Semantics is structural. Structural-semantic classification of sentences

N.S. Pospelov identified the main difference between the two types of complex sentences. It consists in the following: the subordinate part either correlates with the main part in its entirety, or is part of the main part, attaching itself to some word and spreading it. He called sentences of the first type binomial, sentences of the second type - single-term.

An example of a binary type sentence: We will agree on everything if you come to me. The predicative parts of a complex sentence contain two situations that correlate in general: the second situation is a condition for the implementation of the first situation. The appendage is associated with main part generally. A similar relationship is observed in sentences with other semantic conjunctions: We'll agree on everything when you come to me. We will agree on everything, because we understand each other. We will agree on everything, although it will not be easy.

An example of a monomial type clause: We agreed to meet in the evening.

The subordinate part does not refer to the entire main part, but to one word “agreed”, spreading it, making up for its informative insufficiency. This connection is comparable to the connection in the phrase: make an appointment(We made an appointment).

Another important difference between one-term and two-term sentences is manifested in the means of communication. In monomial sentences, asemantic unions are used as means of syntactic communication (the union "what", some unions used as asemantic - "as if", "as if", "to") and allied words, i.e. such indicators that only formalize the connection, but do not establish syntactic relations (syntactic relations are expressed by other means). In binomial sentences, semantic conjunctions are used as means of syntactic communication - indicators of syntactic relations (temporary, conditional, causal, target, etc.).

The classification of complex sentences, developed by N.S. Pospelov, was further developed in the works of other scientists, in particular, V.A. Beloshapkova, who made important clarifications to this classification. First of all, the terms were replaced: one-membered and two-membered, respectively, are denoted by the terms undivided and divided sentences. The reason for changing the terms is the similarity of the former terms with the names of the types of simple sentences (one-part - two-part) and their possible confusion in use.

V.A. Beloshapkova made an important clarification for sentences of a dissected structure (according to Pospelov - two-term). She found that in these sentences there is a connection not between the predicative parts as a whole, but between the predicates: the subordinate part refers to the main predicate, and this predicate is not necessarily a predicate, it can also be an additional predicate, for example, a gerund or participle in separate phrases, and even a semantic predicate (a word with predicate semantics). For example: He held his son tightly by the hand so that he would not run away. The subordinate clause with the target meaning refers to the predicate-predicate "held" (held - for what purpose?). He went out, holding his son tightly by the hand so that he would not run away. The subordinate part refers to an additional predicate expressed by the gerund "holding" (holding - for what purpose?)

Another important step taken by V.A. Beloshapkova in the development of a structural-semantic classification is the determination of the methods of connection between the components of a complex sentence. There are three ways of communication: conditional, determinant and correlation.

A word connection is a predictive connection, it is predetermined by the valency of the word in the main part, its morphological or lexical features. Such a connection is similar to a connection in a phrase. For example: The confidence she had at first was now gone. The word connection is determined by the morphological characteristic of the reference word - its belonging to a certain part of speech - a noun (cf. in the phrase: "initial confidence"). The confidence that he would not let me down gave me strength. In this case, the word connection is determined not by the fact that the word belongs to a part of speech, but by the peculiarity of its lexical meaning: the word "confidence" is distributed here as a synsemantic one, requiring mandatory distribution - subordinate clause or a word form ("confidence in the rightness"). The word connection is a sign of an undivided structure.

Determinant connection is a non-predictive connection, it is similar to the connection of a circumstantial determinant in simple sentence: determinant refers to predicative basis simple sentence; the subordinate part refers to the predicate of the main part (main or additional). For example: I understood you when I got to know you better. Wed: With time I understood you. A similar connection with any semantic union: I understand you because I think so myself. I understand you, although I have a different point of view. Determinant connection is a sign of a dissected structure.

A correlation connection has no analogues in a phrase and a simple sentence; it is a connection that is characteristic of a complex sentence. The classic case of correlation is the T-word in the main part and the corresponding K-word in the subordinate part: Ithat , whom nobody likes. Other manifestations of correlation: T-word in the main part - asemantic union ( It wasSo hot,what melted asphalt); The K-word in the subordinate clause correlates with the entire main clause ( Today Vasya was late,what never happened to him before). Correlation is possible both in non-segmented and dissected structures.

