3. Simple offer.

3.1 Two-part sentence.

3.2 One-part proposal.

3.3 Incomplete proposal

4. Difficult sentence.

4.1 Complex sentence.

4.2 Compound sentence.

4.4 Complex polynomial sentence with different types of connection

II Conclusion.

Introduction.

Syntax begins with the connections of language means and the relationships that arise on the basis of these connections. Depending on what with what and how from language means enters into connections and relations, various syntactic constructions are born.

As part of syntactic constructions, modified words are used in one of their forms (word forms), which together form the morphological paradigm of the word.

Phrases are built from word forms: warm rain, half of the night, start to drizzle and so on.

Simple sentences are built from word forms and phrases: Warm rain began to drizzle from midnight(Paustovsky).

Complex sentences are built from simple sentences, differing in the degree of semantic and grammatical cohesion. Yes, from the suggestions The wind blew from land and the water was calm you can form a complex non-union, compound and complex sentences: The wind blew from land- near the shore the water was calm; The wind blew from the land, and the water was calm near the shore; If the wind was blowing from land, the water was calm near the shore.(Other complex sentences are possible.)

A complex syntactic whole is built from simple and complex sentences. For example: Our people have always loved, known and appreciated the forest. No wonder so many fairy tales and songs are written about our dense forests.

In the forests is our future, the fate of our crops, our full-flowing rivers, our health and, to a certain extent, our culture. Therefore, the forest must be protected, as we protect human life, how we protect our culture and all the achievements of our extraordinary era.(Paustovsky). In this complex syntactic whole, simple and complex sentences are united by a common micro-theme.

ISystem of syntactic units

The main syntactic units are a phrase, a sentence (simple and complex), a complex syntactic whole.

1. The phrase as a unit of syntax.

In the history of Russian syntactic theory, the role of phrases and sentences in the general system of syntactic units has been and is evaluated ambiguously.

The phrase enters the sentence through its main word, which in the sentence can be the dependent word of another phrase.

Phrases are built on the basis of a subordinate relationship between words. Methods of subordinating communication - coordination, control and adjoining.

Agreement is such a way of subordination, in which the dependent word is put in the same forms as the main one: favorite book, my book, read book. In agreement with the change in the forms of the main word, the forms of the dependent word also change accordingly: favorite book, favorite book. The means of registration of agreement is the end of the dependent word.

Management is such a way of subordination, in which the dependent word is placed with the main word in a certain case: write a letter(vin. p.), write to mother(dat. p.), cut with a knife(creative p.), sit in a chair(proposition) etc. When controlling with a change in the form of the main word, the form of the dependent word does not change: wrote a letter, wrote a letter, wrote a letter etc.

The means of formalizing control are usually the ending of a dependent word and a preposition.

Control is direct if the form of the dependent word does not have a preposition (carry out the plan, fulfill the plan), and prepositional, if the form of the indirect case is controlled by the preposition (remembering childhood, homesickness, meeting friends and so on.).

Adjacency is such a way of subordinating connection, in which the dependent unchangeable word is connected with the main one only in meaning and intonation: very appreciate, very cute, very good; left to study, he said worried. As a rule, unchangeable significant words adjoin: adverbs, infinitives, gerunds.

2. The sentence as a unit of syntax.

The sentence is the main unit of syntax, since it is in the sentence that the most essential functions of the language are expressed: cognitive or expressive (language as a tool, tool of thinking) and communicative (language as a means of communication). Language is a means of communication only because it expresses thoughts about objective reality.

The sentence is the most multifaceted unit of syntax. It is therefore characterized by a set of features that can be divided into two groups:

1) structural feature - grammatical organization, which includes special structural schemes, special ways of expressing the structural elements of the scheme and grammatically formalized syntactic links and relationships;

2) a semantic feature - predicativity (the relation of the content of the sentence to reality in the modal-temporal plan. The content (semantics) of the sentence is determined primarily by the nature of the thought expressed. The sentence is characterized by semantic completeness.

Let us especially note the intonation, since it can express both structural and semantic features of a sentence.

Sentences are divided into simple and complex. " building material» for simple sentences are words (word form) and phrases, for complex sentences - two (or more) sentences. Simple sentences include only one predicative combination, complex sentences - at least two. Being part of complex sentences, simple sentences, although to varying degrees, lose their intonational completeness, often change word order, etc., therefore, parts of complex sentences are also called predicative units (and not sentences).

Simple sentences differ from complex ones not only in structure, but also in meaning. Complex sentences have more complex semantics than simple ones. The combination of simple sentences into complex ones enriches their speech meaning, and sometimes transforms their grammatical meanings. So, when combining simple sentences In the yard the acacia bent and rushed about And An angry wind ruffled her by the drag into a complex one with the help of a union as if the real modality of the second sentence is transformed into an unreal one: Outside, an acacia bent and tossed about, as if an angry wind were ruffling its hair.(A. Tolstoy).

3. Simple offer.

The simple sentence is the central communicative unit of syntax. It has a certain structure (structure), due to its semantics.

By the nature of the logical-syntactic articulation, simple sentences are divided into articulating (two-part and one-part) and indivisible, among which interjectional sentences are the most striking. According to the presence / absence of secondary members, segmented sentences are divided into common and non-common. According to the structural and semantic completeness, segmented (two-part and one-part) sentences are divided into complete and incomplete.

The main classification system of structural-semantic types of a simple sentence is formed by segmented (two-part and one-part) and indivisible sentences.

A snow-covered winter forest can be evaluated in the form of the following sentences: The forest is like a fairy tale! Wonderful! Oh! The choice of one of the structural-semantic types and its lexical content are determined by subjective factors, among which the most important are the nature of the articulation of thought in the mind of the speaker, his emotional state, vocabulary, etc.

These proposals have common and distinctive features. They are united by the fact that they are all communicative units and have a two-term semantic structure (there is an object of thought (speech) and its characteristic: “definable” and “defining” “saying something about something”), but what distinguishes them primarily structure: in the first (two-part) sentence The forest is like a fairy tale! there is a subject and a predicate; in the second (one-part) Wonderful! there is only the predicate; in the third (indivisible) Oh! there is no subject or predicate.

3.1 Two-part sentences.

Two-part sentences are sentences with two main members - subject and predicate, which can be extended by secondary members. The subject with the minor members related to it forms the composition, or group, of the subject; the predicate with the secondary members related to it - the composition, or group, of the predicate. For example: Droplets of autumn mist \ Run along the trunks in streams of tears(Kedrin); The desire to serve the common good / must certainly be a need of the soul, a condition for personal happiness(Chekhov). The compositions of the subject and the predicate, separated by a vertical bar, correspond to the components of thought and the actual division: the composition of the subject expresses the logical subject and is the expression of "given", the composition of the predicate expresses the logical predicate and is the expression of the "new", therefore the subject precedes the predicate.

The main members of the sentence are included as structural components in the structural scheme of two-part sentences and form their predicative center.

3.2 One-part sentence

One-part sentences are called sentences whose grammatical basis consists of one main member (with or without dependent words). The other main member is not restored (this is their difference from incomplete sentences). The main elements of predicativity (modality, tense, person) in one-part sentences are expressed in one main member. One-part sentences can act as independent syntactic units and be used as part of complex sentences. According to the totality of semantic and structural properties, the following main types are distinguished among one-component sentences:

1. Definitely personal (I love the storm in early May).

2. Vaguely personal (A new school was built in our village).

3. Generalized-personal (Tears of sorrow will not help).

4. Impersonal (It's getting light; I'm chilly; I'm cold.)

5. Infinitives (The clouds of the sun cannot hide, the war is peacenot win).

6. Nominative (Winter; Here comes the winter; Winter!).

7. Vocative ("suggestions-addresses").

Typical (nuclear, central) one-part sentences- these are sentences with one main member that do not require another main member and cannot be supplemented by it without changing the nature of the thought expressed, without changing the semantics.

According to the way of expressing the main member, one-component sentences are divided into verbal and nominal.

A common structural property of one-part verb sentences is the absence of a subject: it does not exist and cannot exist in all varieties of one-part verb sentences.

3.3 Incomplete sentences

Complete and incomplete proposals are distinguished by the presence / absence of certain members of the proposal. Full sentences have all the members necessary for its understanding outside the context and speech situation: I have known this area for eight years. In incomplete sentences, one or more of its members (main or secondary) are missing.

Usually, the definition of incomplete sentences includes an indication of the context and situation (consituation), which suggest only the lexical specificity of the omitted members of the sentence, that is, they determine the lexical meaning of the omitted word forms. For example: The boy lowered the yacht into the green water And stepped back, giving room to the breeze. But shreds of sails didn't even move. The ship didn't move.

“It won’t float,” the mother sighed. “Let’s go.”

- Will float- said the boy(Stepanov).

As this text shows, there is no absolute lexical specificity of subjects for the selected incomplete sentences, because nouns can also play the role of the subject yacht, boat and pronoun He. Incompleteness of offers Won't float. Will float is created by the absence of a subject, the position of which is determined by the structural scheme of the sentence, the lexical and grammatical properties of verbal predicates.

In place of the missing terms, a dash is usually put.

A comparison of complete and incomplete sentences shows that in complete sentences all syntactic connections and relations are revealed, informative semantics, including grammatical and lexical ones, are more fully and fully expressed.

However, full sentences are not always appropriate: the repetition of the same words can create verbosity and make communication difficult. Incomplete sentences have their own semantic and stylistic advantages: they give speech liveliness, naturalness, ease, and most importantly, they allow you to update the "new".

4. Complex sentence.

A complex sentence is a syntactic communicative unit of a higher order than a simple sentence.

Like a simple sentence, a complex sentence is characterized by intonational and semantic completeness, but it expresses a more complex content and has a more complex form (structure).

The main means of communication of the predicative parts of a complex sentence include intonation and allied means: unions (and, but, or, if, to, since, so, although etc.) and allied words - relative pronouns and pronominal adverbs (who, who, whose, who, where, where, from where, why and etc.).

Intonation is a universal means of communication, that is, any complex sentence has intonational completeness. In sentences without allied means, the role of intonation is especially great.

Thus, we can talk about two main ways of connecting predicative parts in a complex sentence: 1) with the help of allied means and intonation; 2) with the help of intonation (of course, this excludes the participation in the organization of a complex sentence of other means, for example, the correlation of predicate forms; we are talking only about the main means).

