Indefinite personal meaning of the verb. Single sentences. Past time predicates plural with a null subject and the problem of the internal point of view
Good afternoon! I propose to recall the types of one-part sentences in Russian.
A one-part proposal has only one of the main members.
Definitely personal, indefinitely personal sentences, generalized personal sentences
AT definitely personal sentences, the main member is expressed by the verb in the form of 1 and 2 persons of the singular and plural of the indicative mood (in the present and in the future tense), and in the imperative mood; the producer of the action is defined and can be called personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person I, you, we, you:
Come here.
I'm going .
Let's go to the cinema.
AT vaguely personal sentences, the main member is expressed by the verb in the form of the 3rd person plural (present and future tenses in the indicative mood and in the imperative mood), the plural form of the past tense of the indicative mood and a similar form of the conditional mood of the verb. The producer of the action in these sentences is unknown or unimportant:
In the door. knock /. knocked.
Let them knock.
If they had knocked louder, I would have heard.
AT generalized personal sentences speak of an action that is attributed to everyone and everyone individually. In these sentences, the main member is expressed in the same way as in a definite or indefinite personal sentence: by a verb in the form of the 2nd person singular of the indicative and imperative moods or in the form of the 3rd person of the plural of the indicative mood:
If you like to ride - love to carry sleds.
Do not count your chickens before they are hatched .
Such sentences are presented in proverbs, sayings, catchphrases, aphorisms.
Generalized-personal sentences also include sentences like Sometimes you go outside and marvel at the transparency of the air. The speaker, in order to give a generalized meaning, instead of the form of the 1st person, uses the form of the 2nd person.
impersonal proposals
Main member impersonal the sentence is in the form of the 3rd person singular (in the present or future tense of the indicative mood) or the neuter gender singular (in the past tense of the indicative mood and in the conditional mood) - this is the so-called impersonal form.
The main member of an impersonal sentence may be similar in structure to PGS and is expressed:
1) an impersonal verb, the only syntactic function of which is to be the main member of impersonal one-part sentences:
It's getting cold / it's getting colder / it's getting colder.
2) a personal verb in an impersonal form:
It's getting dark .
3) verb to be and word No in negative sentences:
There was no wind / no.
GHS, may have the following expression:
1) modal or phase verb in impersonal form + infinitive:
Outside the window it began to get dark.
2) linking verb to be in impersonal form (currently in zero form) + adverb + infinitive:
It was a pity / it was a pity to leave with friends.
It's time to get on the road.
The main member, similar in structure to SIS, is expressed:
1) linking verb in impersonal form + adverb:
I felt sorry for the old man.
Outside. it was getting fresh.
2) linking verb in impersonal form + short passive participle:
The room was smoky.
A special group among impersonal sentences is formed by infinitive suggestions:
He's on duty tomorrow.
Everybody get up!
Impersonal sentences mean:
1) subjectless states:
It's getting dark outside.
2) actions occurring against the will of the subject:
I'm shivering.
3) actions in the description of which the action itself is more important than its producer:
The wave washed away the boat.
Name sentences
A nominal sentence is a one-part sentence with the main member-subject. In denominative sentences, the existence and presence of an object is reported. The main member of the denominative sentence is expressed by the form of the I. p. of the noun:
Insomnia. Homer. tight sail (O. E. Mandelstam).
Descriptive sentences may include demonstrative particles out, here, and for the introduction of emotional evaluation - exclamation particles Well, which, like this:
Which weather! Well rain! Like this storm!
The distributors of the nominal sentence can be agreed and inconsistent definitions:
Late autumn .
If the distributor is a circumstance of place, time, then such sentences can be interpreted as two-part incomplete:
Soon autumn. Wed: Coming soon autumn.
Outside rain. Wed: On the street goes rain.
We used information from the manual by E. I. Litnevskaya “Russian language: a short theoretical course for schoolchildren”.
This video tutorial covers the topic "Indefinitely-personal sentences". The teacher will consider various examples of one of the types of one-part sentences. He will explain what structure the main member of an indefinitely personal sentence can have, give examples that will help you better understand how this knowledge is applied.
Subject: One-part sentences
Lesson: Indefinitely personal sentences
Vaguely personal sentences are one of the types of one-part sentences in which the main member of the sentence has a structure and properties similar to the structure and properties predicate.
In vaguely personal proposals main term is expressed:
3rd person plural imperative verb:
Let them talk;
The past tense plural verb of the indicative mood:
To you called from school;
Conditional plural verb:
If would me in advance said, I would wait;
Plural verb of the present tense of the indicative mood:
In Moscow you are waiting and very love.
The main members of indefinite personal sentences can have a structure not only simple verb, but also compound verb and compound nominal predicate:
As soon as they arrived, they began to regale and question about life in the capital. In this house they always were glad.
In this type of sentence, as in definitely personal ones, an action or some sign of a person is reported, but the focus is on the action itself, and not its subject. The subject of the action is indefinite:
He is either completely unknown:
Somewhere far away hit into the drums
Or, in this situation, it doesn't matter:
To you wrote, asked to send finished article.
Vaguely personal proposals must be distinguished from two-part incomplete sentences with a predicate in the same forms:
We tried there get through. Called long, but we didn't answer.
Calledfor a long time in this case - incomplete sentence, since it informs us about the actions of specific individuals, and
we have not been answered - indefinite personal sentence because the subject of this action is unknown.
Indefinitely personal proposals may be generalized meaning, especially in proverbs, aphorisms, poetic speech, as well as in sentences containing various instructions, ethical norms, etc.:
Chicks in autumn think. By clothes meet, according to the mind see off. (Proverbs)
late autumn days scold usually (A. Pushkin).
1. Bagryantseva V.A., Bolycheva E.M., Galaktionova I.V., Litnevskaya E.I. and others. Russian language.
2. Barkhudarov S.G., Kryuchkov S.E., Maksimov L.Yu., Cheshko L.A. Russian language.
3. Tests. One-part sentences ().
2. Complete academic reference book, edited by V.V. Shovel ().
3. All about one-part sentences ().
Disassemble pairs of sentences according to structure and meaning.
1. The painting by Borovikovsky was restored last year. The artist Simonov last year restored a painting by Borovikovsky.
2. An old clock was perfectly adjusted in the watch workshop. The watchmaker perfectly adjusted the antique clock.
3. Newspapers report a new world record for a Russian weightlifter. The correspondent of the newspaper announced a new world record for the Russian weightlifter.
4. The schools in our village are fond of table tennis. Schoolchildren of our village are fond of table tennis.
E. N. Nikitina, 2011
Indefinitely personal sentences- the type of sentences, the main member of which is a predicate in the form 3k. plural present, future tense, in the form of plural. past tense and subjunctive, denoting the action or state of an unnamed personal (see Animation) subject. For example: Behind the wall sing ;In the door knocked.
The predicate can be both verbal and nominal. The nominal predicate is expressed by a short adjective or a short participle; in the nominal predicate, the meanings of the verbal categories of mood, tense, person, as well as the nominal category of number are expressed by a bunch (in present time - a zero bunch). For example: Here you are always (were, will be) happy ; Houses (were, will be) alarmed .
The nominal predicate can be represented by the indirect case of the noun:
(1) In the Leningrad association high opinion about the innovator (gaz., an example from [Grammar 1980])
Since in such sentences only one main member (“composition”) is verbally represented - the predicate, in Russian studies they are referred to as the so-called. one-part sentences(the term of A. A. Shakhmatov), which are opposed to two-part sentences (with two main members - subject and predicate). One-part sentences, along with indefinitely personal, also include the so-called. Definitely personal, generalized personal and impersonal sentences: see articles One-part sentences, Impersonality, Definitely personal sentences, Incomplete sentences.
