Korsakov additionally distinguished two types of the structure of predication – the primary predication (consisting of the subject and the predicate) and the secondary predication (consisting of the secondary subject and the secondary predicate). Within the structure of complementation (consisting of the head-word and its complement) he distinguished the following types of complements: 1) The subjective complement or the predicative that characterizes the content of the substance-subject, e.g.: He is a student. 2) The objective complement, or the object-substance, which is in certain relations with the substance-subject expressed by the verb-predicate, e.g.: He studies languages. 3) The adverbial complement pointing towards certain characteristics of the verb-predicate, e.g.: He lives in Lviv. 4) The verbal complement which is the second verb component of the predicate, e.g.: He must study well. Types of coplements are distinguished by A.K. Korsakov taking into consideration their semantic character. The structure of modification (consisting of the head-word and its modifier) has two types of modifiers: the attributive modifier (He is a quick runner.) and the adverbial modifier (He runs quickly.). Of importance is also distinguishing adverbial complements (which cannot be omitted from the sentence without breaking its sense) and adverbial modifiers (that bring in additional information, explaining some other parts of the sentence, and thus, can be omitted from the sentence) that makes both structural and semantic sentence analysis more distinct. Finally, the structure of coordination (consisting of two components of equal value) is usually represented by two homogeneous members of the sentence that can perform different syntactic functions, e.g.: Peter and Ann rushed downstairs immediately. or He could sing and dance equally well. Structures of secondary predication (SSP) (структури вторинної предикації), the peculiar phenomenon of the English language (absent in Ukrainian), consisting of the secondary subject and the secondary predicate (e.g.: They (S1) wanted (P1) him (S2) to perform (P2) this task) can themselves enter structures of predication, complementation and coordination. The type of syntactic structure they enter depends on the syntactic function the structure of secondary predication performs in the sentence. Taking this into account, SSP can be classified in the following way:
|