These two methods of connection determine the division of complex sentences into two large groups: 1. Complex sentences with an allied or relative connection. For example: The coachman suddenly reined in the horses, and the carriage stopped.(Chekhov); A blizzard is not terrible if a person is not afraid of it.(Semushkin); Spread over me blue sky, according to which quietly floated and melted a sparkling cloud(Korolenko). 2. Complex sentences with non-union connection. For example: Crossbills creak, tits ring, the cuckoo laughs, the oriole whistles, the jealous song of the chaffinch sounds incessantly, the strange bird squints thoughtfully(Bitter).

In many cases, there is no clear difference in the grammatical semantics of the complex sentences of these two groups. Particularly close in their semantics are complex sentences with a non-union connection and with a union And, expressing the value of the enumeration of events. Such sentences can be freely combined into polynomial complex sentences that have the general meaning of enumeration. For example: The leaves on the birch trees glisten like medals, the air glistens in the distance, and the dew sparkles in the grass now with a blue, now red, then a purple spark ...(Antonov).

Allied compound sentences (with conjunctions and relative words) are divided by the nature of the syntactic connection and by common grammatical meanings into two structural and semantic subgroups: compound sentences - with a coordinating connection between predicative parts and complex sentences - with a subordinating connection.

The coordinative connection in a complex sentence, as in a simple one, is carried out by coordinating conjunctions (and, yes, but, a, or, either; then..., then... etc.) Coordinating conjunctions, expressing various grammatical meanings, do not indicate the dependent, subordinate nature of one of the predicative parts of a complex sentence in relation to another. For example: The floor was strewn with washcloth, and there were footprints on it.(Fedin); It's dark in here, but I see the sparkle in your eyes(Chekhov);

Subordinating connection in a complex sentence is carried out by subordinating unions (what, to, how, if, because, if..., then... etc.) and allied words (who, who, whose, how much, where, why etc.) Both of them, being in the subordinate (dependent) part, clearly indicate its dependence on the other (main) predicative part. For example: We must go if he advises.(Goncharov); We needed a guide who knew the forest paths well.(Field).

Thus, the difference between compound and complex sentences lies in the fact that in the first of them the allied means does not indicate the dependence of one part on the other (the predicative parts can be equal), and in the second it does (one of the parts is made out as dependent).

Finally, there are complex sentences with a mixed form. For example: Although new schedule transportation was introduced a long time ago, but so far not all drivers have mastered it. In this complex sentence (the first part is subordinate to the second) there is not only a subordinating concessive union Although, but also a coordinating adversative conjunction But, and the relations expressed in this sentence are respectively concessive-adversative.

4.1 Complex sentence.

A complex sentence is a sentence consisting of two or more predicative parts connected by subordinating conjunctions or allied words. In such a sentence, one part is grammatically independent (main), and the other is grammatically dependent, subordinate (subordinate).

Complex sentences with adverbial clauses. Subordinate clauses with the meaning of external circumstances (place, time, conditions, goals, comparisons, reasons, concessions) spread the entire main part, less often the composition of one of its predicates or a separate turnover in the main part, and for the most part are attached by semantic unions special for each type. The only exceptions are subordinate places, the connection of which with the main part is carried out, as in the pronominal-correlative type, with the help of correlative and relative words (pronominal adverbs). For example: It would seem that there is no place for fun at all where shells dig the ground(Ovechkin) (subordinate part of the place); Masha was already quite gone to the door, When Shmelev stopped her(Simonov) (subordinate part of time); Until what happens river water good If drink it at noon in large sips from a helmet(Surkov) (subjective part of the condition); I woke up Pasha to he didn't fall off the road(Chekhov) (attachment of the goal); Every sound gave rise to some sparks and vague smells, How a drop makes the water tremble(Yu. Kazakov) (subordinate clause of comparison); Klim could not refuse meetings with Inokov, because this unpleasant guy knew a lot and could sensibly tell(Bitter) (subordinate part of the cause); Although herself, apparently, did not expect anything worthwhile from her feverish activity(Turgenev) (subordinate part of the concession).

In complex sentences with a subordinate clause of place spatial relationships are expressed. The subordinate part can indicate not only the place itself (with the correlative word there), but also on the direction of action of the main part - direct (with the correlative word there) and vice versa (with the correlative word from there). For example: Where the winds licked the snow, the earth bursts loudly at night(Sholokhov); Alexei crawled to where the plane had gone(Field); He left from where rode into the horse yard(). In addition, the actual place of action of the main part can be indicated not only by indicating the place in the subordinate part (relative word Where), but also by indicating the direction (relative words where, from where). The same must be said about the designation of the direction of action of the main part.

In complex sentences with a subordinate part of time various types of temporal relations are expressed: the action of the main part coincides with the action of the subordinate (relations of simultaneity) or precedes or follows it (relations of different times).

In sentences with the meaning of simultaneity, the subordinate part is attached by conjunctions when, while, while, as; predicates in the main and subordinate parts most often have the same form of imperfect tense, or one of them is imperfect and the other is perfect. For example: As long as he brewed strong tea, sat and was silent keep thinking(Simonov); ...When I see before me Your profile, and eyes, and golden curls ... I fascinated, I burn ... (Pushkin); Only got bored as the train was approaching to Kruzhilikha(Panova). In all these sentences, the predicates of the main and subordinate parts are expressed by imperfective verbs; the action of the main part coincides with the action of the subordinate part throughout its entire length.

In sentences with the meaning of different times of actions, the subordinate part of time is attached by conjunctions when, while, after, since, before, before, as soon as and etc.; the predicates of the main and subordinate parts are most often expressed in the forms of the perfect form or in one of the parts - perfect, and in the other - imperfect. For example: When she entered, the lieutenant quickly got up and went towards(Simonov); Until we get down to business, they won't even move. moved (Nosov); Ever since since as an eternal judge I was given the omniscience of a prophet, In the eyes of people I read Pages of malice and vice(Lermontov).

In complex sentences with a subordinate part of the condition both real and unreal conditions can be expressed.

The meaning of the real condition is expressed in sentences with conjunctions if, if, when, once, moreover, in the main and subordinate parts, predicates in the form indicative mood or infinitive. For example: The big owner, if he sees disorder in someone else's economy, will stand up(Prishvin); If you are a ruddy guy, brother will be named to us(Pushkin); When the commander is not shy, the soldiers will follow him into fire and water(Ovechkin); Once you agreed, so you can not refuse(Dal). In sentences with union When subordinate clauses often have a temporary connotation of meaning, and with the union once - connotation of causality.

The meaning of the unreal condition is expressed in sentences with conjunctions if, if, when, moreover, the predicates in the main and subordinate parts have the form of a subjunctive mood or an infinitive. For example: If I were offered one of the two: to be a chimney sweep in St. Petersburg or to be a local prince, then I would take the place of a chimney sweep(Chekhov); If I were an evil person, would I have let the prey out of my hands?(Mamin-Sibiryak)

With the preposition of the subordinate part, it can be connected to the main part using double unions: If...then...; If only ..., so ...; If so... and etc.

In complex sentences with subordinate goals the latter are joined to the main part by unions so that, so that, so that, so that, so that and particles acting as unions if only, if only. Subjunctive goals indicate facts that are not real, but only desirable, therefore predicates in subordinate goals can only be expressed in the subjunctive mood (particle would is part of unions) or infinitive. For example me woke Pasha, to he didn't fall off the road(Chekhov); He used all his eloquence, so that turn Akulina away from her intention(Pushkin); I'm ready for anything if only mom recovered(Paustovsky); For order to to be happy, one must not only love, but also be loved(Paustovsky).

Adventitious goals attached by union particles if only, if only are used only in postposition, expressing a stronger desire, and have an additional connotation.

In complex sentences with comparative clauses can be expressed real (with unions like, just like) and conjectural comparisons (with conjunctions as if, as if, as if, exactly, as if). For example: Each sound gave rise to some kind of sparks and vague smells, like a drop gives rise to a trembling of water.(Kazakov); Small leaves are bright and friendly green, like who washed them and varnished them(Turgenev). In the first case, facts that are really similar are compared, in the second, the compared facts are connected only by associative, imaginary connections.

In complex sentences with subordinate clauses different shades of causal meaning can be expressed. The subordinate parts are attached by causal unions: because, because, since, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, in connection with the fact that, especially since, because, for and by some others. One or another shade of causal meaning depends on which particular union the subordinate part is attached to.

The broadest causal meaning is expressed by clauses with conjunctions because, because. For example: He did not take any overtime or additional work, because he spent all his free time in the experimental workshop.(Nikolaev); The third corps had to be reinforced with an artillery battalion, since it was on its sector that an offensive was expected.(Bondarev).

Clauses with unions thanks to And because of have narrower meanings, namely: the first usually indicate a favorable, and the second - an unfavorable cause. Compare: Due to the fact that the train schedule was strictly observed, the number of traffic increased significantly(From newspapers) and Due to the fact that the train schedule was not respected, the number of traffic decreased.

Adverbs with union due to express a weakened causal meaning, sometimes an indirect cause, and with the union especially

What - the most important reason. Wed: Extracurricular classes were held irregularly, due to the fact that the lecturer failed to really interest the students and in many cases I did not want to repeat the purely abstract and idealistic thoughts of the German philosopher, especially since in these cases he was not true to himself and paid tribute to his century(Herzen).

Clauses with unions all the more so, good And for always stand after the main part and have an additional connotative connotation of meaning. For example: The dogs climbed far into the kennels, since there was no one to bark at(Goncharov); It is known that, when crossing fast rivers, one should not look at the water, because immediately the head will spin.(Lermontov).

In complex sentences with subordinate clauses the latter point to a fact that contradicts the content of the main part; the event referred to in the subordinate clause should have led to results opposite to those referred to in the main clause, but did not.

Subordinate concessions are attached to the main hour by one of the concessive unions (although; in spite of the fact, honor despite the fact that; let; let; for nothing) or combinations of relative adverbs how, how much with particle neither. Depending on what exactly the subordinate part is attached to the main part, there are shades of a concessive meaning.