The basis of the independent status (structural and semantic) of indefinitely personal sentences is that the subject component (member of the sentence) is not restored from the previous sentence. Thus, indefinitely personal sentences are opposed to incomplete sentences, the essence of which is the completion of the omitted members of the sentence from the previous context. Indefinitely personal sentences are used as a communicative device for not naming the subject of the action or the state reported by the predicate. The reasons for the silence may be the unknown of the subject to the speaker, the insignificance of the subject for presentation, or, conversely, the special significance of the subject.
For example:
(2) He (Sasha) laughed and also got up, and both went to the house. She (Nadya), tall, beautiful, slender, now seemed very healthy and smart next to him; she felt it, and she felt sorry for him and somehow embarrassed. When entered into the hall, where they were already sitting down to supper. (A. p. Chekhov. Bride)
- the subject of the predicate entered is restored from the previous context: it is she (Nadya) and he (Sasha), therefore, the sentence When entered to the hall - incomplete.
(3) ... through the open window you could hear how it was hurried, How knocked knives like clapped block door. (A. p. Chekhov. Bride)
- predicates hurried, knocked, clapped designate the actions of actors, servants; these subjects are not named in the pretext, are unknown and unimportant to the one who hears the sound (Nade), therefore, the predicates organize indefinitely personal sentences. Wed also predicate sat down from example (2): this predicate characterizes the general action of the persons in the hall (each of which is not important to the observer of this scene), these persons are not named in the pretext, therefore, the sentence is one-part.
Traditionally, one speaks of the unknown, the uncertainty of an unnamed personal subject; indefiniteness is proved by a synonymous replacement of an indefinite personal sentence with a two-part sentence with a subject (subject) - an indefinite personal pronoun in im.p. : There was a knock on the door = Someone knocked on the door. With a synonymic replacement, substitution of the subject in the plural form into the sentence is not possible: with such a substitution, the meaning changes, cf .: You are being called =/=They (people) are calling you.
1. Grammatical semantics of personality
Indefinite-personal sentences are a way of linguistic conceptualization of a special type personal subject. Wed: offer Meowed outside the window means that the action was performed by a person, not an animal.
The predicate of an indefinite personal sentence is always in the form plural The categorization of the personal subject is precisely the plural form. (and not singular) is non-random: the plural as a particular value of the category of number:
- expressing the idea of a discrete set, it reveals a connection with the category of animation, realizing the latter as much as possible (in interaction with the category of case) - see in detail [Onipenko 1998 (2004)], [Uspensky 2004], and also the article Animation).
Thus, there are languages in which plural agreement of a verb is possible only with a personal subject (for example, Arabic), cf. also a couple people(singular, inanimate) – people(pl., suffocation).
- can express the indeterminacy of the subject (see Referential status)
Wed “indefinite plural” in [Plungyan 2011:217], correlated with a singular referent: We have guests;Do you have any vacancies? There are new passengers in the carriage: a young woman with a suitcase(the last example belongs to I. I. Revzin).
- can be correlated with a different quantitative composition of subjects (from an indefinite set to one) - see examples above;
- semantically connected with the zone of the 3rd person: 1st–2nd l. (and I AM, and you) are inherently single (on the meaning of the category of number in pairs I-we, you you see articles Number, Pronoun);
- in conjunction with the 3rd person reveals a ban on correlation with the most individual subject - I AM- subject.
NOTE. The exception is sentences with a shifted focus of empathy. Cm. .
In the system of one-part sentences, it is the plural that categorizes the person, while the singular (together with the 3rd person / neuter gender) categorizes the subject - in impersonal sentences with predicates of perceptual semantics, most often sound: They knocked on the door (= Someone knocked) - It gurgles in the pipe, gurgled(=Something gurgles); less often - with predicates of visual semantics (see the article Impersonality):
(4) Darkness clicked and turned into a dazzling day, and from all sides sparkled, shone and turned white. [M. A. Bulgakov. Heart of a Dog (1925)]
(5) And in the morning turned white outside the windows: snow fell in the frost. [AND. S. Shmelev. The Inexhaustible Chalice (1918)]
(6) Far away, behind the Don and the wooded area, a little dawned, turned white. [B. Yekimov. Stories (2002)]
2. The status of indefinite personal sentences in the syntactic system
The question of the syntactic status of indefinite personal sentences is solved differently in different syntactic concepts.
1. Independent type of offer
In traditional Russian studies, indefinitely personal sentences are usually considered as an independent type of sentences. Compare, in particular, the treatment of indefinitely personal sentences in the following theories:
- in the syntactic system of A. A. Shakhmatov, who first introduced the concept of “indefinite-personal sentences” into scientific use (1920, published in 1925-1927);
- in morphosyntactic theories (the theory of N. Yu. Shvedova, presented in [Grammar 1980], and the theory of V. A. Beloshapkova, adopted in higher education, see [Beloshapkova 1997]).
The authors give one-component structural schemes (predicative stems) corresponding to indefinite personal sentences: V 3pl - for the verbal predicate, Adj pl short.ph. (AG-80) and Cop pl3 Adj fpl (V. A. Beloshapkova) - for a nominal predicate; these schemes do not imply a subjective position. These block diagrams are opposed to block diagrams of a two-part sentence (N 1 V f , N 1 Cop f N 1/5). The term "indefinite-personal sentence" itself is not used in AG-80.
- in Russian school grammar, which accepts the position that in the syntactic system indefinitely personal sentences are an independent structural type of one-part sentences, delimited from two-part sentences.
2. The result of modifying a two-part sentence
In various syntactic concepts of the late 20th - early 21st centuries. indefinitely personal sentences are usually considered against the background of a two-part sentence, from the point of view of derivative relations (from two-part to one-part) - both structural and semantic, both in the paradigm and in the text.
- as a derivative of the diathesis of a two-part sentence
Indefinitely personal sentences are considered as a (derivative) passive diathesis of a two-part sentence with a predicate - a transitive verb: The worker broke the wall - The wall was broken (by the worker) - The wall was broken[Khrakovsky 1974]; see also [Melchuk 1974]; [Paducheva 2004]. The essence of such a modification is the lowering of the communicative rank of the subject of the sentence. See the article Collateral.
This approach, however, does not exhaust the entire scope of indefinitely personal sentences: they can also be organized by intransitive verbs that do not have a passive ( Talking behind the wall).
In [Plungyan 2011], a different approach to indefinite-personal sentences is proposed in terms of their relationship with passive diathesis. Thus, the indefinite-personal sentence is understood in this work as original for collateral transformations with an empty or eliminated subject position: The conversation was interrupted => The conversation was interrupted; Classes were held outdoors=>Classes were held outdoors[Plungyan 2011:262–263]. With regard to a two-part sentence with a pronounced Agent, an indefinitely personal sentence is considered as the result of an "interpretive" actant derivation. In this case, the “interpretive” actant derivation, while retaining the place of the actant, does not allow its syntactic embodiment and changes the “referential nature” of the participant in the situation [Plungyan 2011:289]. Thus, indefinite-personal sentences are a way to express the “indefiniteness of the subject” [Plungyan 2011:293–294]: Your novel has been read.
Such a construction is called by V. A. Plungyan impersonal, or impersonal, which is not consistent with the terminology adopted in Russian studies, where one-component sentences with a predicate of 3 l are traditionally called impersonal. / cf., units ( It's getting dark), see Impersonality. In this regard, E. V. Paducheva proposes, within the framework of the Latin-language international linguistic terminology, to change the name of predicates in indefinite personal sentences to implicit personnel: "this form requires a subject-person, but not syntactically attached to the verb, but implied" [Paducheva 2012:37].
- in the syntactic field of a two-part sentence
Being a structural-semantic modification along the line of the subject, indefinite-personal sentences organize the “immediate periphery” of the syntactic field of a two-part sentence (Communicative Grammar [KG 1998(2004)]).
- in the derivational paradigm of a two-part sentence
In the development of the classification of simple sentences, presented in the university textbook, ed. V. A. Beloshapkova [Beloshapkova 1997], in the article [Beloshapkova, Shmeleva 1981], the authors propose to consider indefinitely personal sentences as a member of the derivational paradigm of a two-part sentence.
