A SIMPLE AND COMPLEX SENTENCE (PARADIGMATIC FEATURES AND THEIR TRANSFORMATIONS)

Abstract: This article examines the issues of complex and simple sentences from the point of view of paradigmatic characteristics. Paradigmatic relations are those relations that unite language units into groups and categories. Paradigmatic relations are based on, for example, a system of consonants, a declension system, a synonymic series. In the process of using a language, paradigmatic relations allow to choose the right unit, as well as to form words, their forms by analogy with those available in the language.

Keywords: paradigmatics, relations of complex and simple sentences, transformation, sentences, English.

A sentence is a unit of grammar that usually corresponds to a complete utterance and can act as a separate message (text of minimal length). The sentence consists of words appearing in morphological forms and in linear order, which are provided by the grammar of the language. Sentence structure is the subject of syntax.

A simple sentence.

The central grammatical unit of syntax is a simple sentence. This is determined by the fact that a simple sentence is an elementary unit designed to transmit relatively complete information, having such properties that make it possible to assign the reported to a particular time plan. In addition, a simple sentence is the main unit involved in the formation of a complex sentence and text. A simple sentence consists of phrases and word forms, has its own grammatical characteristics:

1. it is formed according to a special grammatical pattern;

2. has linguistic meanings, formal characteristics, intonation formality and the ability to change.

A simple sentence enters into a paradigmatic relationship. Paradigmatic relations are formal changes in the construction itself (particular manifestations of a general categorical meaning) expressed by special means. The particular grammatical meanings of a simple sentence are expressed:

1. significant or official words;

2. syntactic particles;

3. word order;

4. intonation.

A simple sentence enters into a syntagmatic relationship — the members of a simple sentence are combined with each other according to certain rules.

Each simple sentence is constructed according to a certain formal pattern, which is called a predicative basis or a structural scheme. Such schemes are abstractions, distracted from an unlimited set of concrete proposals.

1) The child is playing. The girl is reading. The train is coming. All these sentences are constructed according to the formal pattern of noun+verb in conjugated form (N1+Vf).

2) Work is being added. The water decreases. — N2 + Vs3 Scheme expresses the relationship of the procedural state and its carrier.

3) Winter. Night. — Cop1N1. — states the fact of existence.

The forms of words that organize the predicative basis are called the components of the structural scheme, the main members, the predicative center.

The grammatical meaning of a simple sentence is predicativity, a category that correlates a message with a particular time plane of reality with a whole complex of formal syntactic means. Thus, the structural scheme of a sentence has grammatical properties that allow us to indicate that what is being reported is either actually carried out in time (present, past, future), that is, has a real time plan, or is thought of as possible, due, desired, that is, has an unreal plan, or temporary uncertainty.

The values of time and reality/unreality are fused together, their complex is called objective modality.

Thus, the concept of predicativity as an abstract syntactic category consists of the concepts: the block diagram, the time plan of the reported and the reality/unreality of the reported.

All of this has to do with the semantics of the block diagram or the semantic structure of the sentence.

Thus, the semantic structure is its linguistic meaning, which is created by the interaction of the semantics of the block diagram and the lexical meaning of words.

In addition to the meaning of predicativity and semantic structure, the sentence has its functional meaning associated with the distribution of the communicative load between its members; this meaning is expressed by actual articulation, that is, articulation on a topic and a rhyme, word order and intonation.

Sentences have different grammatical meaning, different communicative purpose, semantics, etc., depending on the attribute underlying the classification, sentences are grouped into types:

1. Narrative, interrogative, motivational.

2. Exclamation points and non-exclamation points.

3. Affirmative, negative.

4. Separable and non-separable.

5. One-part and two-part.

6. Widespread and non-widespread.

7. Complicated and uncomplicated.

8. Complete and incomplete.

A complex sentence.

A complex sentence is a sentence that has 2 or more predicative units in its composition, forming a single whole in constructive semantic and intonation.

Parts of a complex sentence are not intended for communication as separate units. A complex sentence is characterized by communicative integrity. She also highlights the means of expressing the relations between the parts of the sentence:

a) the unions and the Union of the word (so, because, where, when)

b) intonation

c) order the following parts

d) correlates — and correlative pronominal words (that...that there...where...when)

e) the ratio of predicates (“should turn his head, like a bizarre feeling disappeared without a trace” — the other forms of the verb impossible)

f) the use of lexical elements (as for ... then, the fact is that)

A complex sentence whose parts are connected by compositional conjunctions is called a compound sentence. The compositional connection presupposes the equality of the parts of the sentence, which is revealed only at the syntactic level.

An unsociable complex sentence is a complex sentence, the predicative parts of which are connected by the interconnectedness of their meaning and structure, by rhythmic means, without the help of conjunctions or relative words.

The definition is reduced to listing the varieties of a complicated sentence, while not specifying the general feature that characterizes a complicated sentence as a whole in contrast to a simple uncomplicated sentence. The main difficulty of the definition lies in the heterogeneity of those syntactic phenomena that are traditionally summed up under the concept of complication.

THE LIST OF USED LITERATURE:

1. Fisiak J. A short grammar of Middle English. Warszawa, Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1968, 139 p.

2. Moessner L. Early Middle English Syntax. Tübingen, Niemeyer, 1989, 217 p.

3. Tajima M. The syntactic development of the gerund in Middle English. University of Ottawa, 1983, 470 p.

4. Traugott Elizabeth Closs. A History of English Syntax: a transformational approach to the history of English sentence structure. New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972, 216 p.

5. Visser F.T. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Vol. I. Syntactical units with one verb. Leiden, E.J. Brill, 1963, 663 p.

6. Smirnitskiy A.I. Drevneangliyskiy Yazyk [Old English]. Moscow, Moscow State University Press, 1998, 319 p.