The broadest concessive meaning is expressed in sentences with conjunctions Although; although. For example: For a long time my tireless dog continued to prowl through the bushes, Although herself, apparently, did not expect anything worthwhile from her feverish activity(Turgenev); He looks neat and clean although his clothes are worn out(Fedoseev) In such cases, the subordinate part takes a postposition.

If the subordinate clause with the same conjunctions occupies a preposition, then concessive adversarial relations are expressed in a complex sentence. This is especially pronounced in cases where the main part has an opposing union with it. But or however. For example: Although I was very narrow and awkward in my new dress, however i hid it from everyone(L. Tolstoy); Although it was still early, but the gates were locked(Korolenko). Sentences of this type can be considered transitional (between submission and composition).

Subordinate parts with unions let, let have a connotation of "conscious assumption". For example: Even if you feel sad, don't lower your head(Lebedev-Kumach). The subordinate clauses with these conjunctions are usually used in preposition.

Adventitious, attached with the help of combinations no matter how much clearly express a generalizing-concessive (or intensifying-concessive) meaning. For example: No matter how Pantelei Prokofievich protected himself from all sorts of difficult experiences, he soon had to go through a new shock(Sholokhov) But How many Sasha neither I thought nothing came to his mind(Popov). An intensifying-generalizing shade of meaning is created in this case in the same way as in sentences of a pronominal-correlative type

Complex sentences with subordinate clauses. Subordinate corollaries are attached to the main part or one of its predicates by the union So and are always in postposition. For example: The snow kept getting whiter and brighter, so it hurt my eyes(Lermontov).

In complex sentences with subordinate clauses, the main part is relatively complete in form and content, and the subordinate clause is dependent (one-sided dependence). Therefore, often the subordinate part has an additive connotation of meaning, that is, it contains, as it were, an additional message. In some cases, the connection between the main and subordinate parts can be so weakened that these parts become intonationally independent sentences. For example: Neither father nor mother gave either girl or boy an explanation for what they saw. So the children had to decide for themselves the question of the meaning of this spectacle.(L. Tolstoy).

Complex sentences with subordinate subjunctives. Subordinate clauses are attached to the entire main part or, less often, to one of its members by relative pronouns What(V various forms without prepositions and with prepositions) why, why, For what and others. The main part in such complex sentences is complete in its form and content, and the subordinate clause, dependent in its form, expresses a subordinating - connecting meaning - contains an additional message, an assessment of what is said in the main part, a conclusion, a consequence from that , what is said in the main part, individual remarks about the message contained in the main part, etc. For example: The dew has fallen What predicted good weather tomorrow(Mamin-Sibiryak); We went on tiptoe in the hallway, what Parasha laughed a lot(Aksakov); We returned to Russia at the end of December, then wife spent a month with her father(); ... He took upon himself the burden of general supervision of forest affairs, resulting in he was listened to in the editorial office, colleagues fawned over him(Leonov); She needed not to be late for the theater, which is why she was in a hurry(Chekhov).

In subordinate clauses, the intensifying-comparative particle is often used And, emphasizing that the message contained in the subordinate clause is caused by the message contained in the main clause. Wed two such proposals: One corner of the curtain was slightly turned up, which made it possible to look into the bedroom.(Chekhov) and One corner of the curtain was slightly turned up, which made it possible to look into the bedroom.

Complex sentences with severaladnexal. Above, only sentences consisting of one main and one subordinate part were considered. This form is the most typical for a complex sentence, the most common in both written and oral varieties. literary language.

However, in the Russian language, especially in the styles of written speech and in the language of fiction, there are often more complex sentences in their form, consisting of several parts.

Based on what the subordinate clauses refer to and they correlate with each other, two types of polynomial complex sentences are distinguished.

I. Polynomial complex sentences with sequential subordination of subordinate clauses. In such sentences, the main part is the main one for only one of the subordinate clauses, which in turn is the main one for the next subordinate clause, etc. Schematically, this method can be represented as follows: Marya had already seen him from afar and knew What he is a delegate to the Ninth Congress of the Party, one of those three hundred and forty delegates whom the congress sent to the front

Tell him, to held on until Bye I will not give the order to retreat ...(Fadeev).

More precisely, the last, for example, sentence can be limited using the following linear scheme:

[…verb], (to…until), (until…)

If the first clause is in front of the second clause (for it is the main one), then a confluence of conjunctions is formed and its wearing changes somewhat, since the connection between such sentences is closer. For example: I thought that if at the decisive moment I did not out-argue the stubborn old man, then later it would be difficult for me to free myself from his guardianship.(Pushkin).

[verb], (what (if...), then...)

https://pandia.ru/text/78/064/images/image002_29.gif "height="12"> A. With homogeneous subordination, subordinate clauses are worn to the same word of the main or to all the main and belong to the same structural semantic type.Schematically, in the most general form, such sentences can be depicted as follows:

Here are some examples: But it seems that the song is still going on, that it does not and will not have an end (Bunin); There was that pre-night hour when outlines, lines, colors, distances are erased; when the daylight is still confused, inseparably clinging to the night.

Homogeneous subordinate clauses, like homogeneous members, can be interconnected without unions and with the help of coordinating unions And, less often ah, but. For example me answered that nature is good and that sunsets are especially good in our places(Soloukhin); And Lyubka hugged Ulya, with whom she had made friends since that meeting at Turkenich, but whom she had not yet had time to greet, and kissed her like a sister.(Fadeev).

B. In case of heterogeneous subordination, subordinate clauses are introduced: 1) to different words the main sentence or one part to the whole main, and the other to one of its words; 2) to one word or the whole main - all subordinate clauses, different in their structural and semantic types.

The general scheme of such proposals can be represented as follows:

https://pandia.ru/text/78/064/images/image007_7.gif" width="616" height="96 src=">

4.2 Compound sentence

A compound sentence is a syntactic unit that is a combination of two or more simple sentences and is characterized by semantic, intonational and structural unity.

Predicative parts in compound sentences are connected

coordinative conjunctions that are between predicative parts and serve to express common grammatical meanings - semantic relationships between these parts: connecting, adversative, dividing, etc. These common meanings, in turn, are differentiated by various means. So, in compound sentences expressing connecting relations, the ratios of aspectual-temporal forms of predicates play an important role: Transparent forest one turns black And the spruce turns green through the hoarfrost, And the river shines under the ice(Pushkin) (the simultaneity of actions in terms of the present tense led to the use of imperfect predicates in the form of the present tense in all three parts); pass time and we'll be gone forever(Chekhov) (the sequence of actions in terms of the future led to the use of perfective verbs in the form of the future tense in both parts).

Compound sentences with connecting conjunctions. In compound sentences with connecting conjunctions (and, yes, neither ... nor, also, also) connective relationships are expressed. According to the structural features and grammatical meanings, compound sentences with connecting conjunctions are divided into two large groups: 1) homogeneous composition and 2) heterogeneous composition.

1. In compound sentences of the first group, the predicative parts are connected by conjunctions and, yes, neither ... nor and express connective-enumerative relations (homogeneous events occurring simultaneously or following one after another are listed). Such sentences can be both binary and polynomial (with repeated unions). The homogeneity of their parts is usually determined by the presence in their composition of a common member, or subordinate part, or the same ratio of parts with the previous context, or, finally, the same attitude of the speaker to the listed events.

2. In compound sentences of the second group, of a heterogeneous composition, predicative parts are joined by unions yes, also, also and express connective-distributive connective-resultative and other relations of heterogeneous connection. Such sentences can only be binomial.

Compound sentences withseparating unions. In compound sentences with disjunctive conjunctions (or (il), either, then ... then, not that ... not that, either ... or) separation relations are expressed - relations of mutual exclusion or alternation. Compound sentences with divisive unions can be both two-member and polynomial; most of them are homogeneous.

1. Relations of mutual exclusion are expressed with the help of unions or (il), or, not that ... not that, either ... or.

Unions or (il), either can be single and repetitive; they indicate that the content of the first predicative part excludes the possibility of the content of the second and subsequent parts, and vice versa. Union or is stylistically neutral and is used in all varieties of literary language. The colloquial version of this union is il - has a shade of obsolescence, the union is also colloquial or. For example: Let him move to the village in the wing, or I will move from here(Chekhov); Either the plague will pick me up, Or the frost will ossify, Or the barrier will slam into my forehead(Pushkin).

In sentences with a neutral repeating conjunction not that... not that relations of mutual exclusion are complicated by an indication of the difficulty of distinguishing one from two or from a series of phenomena, due to the uncertainty of impressions from each of them. For example: Not that who gave the horse not that who's new arrived(Danilevsky).

The same relationship is expressed by the repeated union either ... or having a touch of conversational style, for example: Whether the rustle of the ear, the flutter of the breeze, either warm hand stroking hair(Surkov).

2. In alternation sentences (with a repeating union then ... then) it is said that the events reported in the predicative parts exist in different time plans, that is, they alternate. Such sentences are used in all stylistic varieties of the literary language. For example: That the sun shines dimly, then a black cloud hangs(Nekrasov). Her chest now rose high, then it seemed she was holding her breath(Lermontov).

Compound sentences with adversative conjunctions. In compound sentences with adversative conjunctions (ah, but, yes, but, but, however etc.) express comparative and opposite relations, that is, it indicates the opposition of events, their difference or inconsistency. All such sentences, regardless of whether their parts are homogeneous or heterogeneous, can only be binomial.

According to the structural features and basic grammatical meanings, all compound sentences with adversative conjunctions are divided into two groups:

1) comparative and 2) opposing sentences.

1. In comparative sentences (with unions a, well) phenomena that are different in some respect are compared, and these phenomena, for all their dissimilarity, do not cancel each other, but, as it were, coexist. The most common among such sentences are sentences with the broadest meaning and stylistically neutral union. A. For example: The bottom of the tower was stone, and the top was wooden...(Chekhov); He is already over forty, and she is thirty ...(Chekhov).

2. In adversative sentences (with unions but, yes, however, but, but etc.) various types of adversarial relations are expressed: adversative - restrictive, adversative - concessive, adversative - reparative, etc. All these types of relations are based on the inconsistency of the events referred to in the predicative parts. The most common and stylistically neutral is the union But. Union Yes has a colloquial character, and the union however book.

In adversative-restrictive sentences (with conjunctions but, nevertheless, yes) such events are reported, the second of which limits the manifestation of the first, interferes with it or clarifies it, refuting it in some part.