3. The question of the subject of indefinite personal sentences
3.1. Ways to interpret the subject
The syntactic theory of A. A. Shakhmatov, as well as morphosyntactic theories in Soviet linguistics (N. Yu. Shvedova, V. A. Beloshapkova), insisting on the structural one-component nature of indefinite personal sentences, nevertheless, recognize the presence of a subject in the semantics of a sentence. Thus, the structure of the sentence is opposed to its semantic organization.
In Russian linguistics, there is another tradition - the discovery in the composition of indefinite-personal sentences of a subject occupying a position in the sentence structure. Thus, I. A. Melchuk [Melchuk 1974] introduces the concept of “syntactic zero”, cf. the concept of “zero sign” by R. O. Yakobson [Yakobson 1985], “subject expressed by zero” by M. V. Panov [Panov 1966]. Syntactic zeros are, according to I. A. Melchuk, a “noun” in im.p. plural Ø people plural in sentences like The street was covered with snow and a noun in im.p. unit Øelements units cf. in sentences like The street was covered with snow.
NOTE. It is interesting that in the work [Melchuk 1974] I. A. Melchuk to explain the difference in the semantics of two-part and indefinite-personal sentences ( They're calling - they're calling) first considers the possibility of attributing this semantic difference to the form of the predicate. Thus, I. A. Melchuk reproduces the logic of A. A. Shakhmatov, who spoke about a pair of verb forms - definitely-personal and indefinitely-personal, and rejects it due to the uneconomical description: in this case, almost all verb forms would have to be doubled in the lexicon. . plural Instead, I. A. Melchuk offers an interpretation of "subjectless" sentences through the category of the subject: then the lexicon is increased by two "zero" nominal units - "noun", serving as the subject of an indefinitely personal sentence, and "noun", serving as the subject of an impersonal sentence.
The concept of syntactic zero has received recognition in modern Russian studies. True, the opinion has become more widespread that the essence of nominal zero units in syntax is their pronominal nature (see the works [Yakobson 1985], [Bulygina, Shmelev 1997]; [Testelets 2001]; [Onipenko in print]). T. V. Bulygina, developing the idea of “syntactic zero”, calls the subject of indefinite personal sentences “zero pronoun Ø 3l. plural » [Bulygina 1990]. Wed the traditional interpretation of the semantics of indefinite personal sentences due to synonymy with sentences with an indefinite pronoun someone in the position of the subject.
In the early 2000s some researchers return to the discussion of the very concept of syntactic zero (Ya. G. Testelets, E. V. Paducheva). According to Ya. G. Testelts, “non-zero, phonetically expressed units in grammar are facts which the researcher cannot ignore. Zero units are just hypotheses(a tool for linguistic analysis), although often very convenient, and the researcher can always accept or reject the idea of grammatical zero” [Chronicle VCH 2010]. E. V. Paducheva also recognizes the hypothetical (non-proven) nature of zero: “We will assume that in NLP<неопределенно-личном предложении>there is an implied subject (zero subject) of the 3rd person – the THIRD POINT zero” [Paducheva 2012].
The concept of syntactic zero as a tool of linguistic interpretation allowed I. A. Melchuk to explain not only the semantics of an indefinitely personal and impersonal sentence (subject people / subject elemental force), but also the form of person, number / person, number and gender of predicates in these types of sentences for account agreement with zero subjects. By means of syntactic zero, the use of gerunds and reflexive pronouns in indefinite personal sentences, which should be coreferential to the zero subject, was also justified (for more details on the control of reflexive pronouns and gerunds as the main formal properties of the subject in Russian, see the article Subject). In [Testelets 2001], on the contrary, the very existence of the null subject is substantiated by the possible presence of gerunds and reflexive pronouns in indefinite personal sentences. See also point 3.7. The use of gerunds and reflexive pronouns in indefinite personal sentences.
Completing the position of the subject in Russian "one-piece sentences" is natural in a typological perspective, under the conditions of reducing particular linguistic syntactic phenomena to a supralinguistic structural invariant. The two-part nature of any sentence is also substantiated within the framework of classical logic: a thought is two-part, its obligatory components are the object of thought (subject) and the attribute attributed to it (predicate).
The idea of a two-part sentence is supported in modern functional-explanatory theories of syntax (Communicative Grammar of the Russian Language by G. A. Zolotova, see [KG 1998(2004)]). Indefinitely personal sentences are qualified in communicative grammar against the background of a two-part sentence - as its derivative, thereby losing the status of an independent type of sentence, are considered as structurally-semantic modification of a two-part sentence along the line of the subject (for more details on the interpretation of indefinite personal sentences as derivatives of two-part sentences, see). This takes into account the relationship of the unnamed personal subject to I AM speaker: the unnamed subject is in an exclusive relationship with the subject of speech - I AM the speaker is not included in the subjects referred to in the sentence.
T. V. Bulygina [Bulygina 1990], for whom it is important that the unnamed subject is not in the “focus of empathy” of the speaker, speaks about the discrepancy (distance) between the subject of speech and the null subject, see the development of these ideas in [Bulygina, Shmelev 1997] .
Indefinitely personal sentences as a particular variant of "significant absence", within the framework of the artistic whole, are interpreted in connection with the "image of the author". For example: And something not chatted ;in a whisper told ;them in a whisper noticed ; We talked even in the corners that we may have a murder ...(Dostoevsky) - indefinitely personal sentences with predicates - speech verbs in the novel "Demons" are a grammatical means of creating a point of view in terms of psychology and ideology (on the point of view, see [Uspensky 2000]) - the distance of the hero-narrator from urban society.
In grammatical studies of a literary text, indefinitely personal sentences can be interpreted as a means of expressing the semantic category of “alienness” [Penkovsky 2004]: for example, in 19th century fiction, actions of servants are often framed in indefinitely personal sentences ( But they bring tea; The Countess was given a carriage), which is a development of the idea of distancing the subject of speech from the subject of action.
3.2. Quantitative composition and certainty / uncertainty of the subject
The justification for the independent structural status of indefinite personal sentences is the impossibility of restoring the subject from the context - in contrast to incomplete sentences (see Ellipsis). This is true, first of all, with respect to the predicates of sound semantics ( Noisy in the yard) and in relation to predicates naming the actions of official and executive authorities ( Our water is turned off;You are sent on a business trip;The street was blocked etc.), see also [Testelets 2001].
In indefinitely personal sentences, syntactic zero can correspond to subjects of different quantitative composition and different characterization in terms of certainty / indefiniteness; common between them is the personality of the subject, the non-inclusion of the speaker in the composition of the subjects of the action.
a) indefinite subject, open set:
(7) And I am not happy when I ask give the novel "The Return" to be read. (N. Ilyina)
b) indefinite subject, closed set:
(8) (Called on the phone, told his wife): May 7 will solemnly hand over certificates. (M. L. Gasparov)
c) indefinite subject, singular:
(9) called by phone, said wife: (on May 7, certificates will be solemnly presented). (M. L. Gasparov)
d) a certain subject, a single - performer:
(10) When carried away candle, Seryozha heard and felt his mother. (L. N. Tolstoy. Anna Karenina) - Vasily Lukich, Serezha's tutor
e) a certain subject, single, antagonist, depicted from the point of view of the hero in the focus of empathy:
(11) He is on his way, just entered ... She meets him. How harsh! His do not see, not a word with him ... (A.S. Pushkin. Eugene Onegin) - Tatyana does not see Onegin, the statement is uttered from Onegin's point of view; Onegin "in the focus of empathy"
(12) Litvinov bowed to him and at the same moment, as if obeying a secret command, ran to Irina. She I was at home. He ordered to report about himself; him immediately accepted. When he entered, she was standing in the middle of the room. (I. S. Turgenev. Smoke) - in the focus of empathy - Litvinov
(13) About two o'clock in the afternoon, His Majesty's blue cuirassier Count Aven called here with a bonbonniere from Ballet; bonbonniere accepted but he refused. <…>Finally, late in the evening, at the end of the tenth hour, a girl appeared from Madame Farnoy with an enormous cardboard box; her accepted immediately; but when her accepted and there was a chuckle in the hall about this, the bedroom door clicked, and a curiously weepy head stuck out; an angry, hasty cry was heard ... (A. Bely. Petersburg) - accepted, refused, accepted- the predicates denote the actions of the hostess, Sofya Petrovna Likhutina, who allows the messenger to enter - from the point of view of a cuirassier or servant; accepted- the predicate denotes the actions of an unnamed servant from the point of view of the narrator or the hostess, Likhutina, who appears synecdochically in the scene: tearful head, cry.