A section of structural linguistics devoted to describing the meaning of linguistic expressions and operations on it. In S. with. There are two types of models: language behavior of native speakers and language research. Models of linguistic behavior of speakers are divided into generating text and translating text into meaning or meaning into text.

The generative models, which arose under the strong influence of formal logic, imitate the ability of a native speaker to distinguish meaningful sentences from meaningless ones, true from false, analytically true (“Bachelors are not married”) from synthetically true ones (“The sun is the source of life on earth”). The ready-made syntactic structure of the sentence is fed to the input of the generative model (for example, ((tree" of its components - see Generative Grammar), using a special dictionary and rules for connecting values ​​that "amalgamate" the values ​​of two components of a given level into the value of a component of the next level, the sentence is compared with its semantic characteristics Critics of generative semantic models pointed out that the logical analysis of the judgment contained in the sentence (questions of meaningfulness, truth, etc.) goes beyond the competence of linguistics, whose task is to show how language is used to convey any meanings , in particular, anomalous in one way or another.This problem is solved by models of translating text into meaning (analysis) and meaning into text (synthesis).

Currently, synthesizing models are more developed. At their input comes the meaning to be expressed, recorded on special. semantic language; the output is many equivalent to each other

sentences expressing a given meaning (the concept of equivalence is taken as undefined; the meaning is called the invariant of equivalent sentences), and (or) many sentences-inferences from a given meaning. The essential components of the model are: an artificial semantic language and a natural semantic dictionary. A semantic language is made up of a set of concepts and syntactic relations, the rules for the formation of sentences in this language, and the rules for their equivalent or implicative (for the case of inference) transformation. The interpretation (definition) of the meanings of words (or language units) in a natural-semantic dictionary is their translation into a semantic language. A hierarchy of semantic descriptions is expedient - from an abstract semantic record such as predicate calculus to a surface syntactic structure ("tree") with specific words given natural language at its nodes. Then the semantic synthesis appears as a multiple recoding of the originally given meaning with a gradual approximation to the form in which it is expressed in natural language. A model of this type does not exist in full, but many of its fragments are developed on the basis of three principles, each with its own linguistic tradition.

1) In accordance with the principle of decomposition into diff. signs transferred from phonology, the meaning of a word is considered as a conjunction of elementary components - the so-called. "atoms of meaning". The systems of kinship names and other simple nomenclatures were subjected to component analysis. A similar idea of ​​the structure of the meaning of linguistic units underlay the first semantic models used in information retrieval, automatic translation (see Machine translation) and semantic generative models.

2) In accordance with the principle of syntactic organization (put forward in opposition to the 1st principle), it is believed that for an adequate representation of meaning, the semantic components of a complex meaning must form a rather complex syntactic structure (for example, a “tree” of dependencies). In practice, when interpreting the meanings of words, this principle was followed before: the syntax of natural language was used in the lexicographic tradition, spec. a syntax close to that of predicate calculus is found in the works of Sov. scientists on automatic, translation and translation from information-logical languages.

3) The need to receive many proposals equivalent to each other led to the appeal of S. s. to the principle of transformation calculus, which originally arose in the theory of generative grammars precisely on a syntactic basis (in this theory, only transformations of the syntactic structure of a sentence were considered, preserving its grammatical correctness and lexical composition). In S. with. the concept of transformation has been modified in two respects: both narrowed - only semantically invariant (and implicative) transformations are considered, and expanded - any changes in the lexical composition of the sentence are allowed (see the "meaning" model). In the newest S. with. the subject of consideration is, in addition to the semantics of the sentence, the semantic structure of the whole connected text.

Research models in S. with. are aimed at obtaining information about the meanings of language units using formal procedures for processing language material.

1. The concept of the word. Semantic structure of the word.

2. Classification of the word. Lexicon as a system.

3. Non-discrete units of vocabulary.

1. Word concept. Semantic structure of the word

The word (lexeme) is the central unit of the language. Vocabulary language is called vocabulary, and the section studying it is lexicology. It is subdivided into onomasiology and semasiology.