In adversative-concessive sentences (with unions but, nevertheless, yes) the adversative meaning is complicated by the concessive meaning (one phenomenon should have caused another, but did not). For example: I had my own room in the house, but I lived in the yard in a hut...(Chekhov). Wed complex sentence with a concessive clause: Although I had my own room in the house, I lived in the yard in a hut. The concessive meaning is formed mainly by the lexical composition of the parts, therefore its shade is inherent in many types of both complex and complex sentences. Wed: I had my own room in the house, and I lived in the yard in a hut; I did not live in a house where I had my own room, but in the yard in a hut.

A distinctly opposite-concessive meaning is expressed with the help of particles nevertheless, nevertheless, all the same, meanwhile, nevertheless and others. In this case, the concessive-opposite meaning is equally manifested in sentences with the union But, and in conjunction sentences A. Wed, for example: I always fight with them, but still I love them very much.(Dostoevsky); Mother was crying every minute, her health was getting worse day by day, she was apparently withering, and we were waiting for that, we worked with her from morning to night(Dostoevsky). Wed also with adverbs still (still), already (already): Snow is still whitening in the fields, and the waters are already rustling in spring(Tyutchev).

In adversative-compensatory sentences (with conjunctions but, but, yes) any phenomenon is considered from different sides, and one of its sides is most often assessed as negative, and the second - as positive. For example: The Cossacks dismounted in front of the river. The ford was small But the flow is very fast(Arseniev); Cannons rust in the arsenals, but shako sparkle(Simonov). Wed compound sentence but on the other hand: He has a lot of work to do, but in the winter he will rest(Saltykov-Shchedrin).

Compoundproposals with connecting unions. Coordinating conjunctions can be used in a complex sentence in an adjunctive sense.

In sentences with connecting unions (yes and, and then, and not that, not that etc.) are expressed connecting relations, complicated by various additional meanings.

In sentences with union yes and an additional amplifying value is expressed. For example: You won't tell me anything new, and I won't tell you either.(Simonov); He[Sintsov] I didn't ask anymore, so why ask?(Simonov).

In sentences with conjunctions and then, not that, not that the meaning of the warning is expressed (the second predicative part indicates what can happen if the action of the first part is not carried out). For example: You must talk to your father today, otherwise he will worry about your departure.(Pismsky); Advise them to meet me with childlike love and obedience, not that they can not escape a fierce execution(Pushkin); Answer me instead That I will worry(Pushkin).

As can be seen from the above examples, the main area of ​​​​use of connecting constructions, correlative with the composition, is casual colloquial speech.

Compound sentences with explanatory conjunctions. A peculiar group is made up of complex sentences, of which the second part is attached to the first by explanatory-attaching unions namely, that is. For example: In addition to plants, the garden has rooms for various animals, namely: many turrets were built with lattice towers for pigeons, and a huge wire cage was placed between the bushes for pheasants and other birds.(Goncharov); On June 12, the forces of Western Europe crossed the borders of Russia and the war began, that is, an event contrary to human reason and all human nature took place.(L. Tolstoy).

In these complex sentences, the speaker, using the second part, clarifies and reveals the content of the first. Therefore, in these parts there is a kind of semantic parallelism, which determines the inclusion of these sentences in the group of compound ones, although explanatory conjunctions indicate the dependent nature of the second part. The first part ends before the union with a significant lowering of the voice and a pause.

Union that is, in addition to the indicated meaning, it can express the meaning of an amendment, a reservation (it means “speaking more precisely”, “more correctly”). For example: We slept, that is, my sister slept, and I lay with my eyes open and thought(Korolenko).

4.3 Compound non-union sentence

A non-union complex sentence is a kind of complex sentence, the predicative parts of which are combined into one semantic and structural whole with the help of intonation, without unions and allied words.

Complex non-union sentences with the meaning of enumeration. These non-union complex sentences are close to compound sentences of a homogeneous composition with the union And, which is confirmed as the possibility of inserting between the parts of such union-free proposals of union And, and the use in one sentence of predicative parts connected without union and with the help of a union And. Wed, for example: Orchestras play in the park, various attractions work, a boat station is open And Orchestras play in the park, various attractions are open and boat station.

Sentences of this type can be both binary and polynomial; in the first part there is often a common term. For example: In the fog that enveloped the road, wheels creaked, people talked and called to one another.(Perventsev).

Complex non-union sentences with the meaning of comparison. In these sentences, the message contained in the first part is compared with the message contained in the second (or opposed to it). Sentences of this type are characterized by the presence in the predicative parts of words that are opposite or contradictory in their meaning. This type is characterized by a two-member structure. Wed, for example: On the right was a swampy impenetrable forest, on the left - reddish pillars of cliffs(Sedov); He is the guest, I am the host(Bagritsky).

Complex non-union sentences with the meaning of the explanation. In sentences of this type, the content of the entire first part or any of its members is revealed by a single or polynomial second part. For example: Objects lost their shape: everything merged first into gray, then into a dark mass(Goncharov); Foma was greeted solemnly at home: his father gave the boy a heavy silver spoon with an intricate monogram, and his aunt gave him a scarf of his own knitting.(Bitter); Here a very entertaining picture opened up: a wide hut, the roof of which rested on two pillars, was full of people(Lermontov); Now they faced the most difficult thing: they had to leave their comrade, knowing that he was threatened(Fadeev).

A special place among complex non-union sentences with the meaning of explanation is occupied by sentences with demonstrative words such, such, so in the first part. In such sentences, not only an explanation can be expressed, but also qualitative-determinative or qualitative-circumstantial meanings. For example: The whole city is like this: a scammer sits on a scammer and drives a scammer(Gogol); Like all Moscow ones, your father is like this: he would like a son-in-law with stars and ranks(Griboyedov); Everything happened so unexpectedly: the driver ran a red light and did not have time to slow down.

Pointer words so, so, so can also express the value of the degree; in this case, the second part of the complex sentence often indicates not only the degree, but also the consequence. For example: The silence is so - ringing in the ears; So quiet - ringing in the ears.

Complex non-union sentences with conditional-investigative and temporary meaning. These sentences are characterized by a certain ratio of modal forms of the predicates of the first and second predicative parts. It is on the nature of this correlation that the unreal or real conditionality of events is expressed in a complex non-union sentence.

If the predicates of the predicative parts are expressed in the forms of the subjunctive mood, then the sentence has the meaning of unreal conditionality; For example: I would have sat until the end - he would have walked you home(S. Antonov). A close meaning is expressed in cases where the predicate of one of the parts has the form of an imperative mood used in the meaning of the subjunctive, for example: Do not take a pinch of fox hairs, she would have a tail(Krylov).

If the predicates of the predicative parts are expressed in the forms of the indicative mood (more often the future tense) or the infinitive in one of the parts, then the sentence has the meaning of a real possibility, for example: If you manage to go to Tashkent, things will get better(Neverov); I will be needed - call(Godenko); I I'll be happy to handle two, and piss off - and three(Mayakovsky).

A special subgroup of non-union complex sentences with conditional-investigative relations is represented by sentences with a generalized meaning. Parts of these sentences have a generalized personal form or predicates - infinitives. Sentences with a generalized meaning are typical primarily for proverbs: Hurry - make people laugh; Love to ride - love and to carry sleds; He took up the tug - do not say that it is not hefty; They cut the forest - the chips fly(Proverbs); fight alone - don't turn life around(N. Ostrovsky

Complex non-union sentences with the meaning of cause and effect. This type of sentences falls into two groups: with the meaning of the cause and the meaning of the effect. The sentences of both groups are characterized by a binomial structure. The meanings of cause and effect depend on the lexical content of the parts.

The predicates in these non-union complex sentences are expressed by different verb forms, with which different shades of meanings are associated, but the usual is such a correlation of forms in which the temporal plan of the part expressing the cause precedes the temporal plan of the part expressing the consequence, result.

Complex non-union sentences with explanatory-objective meaning. Sentences of this type are always binomial. The first part contains a word with the meaning of the perception of speech, thought, feeling or a word indicating these processes, and the second part expresses the object of these processes, reveals their content. Depending on the structure of the first part and the intonation of a complex sentence, all sentences of this type are divided into two groups:

I. Sentences, the first part of which includes an explicable word that needs to be propagated with the help of an internal object; the second part expresses this object and thus, as it were, replaces the unreplaced position with the word being explained in the first part. Most of these sentences are synonymous with complex subordinate clauses with explanatory-object clauses. For example: I'll definitely tell you: you have talent(Fadeev); We hear: the heart is splashing in the chest. We feel: our voice is pure and clear().

II. Sentences in the first part of which there is no word directly expressing the processes of perception, but there is a word indicating that these processes are taking place (listened, peered, looked around, approached, approached and etc.). Such verbs with the meaning of the action that accompanies the process of perception, as it were, take on the role of verbs denoting this process, so that we can talk about the ellipsis of verbs of perception. Wed: He looked around and saw: behind him was a stranger(sentence of the 1st group; the second part extends the verb of perception saw) And He looked around: behind him was a stranger(sentence of the 2nd group; verb looked back denoting the action that accompanies the perception, took on the role of expressing this perception). In both the first and second sentences, the second part expresses the object of perception.

Polynomial compound non-union sentences. Non-union complex sentences can be polynomial, that is, they can consist of three or, less often, more parts.

4.4 A complex polynomial sentence with different types of communication.

In the Russian language, especially in the language of fiction, complex sentences of combined types are widespread: a) with allied coordinating and subordinating connections; b) with allied and allied subordination; c) with an allied coordinating and non-union connection; finally, there are complex constructions that include various combinations of these types of sentences. The relations between the individual parts in such constructions in most cases do not represent anything fundamentally new in comparison with the previously described types of complex, compound and non-union sentences. However, for correct understanding the meaning of polynomial combined complex sentences to be able to establish relationships between their constituent parts.

1. Among the polynomial sentences with allied coordinating and subordinating communication, two groups are distinguished:

1) We distribute two or more composed parts with a common clause for them. For example: When Gavrila Ivanovich began to speak, his thick eyebrows rose and his forehead became covered with fine wrinkles.(Mamin-Sibiryak).

2) Each of the composed parts or one of them has one or more subordinate parts. For example: She spoke quickly, and her eyes were as if right now, as soon as she finished everything, he, Serpilin, would take everything. will fix(Simonov).