Thus, if in an isolated consideration for researchers their structural and semantic independence becomes an important property of indefinitely personal sentences, then with a textual approach, researchers find that indefinitely personal sentences can interact with the context (see Shakhmatov, [Grammar 1954]): their the null subject can be comprehended in connection with the contender for the role of the subject - a noun with the meaning of the person in the singular. or pl. in the pretext and thereby perform an anaphoric function. Indefinitely personal sentences mark the point of view of the hero who is in the “focus of empathy” [Bulygina 1990], [Bulygina, Shmelev 1997], or the narrator: the author identifies with the hero (an internal point of view in relation to the thinking or observing hero), who opposes himself to the subject action, which he looks at from the side (an external point of view on the acting hero). For external and internal points of view, see [Uspensky 2000].
e) I AM-subject(subject of the maximum degree of reference and individuality) in sentences with displaced empathy focus: You they say put on your coat- in terms of pronunciation from the point of view of the addressee (not the speaker, but the addressee in the "focus of empathy"), Yes, they wish you well, understand! That an indefinite personal sentence can express an action I AM the speaker was noticed by A. A. Shakhmatov [Shakhmatov 1920], see also [Grammar 1954]. Such uses are commented on by T. V. Bulygina and A. D. Shmelev as follows: “... in principle, statements are possible in which Ø 3 mn really correlates with the speaker; but it is indicative that it is in such utterances that the effect of “alienation” becomes especially obvious and one can clearly feel that the speaker takes the point of view of another person” [Bulygina, Shmelev 1997: 346].
The subject of sentences with the predicate 3k. plural can be understood in the sense of ‘everything, and I AM including'. Such sentences are called generalized-personal: They don’t go to a foreign monastery with their own charter; Do not count your chickens before they are hatched; They plow arable land, so they don’t wave their hands.
So, indefinitely personal sentences reveal the independence of their structure (the plural form of the predicate) from the quantitative composition of the conceivable subject, however, the semantics of the conceivable subject may conflict with the name "indefinitely personal sentences". The ability of indefinitely personal sentences to "operate" with the quantitative composition of the characters made it possible to call their zero subject "quantifier zero" - by analogy with quantifier pronouns [Onipenko in press].
3.3. Past time predicates plural with a null subject and the problem of the internal point of view
The pragmatic characteristic of indefinite personal sentences is represented by the concept of "distance" (exclusivity, exclusion I AM from the composition of the subject of an indefinitely personal sentence). But to the semantics of distance from I AM, characteristic of indefinitely personal sentences, it is impossible to reduce "subjectless" sentences with predicates of the past. plural in I AM-texts (for example, in diaries, letters, literary texts embodying an internal point of view), where the subject zero unites I AM with other subjects, often within the framework of a memory. The usual position of such sentences is the absolute beginning (of a diary entry, paragraph, etc.), which is why such sentences can hardly be called incomplete - due to the absence of a pretext, and, consequently, a referent of the omitted subject.
Namelessness I AM- the subject is intimated by the utterance, creates its unaddressedness (or addressing itself I AM), wrapping the content within I AM. For example:
(14) We went to the Kremlin. There is a moon and pink clouds in the sky. Silence, huge snowdrifts. Near the artillery depot, a soldier in a sheepskin coat creaks with his felt boots, with a face as if carved out of wood. How unnecessary this guard now seems! Came out from the Kremlin - the boys are running and shouting with delight, with unnatural accents. (I. A. Bunin. Cursed Days) - a fragment from the diaries "Cursed Days", subjects of sentences with highlighted predicates - I AM the author of the diary (Bunina) and his wife
The same grammatical technique is used in a fictional text to create an (almost) internal point of view:
(15) In Oreanda sat on a bench, not far from the church, watched down to the sea and were silent. Yalta was barely visible through the morning fog, white clouds stood motionless on the mountain tops. (A. p. Chekhov. The lady with the dog) - the position of the sentence - at the beginning of the paragraph; subjects of selected predicates - Gurov and Anna Sergeevna
(16) walked and walked and sang"Eternal memory", and when stopped, it seemed that her legs, horses, and breaths of the wind continued to sing it according to the routine. (B. L. Pasternak. Doctor Zhivago) - the position of the sentence is the absolute beginning.
The classic example adjoins the considered cases - the beginning of the "Queen of Spades", organized by two sentences with zero subjects (the first of them and A. A. Shakhmatov [Shakhmatov 2001: 81], and in [Grammar 1952: 7] is considered among ):
(17) One day were playing into the cards with the horse guard Narumov. The long winter night passed unnoticed; sat down have supper at five o'clock in the morning. (A. S. Pushkin. The Queen of Spades)
This example has been repeatedly discussed in the philological literature in connection with inclusion / non-inclusion I AM the narrator into the depicted space and into the composition of the players. In the work “The Style of the Queen of Spades”, V. V. Vinogradov indicates the gap between form predicates (which he called "indefinite personal form") and their semantics- the absence of an indication of the subject of the action in the transition to a new narrative theme inspires "the idea of the author merging with society (i.e., almost giving birth to an image - we)” [Vinogradov 1936]; in other words, a pair of past-time predicates. plural ( played, sat down to dinner), including the mechanism of anaphora, creates conditions for an inclusive understanding of predicates ( I AM the speaker is part of the subjects of the action, i.e. those who played, sat down to supper), not exclusive ( I AM speaker is not part of the subjects of the action).
Thus, in a context (a coherent text fragment), it may be difficult to qualify such sentences: if in paradigmatic linguistics indefinitely personal and incomplete sentences are clearly opposed, then in syntagmatics a “subjectless” sentence can allow dual meaning. In a third-person narrative, the duality of reading subjectless sentences can become a poetic technique - see the works of A. P. Chekhov.
There are cases when the duality of understanding of such sentences is undesirable (not foreseen by the author), but possible (i.e. different readers interpret the sentence differently). See, for example, different sentence qualifications Bathed in Dvina at night(Yu. Kazakov, Northern diary) in [Grammar 1980] (in which the sentence is classified as indefinitely personal) and in [Paducheva 2012: 35] (which proves that the sentence is incomplete, the subject must be restored in it we).
