Specificity of Cognate Nouns and Adjectives Functioning
https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2020-6-5-130-139
Abstract
Introduction. The aim of the article is to determine whether syntactic behavior of linguistic unit depends on its part-of-speech identity or only its semantics. The importance of the research is determined by the absence of systematic description of the specificity of cognate words functioning in linguistics.
Methodology and sources. The research deals with the cognate nouns and adjectives functioning. According to the classification of semantic types of predicates developed by A. G. Eliseeva, O. N. Seliverstova we define the researched predicates as the ones denoting state. These predicates are studied in terms of case grammar, i. e. they are compared in the aspect of an argument structure realization. In determining the semantic cases of predicates, we mainly rely on the set of semantic cases proposed by V. V. Bogdanov.
Results and discussion. It is shown that the analyzed nouns, as a rule, expressing given or known information require a lower number of cases in its explicit forms which still can be implicit. The researched adjectives that usually denote new information are accompanied by a higher number of cases in a surface structure. These predicates also differ in the forms of their arguments.
Conclusion. The revealed features of cognate nouns and adjectives functioning show the significant influence of the form of linguistic unit on syntactic behavior and indicate that formation of syntactic structures is not only determined by semantics.
About the Author
L. V. Noskina
Saint Petersburg Electrotechnical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Lyudmila V. Noskina – Can. Sci. (Philology) (1989), Associate Professor at the Department of Foreign Languages
5 Professor Popov str., St Petersburg 197376
References
1. Abrosimova, E.A. (1980), “Implementation of semantic actants of single-root verbs and nouns of censure and approval in the syntactic structure (based on the English language)”, Abstract of Can. Sci. (Philol.) dissertation, LGU im. A. A. Zhdanova, Leningrad, USSR.
2. Zolotova, G.A. (1982), Kommunikativnye aspekty russkogo sintaksisa [Communicative aspects of Russian syntax], Nauka, Moscow, USSR.
3. Burmistrova, E.G. (1988), “Structure and semantics of a group of nouns with a deverbative kernel”, Abstract of Can. Sci. (Philol.) dissertation, Leningrad State Pedagogical Institute, Leningrad, USSR.
4. Kudryavceva, V.A. (1988), “Reflection of the valence properties of the verb in verbal agents”, Vyskazyvanie i tekst: vzaimodeistvie yazykovykh edinits Utterance and text: interaction of linguistic units, Nauka, Moscow, USSR, pp. 93–104.
5. Bogdanov, V.V. (1977), Semantiko-sintaksicheskaya organizatsiya predlozheniya [Semanticsyntactic organization of a sentence], Leningrad Univ. Press, Leningrad, USSR.
6. Eliseeva, A.G. and Seliverstova, O.N. (1982), “Semantic types of predicates in English”, Semanticheskie tipy predikatov [Semantic predicate types], in Seliverstova, O.N. (ed.), Nauka, Moscow, USSR, pp. 158–216.
7. Apresyan, U.D. (1974), Leksicheskaya semantika. Sinonimicheskie sredstva yazyka [Lexical semantics. Synonymous means of language], Nauka, Moscow, USSR.
8. Anderson, J. (1974), The grammar of case: towards a localistic theory, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.
9. Chafe, W. (1970), Meaning and the structure of language, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.
10. Fillmore, C.J. (1981), “The Case for Case Reopened”, Transl. by Gorodetskii, B.Yu., New in Foreign Linguistics, no. 10, Progress, Moscow, USSR, pp. 496–530.
11. Fillmore, C.J. (1968), “The Case for Case”, in Bach, E. and Harms, R. (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, NY, USA, pp. 1–89.
12. Hornby, A.S., Cowie, A.P. and Windsor-Lewis, J. (1974), Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, UK.
13. Arutyunova, N.D. (1976), Predlozhenie i ego smysl [The sentence and its meaning], Nauka, Moscow, USSR.
14. Brushlinskii, A.V. (1982), Myshlenie: protsess, deyatel'nost', obshchenie [Thinking: process, activity, communication], Nauka, Moscow, USSR.
15. Spark, M. (1976), “The Public Image”, The Public Image Stories, Progress, Moscow, USSR, pp. 21–128.
16. Murdoch, I. (1957), The Sandcastle, Chatto and Windus, London, UK.
17. Cheever, J. (1980), “The Superintendent”, Selected Short Stories, Progress, Moscow, USSR, pp. 84–107.
18. Paducheva, E.V. (1977), “About derivative diathesis of predicate names in Russian language”, Problemy lingvisticheskoi tipologii i struktury yazyka [Problems of linguistic typology and structure of language], Nauka, Leningrad, USSR, pp. 84–106.
19. Cheever, J. (1980), “The Country Husband”, Selected Short Stories, Progress, Moscow, USSR, pp. 139–180.
20. Blindus, E.S. (1975), “Potentially predicative phrases in English language”, Abstract of Dr. Sci. (Philol.) dissertation, Lomonosov Moscow State Univ., Moscow, USSR.
Review
For citations:
Noskina L.V. Specificity of Cognate Nouns and Adjectives Functioning. Discourse. 2020;6(5):130-139. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2020-6-5-130-139
Views:
401
Email this article 