2. Union-free sentences are widespread, parts of which (or one part) are complex sentences. For example: Dasha's lips stretched themselves into a smile: this big, handsome man is so unsure of himself that he is ready to hide behind a mustard(); If I say these words to her, it will be shameless: she cannot beat me, but, as an honest and kind girl, she will agree if I offer her a hand().

3. Sentences with a non-union and coordinative connection of a homogeneous composition are also very common. For example: Roof on it[outbuilding] rusty, the pipe half collapsed, the steps at the porch rotted and collapsed, and only traces of the plaster remained.(Chekhov). Less common are various combinations of heterogeneous parts with an allied coordinating and non-union connection. For example: Dasha opened the doors of her room and stopped in bewilderment: it smelled of raw flowers, and at once she saw a basket with a high handle and a blue bow.().

IIConclusion

As we can see, the Russian language has a wealth of syntactic constructions. Their study is a lot of painstaking work, which is necessary to replenish knowledge about the language. The Russian language as a subject participates in the development and upbringing of the personality, and the variety of syntactic constructions used in the language expands these possibilities.

LITERATURE

1. Babaitseva Russian.

M., Enlightenment, 2002

2. Sheep language. Reference materials.

M., Enlightenment, 1998

3. Kupalova and the proposal.

M., Enlightenment, 1989

4. Merkin language. Reference materials.

M., Russian word, 2005

5. Rosenthal in Russian,

M., Eksmo, 1998

6. Shan Russian. Syntax.

M., Enlightenment, 1997

Difficult sentence is a structural, semantic and intonation association of predicative units, () grammatically similar to a simple sentence. A complex sentence has its own grammatical meaning and grammatical form, its own structural indicators. A complex sentence is a syntactic communicative unit of a higher order than a simple sentence.
Similarities Between Simple Sentence and Compound Sentence:

1. Each part of a complex sentence is built on the model of a simple sentence.
2. In each part of a complex sentence there is a composition of main members, minor members, and complicating components are possible.

predicative unit

predicative unit

1) A syntactic structure containing a predicate.

2) Part of a complex sentence, its building material.

« A compound sentence is a sentence that consists of two or more simple sentences.
“Sentences that have in their composition two or more predicative units that form a semantic, structural and intonational unity are called complex” (N.S. Valgina).
So, the components of a complex sentence were called and called differently: simple sentences (school), predicative units (university textbooks).
Indeed, a complex sentence consists of parts that are similar to simple sentences. Experiment: take simple sentences and make complex sentences out of them.
Nr, Father spent the whole evening reading a new story. The story was fantastic. Her father liked her.
When constructing a complex sentence from simple sentences, the latter cease to have the most important features of the sentence - semantic and intonational independence. A complex sentence in meaning and structure is never " arithmetic sum"Simple sentences. The content of the parts of a complex sentence becomes clear only as part of a complex sentence (as morphemes in a word).
A complex sentence is a fact of saving language resources. Certain relationships are established between the parts of a complex sentence, which deprive the parts of semantic, intonational, and sometimes structural completeness.
A simple sentence undergoes a whole system of changes, becoming a component of a complex sentence. Thus, despite the fact that there is some commonality between a simple and a complex sentence (predicativity), when entering a complex sentence, these predicative units acquire features that significantly distinguish them from simple sentences. Simple sentences lose their semantic and intonational completeness, and therefore it is more expedient to call parts of a complex sentence predicative units.
The grammatical features of a complex sentence are determined by two points: 1) each of its parts is built according to one or another scheme of a simple sentence; 2) the combination of parts of a complex sentence constitutes a structural-semantic unity (V.A. Beloshapkova).
This duality of a complex sentence has led to a different understanding of its syntactic essence.:

1. A.M. Peshkovsky, A. A. Shakhmatov, who understood a complex sentence as a chain of simple sentences, abandoned the term complex sentence. A.M. Peshkovsky called a complex sentence a “complex whole”, A.A. Shakhmatov called it a “combination of sentences”.
2. V.A. Bogoroditsky described a complex sentence as a single and integral structure. This idea was deepened by N.S. Pospelov, V.A. Beloshapkova,

S.E. Kryuchkov, L.Yu., Maksimov, for whom a complex sentence is a structural-semantic unity of predicative parts.
Features of a complex sentence.

1. Structural features of a complex sentence:

1. Polypredicativity; (polypredicativity, which determines the presence of a complex mechanism for the mutual adaptation of predicative parts and the use of special means for this: The troika is waiting at the porch, in a rush. A quick run will take us away (P. Vyazemsky); Friendship is friendship, and service is service;)

1. The presence of lexical and grammatical means of communication: conjunctions, allied words, correlative words (indicative words), particles, intonation.

N-r, You are many years late, but still I am glad for you.
Know how to live even when life becomes unbearable.
3. The presence of common members of the proposal.

1. Structural incompleteness of any predicative part of a compound sentence (usually the second).

1. Semantic features of a complex sentence:

1. Polypropositivity. (polypropositivity - the presence of two or more event or logical propositions and the combination in the semantic structure of the sentence of nominations of two or more events (situations): Darkness is deep in the sky, the dawn has risen (A. Pushkin).)
2. The lexico-thematic unity of the parts of a complex sentence, which entails their logical compatibility.
3. Between the predicative parts of a complex sentence, certain relationships are established that are associated with certain communicative premises, i.e. for each type of complex sentence, a certain grammatical meaning is characteristic.

The independence of a complex sentence is manifested in the following:

1. single complex semantics;
2. single intonation pattern;
3. availability of specific means of communication.

A complex sentence is a combination of predicative units built according to one or another structural scheme and intended to function as an integral unit of the message.

Complex sentences are divided into types. The first division is according to the nature of the formal connection between the parts. If the parts are connected only by intonation, then the sentence is called unionless (BSP). If unions and allied words are used for communication, then the sentence refers to allied words. Allied, in turn, are divided into two categories according to the nature of the allied means used in them. If a coordinating union is used for the connections of parts, then the sentence refers to compound (CSP). If subordinating unions or allied words are used to connect the parts, then the sentence is characterized as complex (CPP).

Complex sentences

Allied non-Union

Compound complex

At the same time, the meaning expressed by different types of complex sentences can be the same, compare: 1. Night fell, Pinocchio headed to the Field of Miracles. 2. Night fell, and Pinocchio went to the Field of Miracles. 3. As soon as night fell, Pinocchio went to the Field of Miracles. The first sentence is non-union, the second refers to compound with connecting relations between parts, the third is complex with a subordinate clause of time.

Almost any complex sentence can be transformed into a sentence of a different type: If you put money in a hole, a tree with a bunch of gold coins will grow (SPP) - If you put money in a hole, a tree of gold coins (BSP) will grow.

The main ways and means of expressing the grammatical meaning of a complex sentence. Elements of the structure of a complex sentence.

Structural-semantic model of a complex sentence as a certain set of elements necessary to express its main grammatical meaning when implementing the corresponding syntactic connection in it.

The concept of open and closed structure of a complex sentence; about its flexible and inflexible structure; on the structure of homogeneous and inhomogeneous composition. Free and non-free (phraseological) models of a complex sentence. Transitional constructions in the field of complex sentence syntax.

A complex sentence in a functional aspect: types of a complex sentence according to the purpose of the statement; mono- and polyfunctional complex sentences; a complex sentence in terms of the emotional coloring of its structure; the specificity of the actual articulation of the structure of a complex sentence.

Typology of a compound sentence: allied and non-union complex sentences; complex and complex sentences.

A complex sentence is a syntactic unit of a higher order than a simple sentence.

A complex sentence is a combination of two or more predicative parts, functioning as one communicative unit. Each of the predicative parts included in it is similar in structure to a simple sentence, however, as part of a complex structure, it loses such features of the sentence as intonational and semantic independence, and interacts with the other part, expressing a detailed message, integral in nature: We again without collusion ran into her 1: going downstairs, she held the key in her hand 2 (V. Nabokov); Everything burned down 1 that life gave me 2 (L. Alekseeva).

Thus, a complex sentence is a polypredicative communicative unit, characterized by structural and semantic unity, as well as intonational wholeness. The most important features of a complex sentence, opposing it to a simple one, are:

1) polypredicativity, which determines the presence of a complex mechanism of mutual adaptation of predicative parts and the use of special means for this: The three are waiting at the porch 1, in a rush. . . fast run 2 will take us away (P. Vyazemsky); Friendship is friendship 1, and service is service 2;

2) polypropositivity - the presence of two or more event or logical propositions and the combination in the semantic structure of the proposal of nominations of two or more events (situations): Darkness is deep in the sky 1 . . . , the dawn has risen 2 (A. Pushkin).

The event proposition is connected with the sphere of being, movement, activity (physical or social); logical proposition - with a reflection of the relations established in the process of mental activity, logical reasoning (relationships of identification, identities, etc.). The sign of polypropositivity is not absolute: in the sphere of a complex sentence, an asymmetry between the number of predicative parts and the number of propositions is possible.

The asymmetry in the relations of predicativity and propositivity is manifested in the existence of simple sentences, which are characterized by polypropositivity.

These are sentences complicated by separate definitions, circumstances, applications, which are folded propositions, as well as sentences with names of propositive (event) semantics and sentences with secondary nominal predicates: A person who harms by virtue of conviction can be persuaded. A person who harms out of personal malice can be softened. Only those who harm out of fear are invulnerable and adamant (L. Ginzburg); The arrival of the guest woke up the little dogs sleeping in the sun (N. Gogol); From that day on, Prince Andrei began to go to the Rostovs (L. N. Tolstoy) as a groom.

In turn, not all complex sentences are polypropositional. Consider, for example, the complex sentence It's good 1 that he did it 2 . The subordinate part in it expresses a proposition (reports a certain “state of affairs”), the main part expresses the subjective attitude of the speaker to the reported (i.e. modus). A complex sentence consisting of two predicative parts turns out to be monopropositional. Thus, polypredicativity can also correspond to monopropositivity.

A complex sentence is a multidimensional unit. It is characterized: a) in the structural aspect - polypredicativity and a detailed set of structural elements for connecting the combined predicative parts; b) in the semantic aspect - semantic completeness and semantic integrity, as well as often polypropositivity; c) in the communicative aspect - the unity of the communicative task and intonation completeness.