3.4. Semantics of "performing" zero in indefinite personal sentences
The texts testify to the semantic dynamics of the "performing" subjective zero in indefinite personal sentences. Performing semantics of subjective zero in the literature of the 19th - early 20th centuries. was associated with the actions of the authorities and, especially often, servants (the point of view of a hero-nobleman or narrator), and in the 20th century. with the help of indefinitely personal sentences, the actions of the authorities are often conveyed, which in [Testelets 2001] are aptly called the “state machine”, cf.:
(18) The French valet gave him shoes with red heels, blue velvet trousers, a pink caftan embroidered with sequins; in the front hastily powdered wig, his have brought... (A. S. Pushkin. Arap of Peter the Great)
(19) Armchairs with grandma straight lowered in the middle of the office, three steps from the general. (F. M. Dostoevsky. Player)
(20) led away you at dawn ... (A. A. Akhmatova)
(21) Lost Roman sought out with astonishing speed; There with Nikanor Ivanovich entered into conversation; So how? - asked at Nikanor Ivanovich's, screwing up his eyes. (M. A. Bulgakov. Master and Margarita)
(22) When rehabilitated Luppola, in the wall newspaper published an article "The first director of our institute." (M. L. Gasparov)
(23) In the USSR shot smart, plus a certain number of those who accidentally fell under a hot hand. [LiveJournal entry (2004)]
See Bunin's diary, written in 1918-20: in this diary we find vaguely personal proposals on the "pre-revolutionary", noble model (the actions of the performers):
(24) On Strastnaya stick on poster about the benefit of Yavorskaya. (I. A. Bunin. Cursed days)
– and according to the model denoting the position of a private person in relation to the authorities:
(25) From the first of February ordered be new style. So in their opinion now is the eighteenth. (I. A. Bunin. Cursed days)
3.5. "Your novel has been read"
The problem of categorical-semantic boundaries of personality/impersonality, certainty/uncertainty arises when considering the famous phrase from the novel The Master and Margarita (see also [Plungyan 2000]; [Paducheva 2001]; [Paducheva 2012]). Referring to the text of the novel allows you to restore the context of the dialogue in which this phrase was spoken, and its participants, and the one who is indicated by this phrase.
(26) – Your novel has been read Woland spoke, turning to the master, and they said only one thing, that, unfortunately, it is not over. So, I wanted to show you your hero.<…>Woland laughed, glancing at Margarita, and said: “There is no need to shout in the mountains, he is used to landslides anyway, and this will not alarm him. You don't have to ask for him, Margarita, because you already asked for him. the one with whom he is so eager to talk- here Woland again turned to the master and said: - Well, now you can end your novel with one phrase! The master seemed to have been waiting for this while he stood motionless and looked at the seated procurator. He folded his hands like a mouthpiece and shouted so that the echo jumped over the deserted and treeless mountains: - Free! Free! He is waiting for you!<...>Above the black abyss, into which the walls had gone, an immense city caught fire with shining idols reigning above it, above a garden that had grown luxuriantly over many thousands of these moons. The long-awaited moon road stretched straight to this garden, and the sharp-eared dog was the first to run along it. A man in a white cloak lined with blood rose from his chair and shouted something in a hoarse, broken voice.<...>It was only visible that after his faithful guard, he also ran swiftly along the lunar road. - Shall I go after him? the master asked uneasily, touching the reins. - No, - answered Woland.<...>- So, there, then? – the master asked, turned and pointed back, to where the recently abandoned city with monastic gingerbread towers was woven in the rear, with the sun shattered into smithereens in the glass. “Not either,” answered Woland.<...>– romantic master! The one who is so eager to see the hero you invented, whom you yourself have just released, has read your novel.- Here Woland turned to Margarita: - Margarita Nikolaevna! It is impossible not to believe that you tried to invent the best future for the master, but, really, what I offer you and what I asked for Yeshua for you, for you, even better. (M. A. Bulgakov. Master and Margarita)
The famous phrase sounds at the end of the novel - in the key dialogue between Woland and the master, in the dialogue of completions, in which, in particular, the fate of the master is decided - as the author of the novel (he must complete his creation - according to the highest will: They said that unfortunately it is not finished.) and as a mortal person (together with Margarita). At the same time, the historical person, Pilate, appears as the creation of the master, his obedient character, the influence of the will (word) of the master on which allows the master to complete Pilate's suffering, and finish his novel, and fulfill the higher will; the master's work is completed not in a book, but in a speech action that has an impact on reality ( Free!).
Bulgakov uses an indefinitely personal sentence "non-canonically": he pronounces the famous phrase Woland - not a person, not a person, and the predicate in it denotes the action of a non-person. Within the framework of the dialogue, the one referred to in the phrase Your novel has been read, receives four different nominations (point of view in terms of phraseology according to B. A. Uspensky [Uspensky 2000]): (1) as the zero subject of an indefinitely personal sentence, (2) as a pronoun of the 3rd person he, (3) descriptively - through two pronominal sentences t-…to- (the one who…), (4) Yeshua. Thus, as the dialogue develops, the object of nomination acquires for the reader an ever greater degree of certainty and individuality, up to a proper name (on individuality, see [Stepanov 1981]). It is interesting that Bulgakov gives Woland, who acts as an instrument of the Divine will (“part of that force that always wants evil and always does good”), the means of an indefinitely personal sentence, which can also be interpreted in connection with the distance between the subject of action and the subject of speech ( i.e. between Yeshua and Woland), and in connection with the intrigue for the reader (the unknown subject of the action), which will receive full and final resolution at the end of the dialogue. Those. an indefinitely personal sentence receives a multiple reading depending on the point of view from which we understand it: distance from the point of view of Woland (who knows who has read the novel) and, possibly, the addressee of the statement - the master (who understands who is being talked about), the obscurity of the subject from the point of view of the reader (and Margarita); therefore, the interpretation of this proposal by E. V. Paducheva, who believes that it “expresses uncertainty” [Paducheva 2012], is understandable.
In this text fragment, the author's tactics are curious: if in a literary text the subjective zero of an indefinitely personal sentence is usually anaphoric, i.e. is restored from the pretext (see [Bulygina, Shmelev 1997]), then Bulgakov uses the reverse move: the zero pronoun - the subject of an indefinitely personal sentence is cataphoric, i.e. is recovered from the posttext, thereby moving the reader's attention forward.
3.6. Locatives with subjective semantics
In Russian studies, attention has been repeatedly drawn to the fact that prepositional case groups with locative semantics can denote metonymically indefinite group subjects ([Grammatika 1980]; [Bulygina, Shmelev 1997]; [KG 1998(2004)]). Especially often locatives are used from the names of institutions, official bodies, departments, etc. than the speaker points to the performer - an imperious, official authority. Usually the locative is at the absolute beginning of the sentence, and the semantics of predicates is limited, mostly these are mental verbs (such as think), speech (like speak), intellectual (type write), emotive (like to greet), as well as repressive (such as to arrest) semantics: In the Kremlin talk about hockey. AT Duma proposed the creation of a state fund for alimony.
(27) The IT department defines level of service, but when the idea of SLA is proposed to management, a lot of nuances arise: it turns out that some aspects of business processes are not automated, others require interaction with subcontractors, etc. ["Computerworld" (2004)]
(28) welcome in Russia increasing the role of African states in world politics, their efforts to resolve the remaining regional conflicts on the continent, their desire for socio-economic development, the establishment of human rights and democracy. [FROM. V. Lavrov. Speech at the Africa Day Reception (2004)]
(29) In the middle of the courtyard in front of the museum building, a bronze Pushkin stood, spreading his arms in confusion, as if trying to remind those who came that for a dollar at exchange offices already 16 (!). [LiveJournal entry (2004)]
(30) Preparing in the peaceful Kremlin to the elections think referendum votes, offer Kadyrov to represent the country in international humanitarian organizations. ["Tomorrow" (2003)]
(31) As another potential application for its technology see in the company military products. ["Computerworld" (2004)]
(32) Question: How in Russia evaluate results of the EU summit? [Answer of the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry to the question of ITAR-TASS, other news agencies in connection with the approval by the EU summit of the text of the Constitution of the European Union (2004)]
(33) A at our school they give free milk and some pastries to go with it. [Our Children: Teens (2004)]
(34) In a huge abandoned cinema in Taipei they play classic Chinese historical action film, the 1967 film Dragon Inn by Kin Hu. [LiveJournal entry (2004)]
Locatives with home space semantics can also indicate the subject of an indefinitely personal sentence: Houses they call him Lesha; In family he was not loved.
Locatives with subjective semantics as part of indefinitely personal sentences have the meaning of “part”, i.e. “not all of those who are present in the named space”, cf.: Hall laughed(= all) – Laughed in the hall(= not all, some), i.e. the composition of the subjects has been modified - reduced. Wed similar ratio win.p. - rod.p. (or partitive) object: drank milk – drank milk.
