|Главная Случайная страница
Разделы: Автомобили Астрономия Биология География Дом и сад Другие языки Другое Информатика История Культура Литература Логика Математика Медицина Металлургия Механика Образование Охрана труда Педагогика Политика Право Психология Религия Риторика Социология Спорт Строительство Технология Туризм Физика Философия Финансы Химия Черчение Экология Экономика Электроника
The category of voice. Morphologo-syntactic nature of the voice category. Number and kinds of voices in ME. The problem of reflexive, reciprocal and middle voices
The category of voice is the system of binary/privative oppositions (love-is loved, loving-being loved, to love-to be loved) which shows whether the action is represented as issuing from the subjects (Active V.) or experienced by its object (Passive V.). |The category of voice shows close links between morphology & syntax. Being a morphological category, voice often manifests syntactic relations. |The voice opposites of the finite verbs indicate whether the subject of the sentence denotes the doer (agent) of the action or its recipient. |There is a tradit. point of view that there are 3 types of passive constructions depending on the initial active sentences: 1) direct passive (I wrote a letter – The letter was written by me); 2) indirect passive (I was shown the way to the village); 3) prepositional passive (If you put on this hat, you will be laughed at). |They depend on the kind of objects. Besides this tradit. classification there is a view of Ilysh and Kaushanskaya. They single out so-called (neuter-)reflexive voice, middle voice and reciprocal voice. |Neuter-reflexive shows that the action expressed by the predicate passes on to the subject (V+reflex.pronoun: myself, yourself but they’re semantically weakened): He cut himself while shaving. |Middle v. is represented by such structures which look like active but have passive meaning (the book sells well – active in form, passive in meaning). |Reciprocal v. is formed with each other & one another (They greeted each other). Some authors argue because: 1) in such sentences as he washed himself the pronoun may be viewed as direct object; 2) the words “washed” & “himself” belong to different lexical and grammatical meanings; 3) if we regard the form “wash himself” as analytical one it’s necessary to admit that the verb in English has the category of gender which doesn’t really exist; 4) the same meaning may be conveyed without pronoun himself.