In the structural aspect, a complex sentence is built according to models (schemes), the elements of which are determined by its polypredicative nature: the combination of predicative parts that are different in structure and semantics requires their structural, semantic and intonational adaptation to each other.

The complex sentence model includes a set of basic and additional means of communication. The main means of communication include: a) composing and subordinating unions: My tired thoughts flight became low 1, and the world of the soul is waterless and poorer 2 (P. Vyazemsky); If my Russia is over 1 - I die 2 (Z. Gippius); b) allied words, or relatives (in a complex sentence): In the river 1, which we call life 2, and we are a mirror stream 1 (P. Vyazemsky); c) correlates (indicative words in the main part of a complex sentence, signaling its incompleteness): What is regret and hello to that 1 who dies in the color of years 2? (M. Lermontov); d) supporting words in complex sentences of an undivided structure - words directly distributed by the subordinate clause: You wander in the forest without thinking 1 that suddenly you will become an eyewitness of some secret 2 (M. Petrovykh); e) intonation.

Additional means of communication, namely the structural features of predicative parts, due to the need for their connection with others, include: 1) the paradigm of a complex sentence - the ratio of aspectual-temporal forms and modal plans of predicates. It has more members than the simple sentence paradigm (in a complex sentence, their maximum number reaches 49), which is explained by various combinations of tense and modal plans of predicative parts. In addition to temporal and modal characteristics, the paradigm of a complex sentence also takes into account the specific forms of predicates, since depending on their identity or non-coincidence, various ratios of situations in time (sequence or simultaneity) are transmitted, cf.: When doctor 1 (owl species) arrived, the patient calmed down 2 (owl view) - sequence of actions; When the doctor examined the patient 1 (non-native view), no one interfered 2 (non-n. view) - simultaneity; 2) anaphoric and cataphoric pronouns, indicating the incompleteness of one of the parts and its close connection with the other: anaphoric pronominal words refer to the previous predicative part, cataphoric ones to the next: In Russia, the censorship department arose before literature 1; his fatal perfection was always felt 2 (V. Nabokov); The whole city is like that there 1: a scammer sits on a scammer and drives a scammer 2 (V. Gogol); 3) structural incompleteness of one of the predicative parts, the presence of unsubstituted syntactic positions in it: He is in hall 1; further 2: no one 3 (A. Pushkin); 4) grammaticalized lexemes specific to certain complex sentences: for example, in non-target complex sentences, lexemes are used enough, not enough, too, etc.: Any crumbs of experience 1 are enough for a genius to be able to recreate an accurate picture 2 (A. Bitov) ; 5) the semantic correlation of the lexical content of the predicative parts, manifested in the presence of words with common semes or in lexical repetition: With a clear mind, the heart is clear 1, and the sea is clear as glass 2: everything is so welcoming-safe 3, everything is so smiling-light 4 (P. Vyazemsky); 6) loose/fixed (fixed) order of predicative parts (fixed postposition, unfixed postposition): Poetry is lying in the grass, underfoot 1, so you just have to bend down 2 to see it and pick it up from the ground 3 (B. Pasternak); 7) the parallelism of the structure, relevant for some types of compound and non-union complex sentences: I was gloomy 1, - other children are cheerful and talkative 2 (M. Lermontov).

The set of means of communication - the structural elements of a complex sentence - forms its model (scheme), which can be both typical and private. A typical model is a general model by which all complex sentences of the same structural-semantic type are built, a particular model is a model of a specific complex sentence. It includes the means of predicative links that are inherent in a particular syntactic construction and are relevant for its construction. The complex sentence model is graphically transmitted in the form of a block diagram. For example, the sentence Evil exists 1 in order to fight it 2 (I. Brodsky) is built according to the scheme , (p. what). Models of a complex sentence are divided into free and phraseologized (phrase models). The latter include stably reproducible additional means of connecting predicative parts (particles, special lexemes, repetition of words or their forms): Let's take a closer look at the sentence of the phraseologized structure. It is worth reading this poem more carefully 1, as we will understand its entire depth 2. It is built according to a non-free model, which includes, as its constant component, such additional means of communication as the word stands (cost) and the adjoining perfective infinitive in the first part. The general model of complex sentences of this variety has the form:

[worth (cost) + infinitive], (with. how).

Such sentences of a phraseologized structure name two events that are connected by the relations of condition and direct consequence, cf. : As soon as we carefully read this poem, we will understand its meaning. If we carefully read this poem, we will understand its meaning. In addition, in sentences built on this phrase model, the presence of a characteristic property in a person or object, which determines the possibility of what is called the second part, is emphasized. As a result, additional causal relationships may arise between the two predicative parts: As soon as he gets sick 1, everything stops 2 . Thus, this sentence of a phraseologized structure, like many others built on non-free models, is ambiguous. The model of a complex sentence is an indicator of its grammatical meaning; the structural mechanism of a sentence determines its syntactic semantics.

In the semantic aspect, a complex sentence is a unit characterized by semantic integrity. Its meaning is not the sum of the meanings of its constituent predicative parts. “The grammatical meaning of a complex sentence is usually understood as the semantic relations between its parts, and one or another grammatical meaning is characteristic not only of one particular sentence, but of all sentences that have the same structure (structure), built on the same model” . He did not accept Gift Offers 1 because there was nothing to give 2 (I. Goncharov); The dogs climbed far into the kennels 1, since there was no one to bark at 2 (I. Goncharov); One day Varyusha woke up because Sidor. . . pounded his beak on the glass 2 (K. Paustovsky), despite the difference in specific unions, are built according to a common model model:, (causal subordinating union). A causal relationship is established between the events of the first and second predicative parts. Thus, the syntactic meanings of these constructions are the meanings of the cause.

There are general and particular syntactic meanings. General meanings are the meanings inherent in typical models of complex sentences and based mainly on the main means of communication; private syntactic meanings are determined taking into account the lexical content and additional means of communication and characterize the subtypes of complex sentences or their varieties (within the subtype). Let's compare the complex sentences: a) The lamps were burning brightly 1, and everyone sang and sang his simple song the disabled samovar 2 (K. Paustovsky); b) It was getting hot 1, and I hurried home 2 (M. Lermontov); c) The youthful fever of Stolz infected Oblomov 1 , and he burned with a thirst for work 2 . . . (I. Goncharov). All of them are built according to a common standard model, and, the main means of communication in it is the connecting union and. The common syntactic meaning of these constructions is the meaning of the connection. Their lexical content, the features of the paradigm and the order of their parts make it possible to single out particular syntactic meanings: a) enumerative meaning; b) effective value; c) connective-distributive meaning.

The distinction between general and particular meanings is essential for the classification of complex sentences: the types of complex sentences are distinguished taking into account general meanings, subtypes and their varieties, taking into account particular syntactic meanings.

A particular meaning can be specified as a result of the use of syntactically specialized elements. These are adverbs, particles (and their combinations), introductory words that perform the functions of concretizers of a certain particular meaning in a complex sentence. So, in the sentence Already, almost in front of the pillbox, there were forward arrows 1, but it was still impossible to walk along the road 2 (N. Tikhonov), the words already and still express a concessive meaning. The role of such elements is especially great in compound and non-union complex sentences.

Typed lexical elements also play an important role in the implementation of syntactic meanings. These are lexical means that regularly express certain meanings in various types of complex sentences, participating in the formation of the corresponding grammatical meanings.

There are two types of such lexical elements: 1) typological-constructive elements necessary to implement the main syntactic meaning of a complex sentence. So, antonyms express a comparative meaning, the main one for compound and non-union sentences with comparative relations: Young - for service 1, old - for advice 2 (proverb); 2) private-constructive elements that cause an additional grammatical meaning that does not coincide with the main meaning of the sentence; so, the use of modal words in complex sentences with subordinate clauses modifies the main syntactic meaning: True, the bullet hit him in the shoulder 1, because he suddenly lowered his arm 2 (M. Lermontov). The subordinate clause expresses not a causal, but an investigative meaning, since its rationale is given in the main part.

In the semantic aspect, a complex sentence acts as a polypropositive unit: it is focused on reporting two or more situations, each of which receives a predicate expression, and may contain several dictum meanings. This feature does not apply, however, to all types of complex sentences. Monopropositive are: 1) complex sentences with substantive-attributive (defining) clauses, in which the clause is used not to name a separate situation, but to establish the reference of a name: There are words 1 that only seem banal 2 ; 2) explanatory-object complex sentences, in which one part may contain a modal statement (give a modal and / or evaluative interpretation of the message), and the second - a dictum (main message): . Vyazemsky); It is good 1 that autumn has already passed 2 ; 3) complex sentences with pronominal-correlative clauses, in which the clause in combination with the correlate gives a detailed name of a person or object: This is all 1 that I heard 2 (M. Bulgakov) - cf. : all overheard.

The meaning of a complex sentence can also be organized in such a way that the propositions contained in its parts “correlate with the same situation”. So, in divisive compound sentences with unions, it’s not the same. . . not that, or. . . whether different propositions serve to inaccurate nomination of the same situation, not clearly identified by the speaker: Either he [Rudin] envied Natalia 1 , or he regretted her 2 (I. Turgenev).

In the communicative aspect, a complex sentence is considered as an integral unit that performs a specific communicative task. The actual articulation of a complex sentence is carried out through intonation and the order of the parts. With a neutral (objective) order of parts, the topic is usually located at the beginning of the statement (the first part); the rheme takes postposition,

rheme theme rheme theme

cf. : (Freezing). It's cold, / / ​​the snow crunches underfoot. Wed : (Freezing). The snow crunches underfoot, / / ​​it's cold. In the last utterance, a change in the order of the parts actualizes the rheme, the first part is distinguished by intonation (raising the pitch on the stressed word and increasing its duration). The theme-rhematic division of a complex sentence reflects the allocation of less and more significant information for the speaker: the most important information is the rheme of the statement.

The boundaries of syntactic and actual articulation in a complex sentence may not coincide.

rheme theme

Wed: Since the classes were over, / / ​​I went home (the boundaries of the components of the actual articulation coincided

rheme theme

give with boundaries of predicative parts); The house in which I settled / / had interesting story(the clause, along with the supporting word, is part of the topic - and the boundaries of syntactic and actual articulation do not coincide). The peculiarity of the actual division of a complex sentence is that its components usually denote whole events, therefore each of the predicative parts can have its own communicative structure.