See, however, the opinion of E. V. Paducheva, who, based on structural considerations, sees in indefinitely personal sentences with an initial locative a “zero subject” [Paducheva 2012]. If we combine these two points of view (the Russian one about the locative subject and E. V. Paducheva about the zero subject), then this modification can be explained by the “presence” of a syntactic zero in the sentence, which limits the number of subjects (see about the quantifying nature of zero Ø 3 min - [Onipenko in print]).
The semantics of the predicate can limit the subjective understanding of the locative: in the Duma turned off the water- the locative has only a spatial, but not a subjective meaning, since the action "turn off the water" does not correlate with the subject - the authority (unlike the verbs of speech or repressive semantics).
In construction My name is... the absence of spatio-temporal localization and the expansion of the class of subjects to the maximum ("everyone who knows") lead to a decrease and, in the limit, to the loss of the actional properties of the verb (approaching the connective) and synonymous relations with nominal sentences of identity: My name is Masha = I am Masha, My name is Masha. On the contrary, the emergence of the locative, and thus spatio-temporal localization, leads to a more actional understanding of the predicate: At home my name is Musya. Therefore, synonymous substitutions are also possible - nominative predicative for instrumental predicative (subjectivism of the naming), name is on called: At home they call me (= call) Musya(for more information about the competition between the nominative and instrumental cases in the predicative position, see the article Nominative case).
3.7. The use of reflexive pronouns and participles in indefinite personal sentences
An appeal to real speech material shows that the correlation of gerunds and reflexive pronouns with the null subject of indefinite personal sentences is not consistent due to the discrepancy in the referential and individual status of the null subject of an indefinite personal sentence and subjects, which are usually coreferential gerunds and reflexive pronouns, as well as due to the shift of attention (“focus of empathy”) from the subject of the sentence to the object. For more information about the properties of the subject and the rules for using reflexive pronouns and participles, see the articles Subject, Pronoun, and Participle.
So, in A. A. Shakhmatov we find: “According to the general rule that prevails throughout the Russian language, the use of gerunds is possible where there is a subject and a predicate. The participle is thus in direct connection with the subject” [Shakhmatov 2001:229]. At the same time, traditional Russian studies recognize the limited nature of the interaction of gerunds with indefinite personal sentences in particular [Shakhmatov 2001] and with “single-component”<односоставными>in general [Grammar 1980]. In modern research, it is noted that the use of gerunds is typical for sentences with concretely referential, definite, individual subjects (and being in the focus of empathy), see [Glovinskaya 1995], [KG 1998 (2004)], [Nikitina in press]. Wed also the interaction of non-core gerunds with main predicates in sentences with I AM-subjects as a trend, as a zone of mass errors [Glovinskaya 1995].
In indefinitely personal sentences, the comprehension of gerunds can be difficult:
(35) That is, how? - asked at Nikanor Ivanovich, squinting(M. A. Bulgakov. Master and Margarita)
The focus of empathy in this sentence Nikanor Ivanovich: Bulgakov comically plays up the actions of secret services, boldly connecting an indefinitely personal sentence, the subject of which is comprehended non-individually, and a participle, which requires an individual subject. It seems that gerunds interact normally with 3n predicates. plural more against the background of the generalized-personal semantics of the subject (which implies the focus of empathy on the subject), rather than exclusive, see, for example: Sitting on a mat, they don’t talk about sables. See also an example from the Corpus:
(36) So... One could agree with Ms. Ryder's statement, and then with a clarification: Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon finally realized that not only in the so-called Palestinian autonomy, but also in the depths of Israeli land has already grown not one generation of those who are only listed as citizens of Israel, but in fact have long become its enemies. And enemies are not appeased - they are fought. And only having won, they sit down at the negotiating table. This is precisely the new reality of Israel, which Ms. Ryder does not see point blank - but rather does not want to see. How many illegal Arab houses have been built in Israel (what kind of houses? Palaces! [The Swan (2003)]
The highlighted sentences receive a generalized personal reading (‘all smart people, and I AM including'), temporal semantics - 'always', their background is a text fragment in the informative register (knowledge mode).
Below, the possibilities of using an indefinitely personal sentence with the subject are discussed in sequence:
3.7.1. Postpositive gerunds
An analysis of examples from the Corpus shows that the predicates of indefinitely personal sentences (with subjective semantics “do not I AM”) can be accompanied by postpositive gerunds (see below for prepositive gerunds) with interpretative semantics. Thus, the actual action of a certain person is denoted by an indefinite personal predicate, and the gerund denotes not an action, but an interpretation, an assessment of this action from the speaker's point of view. Thus, within the framework of the proposal, the effect of a kind of "polyphony" is created. In these cases, the temporal relations between the verbal predicate and the gerund are destroyed (which are possible in the case when both predicates are stating, which allows us to comprehend them as real actions / states in terms of simultaneity or temporal succession):
(37) To capitalist countries Lenya not allowed, depriving his thereby the opportunity to achieve worldwide recognition. [AND. E. Keogh. Illusions without illusions (1995-1999)]
(38) About such habitations they say insulting animals, lair. [AT. M. Shukshin. Kalina red (1973)]
3.7.2. Prepositive gerunds
The following cases are possible.
1) In the general case, prepositive gerunds show a greater propensity to express proper-temporal relations (germs CB - express temporal succession, denoting the previous action; NSV - simultaneity, see the article gerund) than postpositive ones (which are a way of subjectivation), this can see the iconism of the sign. Temporal relations between the predicate of an indefinitely personal sentence and the gerund are present if they are ascertaining, meaning actions. This imposes certain restrictions on the semantics of the subject (definite), and also in terms of spatio-temporal localization, the sentences are maximally individualized: they describe a separate, isolated case in the past or are accompanied by an adverb of time that limits the time frame (i.e. the category of certainty-uncertainty is distributed between name - non-individualized and individualizing means: gerunds and concretized spatio-temporal localization).
(39) On the morning of the next day, a detachment of armed riot police appeared, nicknamed by the people "masks of the show." Under the muzzles of automatic weapons, everyone was laid face down on the floor - both women and foreigners who were at the negotiations. Then they destroyed furniture, knocked down several cabinets, smashed coffee tables, several computer monitors, took hard drives and all documents with them. Leaving, they hit a couple of times on the backs of machine guns lying on the butts ... And the next day the bandits appeared again. Victor realized that things were really bad. He transferred everything to them on the balance sheet of some shell company and left. [AND. Tarasov. Millionaire (2004)]
Plural predicate past time in this example, it can be interpreted as indefinitely personal or understood as an incomplete sentence, the predicate of which is semantically consistent with the subject detachment.
Wed example:
(40) In early childhood, I happened to lie down in our small hospital with a sore throat two or three times. It was boring to listen men who, lighting their first cigarette, remembered that many mice saw in a dream - why would it? Or the father-in-law, drunk, fell into a ditch<...>. If occasionally, recollecting themselves, they were interested in my dreams, I got off with empty phrases. "I don't remember anything. I ran somewhere. I saw birds. Galina Prosovna without a nose." [YU. Buyda. Executioner City]
- the subject of an indefinitely personal sentence is localized in time and space - the hospital where the hero lay in childhood. Semantically, the subject of an indefinitely personal sentence is comprehended in the pretext - this men, but not structurally: the subjective zero of an indefinitely personal sentence cannot be coreferential to the verbal object: in the pretext men take the position of the object: it was boring to listen to men. Semantics of the prepositive gerund having realized– interpretative, perfect, main predicate were interested(=‘asked’) – ascertaining; there is no question of proper-temporal relations between them.
2) Phraseologisation of a participle turnover or lexicalization (adverbalization) of a single participle with negation. Negation is a sign interpretation predicate("polyphony"), a signal of the loss of temporary relationships; the absence of punctuation marks in gerunds serves as a signal of the absence of intonation prominence and an additional signal of the destruction of not only interpredicative relations, but also the proper predicative relations between the null subject and the considered forms with not:
(41) In the waiting room, where I then moved, without further ado, they took paper trash bag. [B. Grishchenko. Stranger in the Kremlin (2004)]
(42) Once upon a time, the bronze finger of LENINGRAD Ilyich pointed to one of the premises of the House of Culture. However, in the recent past, this building was converted into a casino and an erotic club. Of course, the close attention of the leader of the world proletariat to the dubious institution looked out of place. sculpture quickly moved on the territory of a suburban dispensary. ["Evening Yekaterinburg" (2004)]
3.7.3. reflexive pronouns
Reflexive pronouns within the framework of indefinite personal sentences can interact (on the verge of the norm) with the indirect case, and not with the null subject-subject in im.p. (as one might expect, see articles Pronoun and Subject):
(43) tourists evicted from their numbers (Internet resource)
(44) to me already sent to mine address (Internet resource)
As in the case of the interaction of gerunds with I AM, this is not a norm, but rather a grammatical symptom, an indicator that the verbal object (carrying the corresponding morphological form) falls into the focus of empathy.
4. Syntactic synonymy of indefinitely personal sentences
Indefinitely personal sentences organized by transitive verbs are sometimes treated as synonyms for passive sentences (see voice) ( The accountant makes the estimate- Estimated by an accountant), cm. . Due to the subjective semantics and the structure of indefinitely personal sentences, we can talk about synonymy with a passive only in cases where the passive sentence satisfies the following structural and semantic requirements:
- correlates with the causative/performing personal subject;
- this person is not named ("syntactic null");
- indicates the distance between the speaker and the subject of the action.
In modern Russian studies, it is believed that there are two ways to express a passive in Russian:
- with the help of reflexive verbs - for NSV verbs (see clause 4.1);
- using analytical constructions with participles in -n, -t (see passive participles) - for SV verbs (see paragraph 4.2).
For more details, see the article Pledge.
They can claim to be synonymous with indefinite personal sentences.
4.1. Predicates of indefinite personal sentences and reflexively passive predicates as syntactic synonyms
However, in literary texts, sometimes there are examples with reflexive-passive imperfective-procedural predicates (within the framework of actual tense) - in a multiple meaning; see for example: crowds of the wounded ... walked, crawled and on a stretcher rushed from the battery. In this example, there is a general, generalized view of the observer (other terms: panoramic, "bird's eye view" - [Uspensky 2000]) on a vast space and a multiplicity of actions and non-referential subjects and objects of action ( crowds of wounded), the plurality of actions in the observed space (reproductive register, perceptual mode) approaches the plurality of actions in time (informative register, mental mode), the basis for which is the generalizing mental work of the observer - the subject of consciousness.
4.1.3. Syntactic synonyms and the genre problem
Syntactic synonymy is connected with the problem of genre and mode. Indefinitely personal sentences and passives can enter into synonymous relations in prescriptive texts. The synonymy of an indefinitely personal sentence and a passive is usually implemented in instructive, recommendatory, but not prescriptive texts, for example, in culinary recipes: onions are cut, then sautéed - onions are cut, then sautéed(about this kind of use of passive forms - the so-called passive recommendation - see more details Recurrence, paragraph 2.2.1) . If a prescription is expressed, then the use of an indefinitely personal sentence is uncharacteristic: Photos are cut and pasted – Cut and paste photos – Photos are cut and pasted – ? Photos cut and pasted. Wed also the strangeness of indefinitely personal sentences when expressing a prohibition (in this case, the use of an infinitive construction is more natural): Do not walk on the grass - ? Don't walk on the lawn under normality We do not smoke(= ‘Please do not smoke’, i.e., apparently, in an indefinitely personal sentence, the requirement is expressed more mildly, in an infinitive sentence more categorically).
4.2. CB predicates in indefinite personal sentences and participial predicates: on the problem of syntactic synonymy
Predicates in CB of indefinitely personal sentences can enter into synonymous relations with participial predicates (strad., CB, past tense): The fire of the Olympic Games was delivered to St. Petersburg. - On the night of Friday, the fire of the 2008 Olympic Games was delivered to St. Petersburg by a plane from Turkey. Syntactic synonyms have a perfect meaning (= Olympic flame in St. Petersburg): the speaker states the consequence of the completed action (for the expression of this meaning by the participial construction, see Passive participle for more details).
However, these synonymous relations are limited by genre and functionality. It can be assumed that the discreteness of the subject in an indefinitely personal sentence is semantically related to its agentivity and, thus, to the maximum control of the subject of action over the action and its result, in contrast to passivity: here control over the situation (over the result of the action) passes to the subject of speech which states a fait accompli. Wed:
(61) In Moscow beaten and robbed son of an aide to the president. (Internet resource) - ??? In Moscow beaten and robbed son of an aide to the president.
Wed also the inscription on the street commemorative plaque:
(62) In 1991 street returned historical name - ??? In 1991 street returned historical name.
Despite the fact that the second option (vaguely personal sentences) is absolutely adequate, in this way it is impossible to convey information about the event in an official message (transmitting the point of view of the authorities) - in a newspaper, on television, in a police report. In informal communication, both options seem to be synonymous.
In the case of the personal object of the action and the positive semantics of the verb (the action is performed “for the good” of its object), the synonymous relations between participial and indefinitely personal predicates can be destroyed, cf .: He is combed - He was combed, which is connected with the opposition of predicates on the basis of controllability / uncontrollability of action. The observed sign (the result of the action), expressed by the participle, is interpreted in connection with the fulfillment of the will of the object of the action, while in an indefinitely personal sentence, the verbal sign is recognized as not related to the will of the object of the action, the will and control belong to the conceivable subject of the action.
5. Bibliography
- Beloshapkova V.A., Shmeleva T.V. Derivational paradigm of the sentence // Bulletin of Moscow State University, 2. Ser. Philology. 1981, pp. 43–51.
- Bulygina T.V. Me, you and others in Russian grammar // RES PHILOLOGICA. Philological research: In memory of ac. G.V. Stepanova 1919-1986. M.-L. 1990, pp. 111–126.
- Vinogradov V.V. The style of the "Queen of Spades" // Pushkin. Proceedings of the Pushkin Commission of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 2. M .: Izd. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 1936, pp. 74–147. http://feb-web.ru/feb/pushkin/serial/v36/v36-074-.htm
- Glovinskaya M.Ya. Active processes in grammar (based on innovations and mass language errors) // Russian Language of the End of the 20th Century (1985 - 1995). M. 1996. S. 237–304.
- http://www.rusgram.narod.ru/
- KG 1998 (2004) – Zolotova G.A., Onipenko N.K., Sidorova M.Yu. Communicative grammar of the Russian language. M. 1998 (2004). pp. 115–118.
- Nikitina E.N. Once again about gerunds in indefinitely personal sentences // RYANO (in press).
- philol.msu.ru ›~ruslang/data/pdf/qrlf…2010.pdf http://www.philol.msu.ru/~ruslang/data/pdf/qrlf_8_2010.pdf
- Onipenko N.K. Model of subjective perspective and the problem of classification of egocentric means // Problems of functional grammar. SPb. (in the press).
- Paducheva E.V. Causative verbs and decausatives in Russian // Russian language in scientific coverage, 1. 2001. P. 52–79. http://www.ruslang.ru/doc/rjano01.pdf
- Paducheva E.V. Dynamic models in the semantics of vocabulary. M. 2004.
- http://lexicograph.ruslang.ru/TextPdf1/Neopr_Lichn_VYa.pdf
- Panov M.V. Russian language // Languages of the peoples of the USSR. T.1. M. 1966. S. 106–107.
- Penkovsky A.B. On the semantic category of foreignness in the Russian language // Essays on Russian semantics. M. 2004. S. 5–49.
- Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. M. 1956. S. 370–376.
- Plungyan V.A. Introduction to grammatical semantics: grammatical meanings and grammatical systems of the languages of the world. Moscow: RGGU. 2011, pp. 191–219.