When expressing the purpose of the statement in a complex sentence, not only single-functional, but also multi-functional parts can be combined, for example, narrative and interrogative: He worked all his life 1, and what did you do 2? Thus, in comparison with a simple sentence, a complex one is characterized by the possibility of combining different goals, different functional plans. It has not only a modal, temporal, but also a communicative perspective.

The classification of complex sentences is based on the juxtaposition of the means of communication between predicative parts and syntactic meanings. When differentiating complex sentences, quantitative and qualitative criteria for their division are used, related both to their structure and semantics.

1) Binomial / polynomial sentences are distinguished by the number of predicative parts: It was raining 1, and trees were rustling from a strong wind 2 (A. Chekhov); For some time he stood at the window 1: the sky was curdled 2 ; occasionally, in the place 3 where the blind sun 4 floated, opal pits 3 appeared (V. Nabokov);

2) by the presence of allied means of communication, allied / non-union complex sentences are opposed: in allied constructions, predicative parts are connected by unions (composing or subordinating) or allied words, allied sentences are characterized by the absence of allied means of communication: You sing me that song 1 that the old one used to sing to us mother 2 (S. Yesenin); There will be, there will be time 1: the sun will come again 2 (K. Sluchevsky).

3) according to the nature of the model (scheme), sentences built according to free models and sentences built according to non-free (phraseological) models (sentences of a phraseological structure) are distinguished. Sentences of a phraseologized structure are built according to special non-free models, which are characterized by the presence of additional stably reproduced means of communication (particles, special lexemes, repetitions). Their features are: a) modeling based on the stability of the phrase scheme and its reproducibility; b) especially close connection of predicative parts; c) often a fixed order of parts; d) tendency to idiomatic meaning; e) the presence of a variety of expressive and evaluative meanings: The more flame in my long-experienced 1, the less ahead of the fire in me tired 2 (I. Severyanin); Be brave, don't be brave 1, but you won't be braver than the world 2 (N. Leskov).

Among the most important and regular elements of the structure of a complex sentence are the main means of communication (unions and allied words), the ratio of aspectual-temporal and modal forms of predicates, the relative position of parts, and in complex sentences, in addition, the presence or absence of correlative (indicative) words and the ratio of the subordinate part to the main part (the subordinate part refers to the entire main part or to any word or phrase in it). As already mentioned, quantitatively and qualitatively different combinations of these structural elements form models of complex sentences of various types (of course, taking into account known lexical restrictions), each of which is characterized by its wide grammatical meaning.

Most complex sentences are built on such models, they are the most productive and stylistically neutral. They are called free.

However, there are also complex proposals that are built on more complex models. In addition to the basic elements of the structure indicated above, they include other, more specific elements that make the connection between the predicative parts especially close and cause more specific and complex grammatical meanings. Complex sentences built according to such models are limited in their use (usually typical for live colloquial speech). Such models are called non-free.

Such, for example, is the complex sentence What else, but there are enough swamps in Meshchera (K. Paustovsky). The structural model of this sentence, in addition to the comparative union a and the present tense (suffices) with a timeless meaning, also includes the pronominal combination of something else, which forms the first part. This also determines the more complex grammatical meaning of this sentence - it expresses not comparative relations, but discriminatory-comparative ones. According to the same non-free model, such sentences are built: Who else, but he knows; Where else, but in Moscow you will find everything, etc. Cf. free model proposal: There is little arable land in Meshchera, but there are plenty of swamps.

Individual particles are especially often used as additional elements of the structure, but these can also be various morphological forms of words and even fully significant words.

So, the negative particle not and the restrictive particle are only used in complex sentences with the union as, expressing the relationship of temporal interdependence, for example: 1) The peasant did not have time to gasp, as the bear settled on him (I. Krylov); 2) As soon as we had time to rest and dine, we heard gun shots (A. Pushkin). The first part in such sentences denotes an action interrupted by another action, which is mentioned in the second part (a sentence with a particle not), or an action that ended just when the action indicated in the second part of the sentence began (a sentence with a particle only). Thus, the difference in meaning between the first and second sentences depends on the use of different particles in these sentences. Both particles are necessary in the organization of such proposals. Without them, such sentences cannot be constructed at all (one cannot say: “We managed to dine, how ...”, “I managed to gasp, how ...”, etc.).

In the structure of these complex sentences, the verb managed also takes part, which, in combination with particles, not only directly indicates by its lexical meaning the nature of the relations expressed in the complex sentence (did not have time ... only managed ...).

In sentences with a double union than ... those in which facts interconnected in their development are compared, forms are an obligatory element of the structure comparative degree adjectives or qualitative adverbs, for example: 1) The sooner the fire burned out, the more visible the moonlit night became (A. Chekhov); 2) The more he spoke, the more he blushed (Saltykov-Shchedrin).

In the sentences analyzed above with elements, I did not have time ..., how ...; only managed ..., how ... and in sentences with the union than ... the, in addition to the main elements of the structure, several more private elements, characteristic only for these sentences, are distinguished. This leads to the fact that the connection between the parts of a complex sentence turns out to be so close that it even seems difficult to decide which part is main and which is subordinate. In such cases, we can talk about the subordination of parts of a complex sentence.

Thus, the more elements of the structure are included in the model of a complex sentence, the closer the connection between its parts, the less free it is, and, conversely, the fewer such elements, the less close the connection is, the more free in its structure the complex sentence turns out to be.

4) if it is possible to change the order of predicative parts in complex sentences, flexible and inflexible structures are distinguished. Flexible structures allow different options for the order of parts: If you have to choose a fate 1 - I will not be deceived by another 2 (N. Krandievskaya). Inflexible structures are structures in which permutations of predicative parts and the insertion of one of the parts into another are impossible: The train departed at seven o'clock in the evening 1, so that Mikhail Ivanovich could have time to have dinner ... before departure 2 (L. Tolstoy);

5) on the basis of “correspondence / inconsistency in the number of propositions and predicative parts of the sentence”, symmetrical and asymmetric constructions are distinguished. In symmetrical constructions, the number of propositions is equal to the number of predicative parts: If you need help 1 call 2 . In asymmetric constructions, the number of propositions does not correspond to the number of predicative parts, and individual links of the semantic structure of the statement are not expressed using linguistic means (implicit): If you want to buy bread 1, then the bakery is to the right 2 . In this statement, two predicative parts correspond to three components of the semantic structure: If you want to buy bread 1, then (keep in mind, know 2) (that) a bakery to the right 3 . The second component is omitted, which causes the asymmetry of the complex sentence.

According to the function (the nature of the goal setting), the functional types of the complex sentence are distinguished. At the same time, they differ:

1) functional homogeneous proposals- sentences, all the predicative parts of which coincide in goal setting: a) narrative: I walked slowly 1: I was sad 2 (M. Lermontov); b) interrogative: Why ... others can do everything 1 , but I can't 2 ? (L. Tolstoy); c) incentive: Give everything earthly to the earth 1, and, like blue smoke, ascend to us in blue, pure and unharmed 2 (F. Sologub).

2) syncretic, uniting functionally heterogeneous parts: a) narrative-interrogative: Without a doubt, he was in a miserable position 1 , but what was there to do 2 ? (L. Tolstoy); b) narrative-motivating: ... You won’t find better 1: turn a gentle look, girls, to the infantry 2 (A. Tvardovsky); c) motivating-interrogative: Yes, run to the officer 1 - why is he chilling there 2? (A. Chekhov); d) incentive-narrative: Understand 1: lack of freedom from lies leads to atrocities 2 (V Kornilov).

Syncretic functional types are represented mainly in the sphere of complex and non-union complex sentences, the predicative parts of which are characterized by a greater degree of independence than in a complex sentence.

It is traditional to divide sentences into exclamatory and non-exclamatory sentences. These types of sentences differ in the presence / absence of emotional coloring in the syntactic construction and, thus, are associated with the reflection of the position of the speaker (the author of the statement), with the transfer of his emotions and assessments. First of all, exclamatory intonation, as well as particles, interjections and expressive vocabulary serve as a means of expressing emotions: How vividly unpretentious pictures of marching movements arise in my head 1, and what a modest charm they acquire in memories 2! (A. Kuprin). Non-exclamatory and exclamatory sentences are unevenly distributed in the system complex structures. Non-exclamatory sentences predominate, while exclamatory ones are used, as a rule, in the sphere of binary constructions, and they are closely related to the functional types of the sentence: it is the question or motivation that often expresses the speaker's emotions.

With all the variety of structural, semantic and functional characteristics in modern Russian studies, there are three main features that serve as the basis for a consistent multi-level classification of complex sentences: 1) the presence / absence of means of communication that combine predicative parts. On this basis, the classes of allied and non-union proposals are distinguished; 2) contrasting the composition / subordination of predicative parts in the field of allied constructions: allied sentences are divided into compound and complex; 3) the assignment of one predicative part to one word of another part or to the entire part as a whole (non-segmentation/segmentation). The last division applies only to complex sentences. As a result, a rather harmonious classification arises: each division in it makes it possible to reveal the semantic originality of a distinguished class or subclass of sentences, due to the structural features underlying the classification. So, non-union sentences differ from allied ones by the diffuseness of semantics, the non-differentiation of relations between parts. Compound and complex sentences differ in the degree of autonomy of the parts and the nature of the expressed relations between them. The division of complex sentences into undivided and dissected corresponds not only to a set of structural features that delimit them, but also to significant differences in the nature of the relationship between the parts, which is reflected in the establishment of an analogy with the phrase for the first, for the second (dissected) - with a simple sentence with an adverbial determinant .

The further division of compound and non-union sentences is predominantly traditional: compound sentences are differentiated depending on the type of the coordinating union, and then divided into subtypes according to the nature of the syntactic meaning, non-union complex sentences are classified depending on the relationship between the predicative parts (taking into account additional means of communication) .

Thus, the general classification of complex sentences is generally heterogeneous. Let us turn to the consideration of their main classes.

More on the topic The concept of a complex sentence. The place of a complex sentence in the system of syntactic units of the language. The grammatical meaning of a complex sentence as its main distinguishing feature. A complex sentence as a structural-semantic union of predicative parts and as a special independent unit of syntax. Differential features of a complex sentence.:

1. The concept of a complex sentence. The place of a complex sentence in the system of syntactic units of the language. The grammatical meaning of a complex sentence as its main distinguishing feature. A complex sentence as a structural-semantic union of predicative parts and as a special independent unit of syntax. Differential features of a complex sentence.

§1. Difficult sentence. General concepts

Difficult sentence is a unit of syntax.

complex are called sentences consisting of two or more grammatical bases, connected into a single whole in meaning, grammatically and intonationally.
What distinguishes a complex sentence from a simple sentence is that simple sentence one grammatical basis, and in complex - more than one. A complex sentence, therefore, consists of parts, each of which is framed as a simple sentence.
But a complex sentence is not a random collection of simple sentences. In a complex sentence, parts are interconnected in meaning and syntactically, with the help of syntactic links. Each part, being framed as a sentence, does not have semantic and intonational completeness. These features are characteristic of the entire complex sentence as a whole.

Complex sentences, like simple ones, are characterized by the purpose of the utterance. They can be non-exclamatory and exclamatory.

Unlike a simple sentence, a complex one requires determining how many parts it consists of and what connection its parts are connected by.

§2. Types of syntactic connection of parts of a complex sentence

The syntactic relationship between parts of a complex sentence can be:

• allied
• unionless

Allied connection- this is a kind of syntactic connection expressed with the help of unions.

Allied connection can be:

• writing
• subordinating

Coordinating syntactic connection- this is a type of syntactic connection with an equal relationship of parts. A coordinating syntactic connection is expressed with the help of special means: coordinating conjunctions.

The storm passed and the sun came out.

Subordinating syntactic connection- this is a type of syntactic connection with an unequal relationship of parts. The parts of a complex sentence with a subordinating link are different: one is the main sentence, the other is a subordinate sentence. The subordinating syntactic connection is expressed with the help of special means: subordinating conjunctions and allied words.

We didn't go for a walk because a thunderstorm started.

(We didn't go for a walk- main proposition because the storm has begun- subordinate clause.)

Associative syntactic relationship is a meaningful connection. Parts of a complex sentence are connected only by punctuation. Neither conjunctions nor allied words are used to express an allied syntactic connection. Example:

The coach got sick, the class was rescheduled for next week.

The nature of the syntactic connection between parts of a complex sentence- this is the most important classification feature of complex sentences.

§3. Classification of complex sentences

The classification of complex sentences is a classification according to the syntactic relationship between its parts. Complex sentences are divided into:

into 1) allied and 2) non-union, and allied, in turn - into 1) compound and 2) compound.

Therefore, there are three types of complex sentences:

• compound
• complex subordinate
• unionless

Each of these types is subject to further classification by meaning.

test of strength

Find out how you understood the contents of this chapter.

Final test

1. How many grammatical bases are in a complex sentence?

   • two or more

2. How are parts of a complex sentence related?

   • within the meaning of

3. Does a part of a complex sentence have a completeness?

   • yes, each part is a separate independent proposal

4. Are complex sentences characterized by the purpose of the utterance?

5. Can complex sentences be exclamatory?

6. Is it correct to assume that the syntactic connection between the parts of a complex sentence is only allied?

7. What can be an allied connection between parts of a complex sentence?

   • main
   • adnexal

8. Is it possible to have a syntactic connection between parts of a complex sentence without conjunctions?

9. What type of allied syntactic connection is characterized by an equal relationship of parts of a complex sentence?

   • an equal relationship characterizes a subordinating relationship

10. What type of allied syntactic connection is characterized by an unequal relationship of parts of a complex sentence?

    • unequal attitude characterizes the coordinative connection

Right answers:

1. two or more
2. in meaning and syntactically (using a syntactic link)
3. no, only all the parts together are an independent offer
4. coordinating and subordinating
5. equal relationship characterizes the coordinative connection
6. unequal attitude characterizes a subordinating relationship

DIFFICULT SENTENCE

COMPLEX SENTENCE AS A UNIT OF SYNTAX. PRINCIPLES OF CLASSIFICATION OF COMPLEX OFFERS….….…….3

COMPOUND SENTENCE……………………………..6

COMPLEX SUBDIVISION……………………………..10

UNION-FREE COMPLEX OFFER…………………………….19

Classifications of non-union complex sentences…………………...21

COMPLICATED COMPLEX SENTENCES……………………...24

COMPLEX SENTENCE AS A UNIT OF SYNTAX. PRINCIPLES OF CLASSIFICATION OF COMPLEX SENTENCES

Difficult sentence- a special semantic-structural unit of syntax; it is a syntactic unit that is complete in meaning and intonation, consisting of two predicative parts, similar in structure to a simple sentence. A complex sentence (hereinafter - SP) acts as a single communicative unit.

When qualifying a joint venture, the following points should be considered:

1. Parts of the joint venture have an external structural similarity with simple sentences, but do not have intonational and semantic completeness.

2. In some structural parts of the joint venture there are structural components, not characteristic of a simple sentence - demonstrative-correlative words (antecedents) and subordinating conjunctions.

3. The main part of the SP may be informatively incomplete.

4. In certain types of joint ventures, there are specific patterns of word order in constituent parts.

In some cases, simple and complex sentences converge and form transitional types. These are constructs that express:

a) comparison: Below, like a mirror, the lake turns blue;

b) purpose: People went to the construction site to work;

c) offers with homogeneous predicates pertaining to the same subject: The leaf falls and spins.

Parts of the joint venture can be combined with the help of unions, allied words and without unions. These two methods of communication determine the division of the joint venture into allied complex and non-union complex. Allied sentences, depending on the means of communication, are divided into compound and complex. When composing, parts of the joint venture are combined as syntactically equal, and when subordinating, one part is syntactically dependent on the other.

Compound and complex sentences differ in the following:

1. In a compound sentence (hereinafter referred to as CSP), the means of communication are coordinating conjunctions (they also connect homogeneous members in a simple sentence), and in a complex subordinating sentence (hereinafter referred to as CSP), subordinating conjunctions that do not occur in other constructions.

2. In SSP, coordinating conjunctions are a purely connecting means; in SPP, subordinating conjunctions are structural element accessory part.

3. In NGN, interposition of the subordinate part is possible.

4. The main part of the NGN is characterized by informative incompleteness (moreover, this main part is in the preposition).

5. In the main part of the NGN, there may be antecedents that are not found in the NGN.

6. If in SSP verbs-predicates are characterized by the absolute use of the category of time, then in SSP the relative use of tenses of verbs-predicates is possible.

Most of these differences are not formulated categorically, it can be assumed transitional types, in which signs of both composition and submission are found:

1. Joint venture with comparative parts, with unions while, than and etc.

2. SP, parts of which are connected not so much by conjunctions and allied words, but by other structural means: forms of mood of verbs, the order of parts, etc. The connection between parts is expressed here only morphologically or in combination with unions that have lost their subordinating character.

3. SP with fuzzy syntactic relations
(with structures like with regards to).

4. JV with double alliances although - but, true - but, no matter how - however, in which the subordinating component is located in the first part, and the coordinating component of the union is in the second. V.V. Babaitseva calls such constructions “complex sentences with a mixed (contaminated) form.

The doctrine of subordination and composition as two types of connection between parts of a complex sentence in syntactic science originated in the 19th century. It is based on the idea of ​​semantic dependence / independence of the parts of a complex sentence. Composition and subordination in SP are similar to the relationship between homogeneous and heterogeneous members in a simple sentence, but in SP these relationships are less clearly expressed and more contradictory. The most important stage in the development of the doctrine of composition and subordination was the discussion in the 20s of the twentieth century. It was opened by Professor M.N. Peterson, who showed all the indefiniteness of the concepts of "composition" and "subordination" and argued that these concepts themselves have no linguistic content and are mechanically borrowed from logic. The basis of the traditional understanding of composition and subordination was the work of A.M. Peshkovsky "Are there coordinating and subordinating sentences in Russian?" (1959). Here Peshkovsky proved that composition and subordination are the most important syntactic concepts on which the classification of all joint ventures is based. The most successful teaching
A.M. Peshkovsky was continued by V.A. Beloshapkova. In her opinion, the compositional connection is equal to the connection in the compositional phrase. It is characterized by the fact that the components connected by it perform the same syntactic function with respect to the whole they form. The means of communication in composing are composing unions. The subordinating connection, according to Beloshapkova, is similar to different types of subordinating connection in a phrase and a simple sentence. The combined elements here differ in their syntactic function, and each of them takes its place. The means of communication are subordinating conjunctions and allied words. According to V.A. Beloshapkova, in the non-union complex sentence, the opposition between composition and subordination is removed. Some linguists, on the basis of semantic relationships between parts and on the basis of intonation, divide non-union complex sentences into non-union composed and non-union subordinates.

In the concepts of individual scientists outside the joint venture there remains an "union-free combination of proposals." An argument in favor of such an understanding of the nature of non-union constructions is the non-grammatical character, at its core, the nature of the non-union connection, the universal means of expressing which is intonation. But, signaling that several sentences have entered into a certain combination, intonation does not indicate either the nature of this connection, or the relationships that are created on its basis. Therefore, an objective distinction between composition and subordination is impossible under conditions of an allied connection. Relations that develop within non-union constructions can be identified and differentiated based on stable elements of its structure, schemes for constructing parts, the order of their arrangement, the ratio of verbs-predicates, various lexical indicators, however, none of these has no funds. Some modern syntaxists regard non-union complex sentences as a simple combination of sentences. But non-union complex sentences are a special unit. Among them there are those that can correlate with a complex or compound sentence, but there are also constructions that do not correlate with them. The absence of coordinating and subordinating conjunctions, the impossibility of accurately distinguishing intonation of a coordinating or subordinating nature, the presence of union-free constructions with an undifferentiated meaning distinguishes BSP into a special group.

The means of expressing a syntactic connection in a joint venture can be unions, allied words, the order of parts, intonation.

The connection between the parts of the joint venture may be more or less close. With a less close connection, the content of the second part is an additional message that arose along the way in connection with the content of the first part.
In such constructions, the connection of the second part is qualified as connecting.

SP, in which only one specific type of value is revealed and which, as a rule, consist of two predicative units, is called minimal designs. Structures that are the result of a combination of minimal constructions are called complex complex sentences.