- Stepanov Yu.S. Names. Predicates. Offers. M. 1981. S. 85–97.
- Chronicle of VCH 2010 – Chronicle of the Vinogradov readings at Moscow State University (N.K. Onipenko) // Bulletin of Moscow State University, 4. 2010. P. 223–226.
- Shakhmatov A.A. The syntax of the Russian language (not finished, 1st edition after the death of the author: 1 vol. - 1925; 2 vol. - 1927). M. 2001. S. 70–81, 125–128 (§116), 229 (§284), 462–465.
- Jacobson R.O. Zero sign // Yakobson R.O. Selected works. M. 1985. http://www.philology.ru/linguistics1/jakobson-85d.htm
6. Basic literature on the topic
- Beloshapkova V.A. (Ed.) Modern Russian: Textbook. M. 1997. S. 711, 726.
- Bulygina T.V. Me, you and others in Russian grammar // RES PHILOLOGICA. Philological research: In memory of ac. G.V. Stepanova 1919-1986. M.–L. 1990, pp. 111–126.
- Bulygina T.V., Shmelev A.D. Linguistic conceptualization of the world (based on Russian grammar). M. 1997. S. 335–352.
- Vinogradov V.V. The style of the "Queen of Spades" // Pushkin. Vremennik of the Pushkin Commission of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 2. Ed. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 1936, pp. 74–147. http://feb-web.ru/feb/pushkin/serial/v36/v36-074-.htm
- Grammar 1954 - Vinogradov V.V. (Ed.) Grammar of the Russian language: In 2 vols. M. 1954. Vol. 2. Part 2. pp.5–8.
- Grammar 1970 - Shvedova N.Yu. (Ed.) Grammar of the modern Russian literary language. M.: Science. 1970.
- Grammar 1980 - Shvedova N.Yu. (Ed.) Russian grammar. T.2. M. 1980. §§2511–2521. http://www.rusgram.narod.ru/
- Zolotova G.A. Subjective modifications of the Russian sentence// Sagners slavistische Sammlung. Bd 17. Munchen. 1991. S. 509–515.
- KG 1998 (2004) – Zolotova G.A., Onipenko N.K., Sidorova M.Yu. Communicative grammar of the Russian language. M. 1998 (2004). pp. 115–118.
- Knyazev Yu.p. Verb // Morphology of the modern Russian language. SPb. 2008, pp. 355–542.
- Melchuk I.A. On syntactic zero // Typology of passive constructions. Diathesis and pledges. L. 1974. S. 343–361.
- Nikitina E.N. Indefinite personality and suffering: functional differences and identities // Questions of Russian Linguistics: Sat. Issue. 13. Phonetics and grammar: present, past, future. M. 2010. S. 291–302.
- Paducheva E.V. Indefinite personal sentence and its implied subject // Questions of Linguistics, 1. 2012. P. 27–41.
- Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. M. 2002.
- Plungyan V.A. Introduction to grammatical semantics. Grammatical meanings and grammatical systems of the languages of the world. Moscow: RGGU. 2011, pp. 262–270, 289–297.
- Pushkareva N.V. Indefinitely personal sentences as a means of creating a picture of the world in a literary text // Text. Structure and semantics. T.1. M. 2005.
- Bondarko A.V. (Ed.) Theory of functional grammar. Personality. Collateral. SPb. 1991, pp. 41–120, 168–170.
- Testelec Ya.G. Introduction to General Syntax. M. 2001. S. 310–315.
- Khazova O.N. Russian indefinite-personal sentences and their place in the syntactic system of the modern Russian language: Diss…. cand. philological sciences M. 1985.
- Khrakovsky V.S. Passive constructions // Typology of passive constructions. Diathesis and pledges. L. 1974. S. 5–45.
- Shakhmatov A.A. The syntax of the Russian language. M. 2001.
- Malchukov, A., Siewerska A. (Eds.) Impersonal constructions. A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2011.
9. Definitely personal and indefinitely personal one-part sentences. The question of singling out generalized-personal sentences.
Definitely personal and are called one-part sentences, the main member of which is expressed personal verb form indicating certain face. The verb in this case does not need a pronoun, since the meaning of a particular person is conveyed by his personal ending. For example: reread long index of titles. There is no lung. I find lungwort. (Sol.). The main member in definite personal sentences can be expressed by the verb in the form of the first or second person singular of the indicative mood: I stand one among the bare plain; verb in the form of the second person plural of the indicative mood (when referring to the interlocutor): What you say Ivanov?; less often - by a verb in the form of the first person plural of the indicative mood; verb imperative in the form of the second person singular and plural and - less often - in the form of the first person plural (with the meaning of inducement to joint action).
Usually, definitely-personal one-part sentences are synonymous with two-part sentences with a subject - pronoun (I'll go to the city. - I'll go to the city), however, such parallel constructions are not always possible, for example, in the structure of some complex sentences with adversative relations, the absence of a pronoun is unthinkable: You go home, and I'll sit here. In other cases, sentences with and without pronouns differ only stylistically. So, for example, the pronoun is used when persuading: Don't worry, calm down; with a disparaging statement: Get out of here!; with logical selection, emphasizing the face: I'm telling you this, you hear me! (and not anyone else)
vaguely personal sentences are called, the main member of which is expressed by the verb in the form of the third person plural or in the form of the past tense and denotes an action performed by indefinite or unmarked persons. For example: Everything is fine at the factory. Are waiting only the arrival of Vasily Terentyevich (Kupr.). In indefinite personal sentences, attention is focused on a fact, event, action. The character remains either unmarked, since reference to him, from the point of view of the speaker, is insignificant, or it is indefinite or unknown, and therefore reference to him is impossible. In any case, the sentence is devoid of a grammatical subject. The significance of a person's indeterminacy by no means entails a decrease in his activity as a producer of an action, only this producer of an action does not matter in itself, only the action he performs is important. Such is the specificity of the expression of thought in indefinite personal sentences. An action denoted by a verb in the third person form or the past tense form, as a rule, refers to an indefinite set of persons. Sometimes it can be attributed to one person, although the verb is plural. This person can be either indefinite or quite specific, but he is not named for various reasons, in particular because there is no need for this information. Sometimes the speaker himself acts as a character. Thus, the main meaning of the verb form in indefinite personal sentences is precisely the indefiniteness, and not the plurality of the subject, although the latter is the most common. This type of sentence is common in conversational style and is less common or almost uncommon in book styles, especially scientific and business, the necessary quality of which is the utmost clarity and certainty of presentation.
generalized-personal one-part sentences are called, the main member of which is expressed by the verb in the form of the second person singular of the present and future tense (less often - in other personal forms), and the action denoted by the verb in such sentences applies equally to any person, i.e. the actor is thought of in a generalized way . The semantic feature of the verb forms in these sentences is the designation timelessness . The usual way of expressing the main member in generalized personal sentences is the verb in the form of the second person singular of the present and future tenses. It is this form that has a generalized-personal, expansive meaning in the Russian language as a common meaning: Do you like to ride- love to carry sleds. (last). However, the verb can also denote a generalized action in the form of the third person plural of the indicative mood. For example: There is no firewood in the forest carry(last). Sometimes found in a generalized personal sentence and the form of the first person plural of the indicative mood. Like what we have- do not store, lose - cry(last) And, finally, the form of the first person singular of the indicative mood. . Generalized personal sentences with a verb in the form of the imperative mood are quite common. For example: Vek live- century learn. The main purpose of generalized personal sentences is a figurative expression of general judgments, broad generalizations, which is why they are so widely represented in folk proverbs: You cannot throw out a word from a song; With whom you lead, from that you will gain. Generalized personal sentences are usually one-part. However, sometimes they can take the form of a two-part sentence, where the subject, expressed by a personal pronoun, is used in the sense of a generalized person.
| " |
Search
We may notify you of new articles,