Onomasiology- a section of lexicology that studies the vocabulary of a language, its nominative means, types of vocabulary units of the language, methods of nomination.

Semasiology- a branch of lexicology that studies the meaning dictionary languages, types of lexical meanings, semantic structure of the word.

Depending on the originality of lexemes and compound names, such lexicological disciplines are distinguished as phraseology, terminology, onomastics(the science of proper names). Closely related to lexicology etymology- the science of the origin of words and expressions and lexicography as the theory of compiling dictionaries different types. Word- the main structural - semantic unit of the language, which serves to name objects, properties, phenomena and relations of reality, which has a set of semantic, phonetic and grammatical features.

Characteristic features the words:

1. integrity

2. indivisibility

3. free reproducibility in speech

The word contains:

1. phonetic structure (an organized set of sound

phonetic phenomena, forming the sound shell of the word)

2. morphological structure (a set of morphemes included in it)

3. semantic structure (a set of meanings in the content of a word)

All words included in a particular language form its vocabulary (lexicon, lexicon).

The word has many definitions. One of the more successful prof. Golovin:

Word- the smallest semantic unit of the language, freely reproduced in speech to build statements.

By this definition, the word can be distinguished from phonemes and syllables, which are not semantic units, from morphemes, not reproduced in speech freely, from phrases consisting of 2 or more words.

Any word is included in 3 main types of relationships:

1. attitudes towards objects and phenomena of reality;

2. attitudes towards thoughts, feelings, desires of the person himself;

3. relationship to other words.

In linguistics these relationship types are called:

1. denotative (from the word through its meaning to the subject)

2. significative (from the word through its meaning to the concept)

3. structural (relational) (from word to another word)

In accordance with the indicated types of relations, the functions of the word are also defined:

● denotative function- allows a word to designate an object;

● significative function- allows the word to participate in the formation and expression of concepts;

● structural function - allows the word to enter into different rows and groups of words.

concept(denotation) - reflects the most common and at the same time the most significant features of an object and phenomenon.

The denotative (from Lat. denotatum - marked, designated), or subject, component correlates the word with one or another phenomenon of reality: objects, qualities, relationships, actions, processes, etc. The object designated by the word is called a denotation, or a referent (from Latin to refer - to send, to relate)

denotations- these are images of real or imaginary objects or phenomena, embodied in verbal form. Through denotations, words are related to real (human, tree, dog, cat) or imaginary (mermaid, dragon, brownie) realities.

Meaning (significat)- the highest stage of reflection of reality in the human mind, the same stage as the concept. The meaning of the word reflects the general and at the same time essential features of the subject, known in the social practice of people.

significative(from lat. significatum - denoted) the meaning component correlates the word with the concept it denotes. A significat is a concept embodied in a verbal form. The concept itself is defined as a thought, which in a generalized form reflects objects and phenomena by fixing their properties, features and relationships. Conceptual thinking is carried out with the help of special mental operations - analysis and synthesis, identification and distinction, abstraction and generalization, which receive a verbal form in the language. Any concept always corresponds to a large volume, the content of which is revealed not with the help of one word, but with a detailed description. The word only fixes a certain set of features characteristic of a certain concept. So, the word signification river contains in its meaning the conceptual signs of a river as "a natural, significant and continuous water flow, flowing in the channel developed by him."

1. Word classifications. Vocabulary as a system

The vocabulary of a particular language includes hundreds of thousands of words, but the vocabulary of a language is characterized not only by the quantity, but also by the quality of its constituent units, which simultaneously have typical and specific features. The properties and differences of language units help to classify them on various grounds.

By way of nomination There are 4 types of words:

● independent (full-valued, denoting directly fragments of reality). These are: nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, numerals.

● official (do not have sufficient independence to be used independently). They form one member of the sentence together with an independent word (prepositions, articles), or connect words (conjunctions), or replace structurally and functionally other words (substituent words);

● pronominal words (denoting objects indirectly);

● interjections (denoting the phenomena of reality and the reaction of a person to them in an undivided way, in connection with which they do not have a grammatical structure).

According to impact, i.e. words differ phonetically:

● single-beat (eg table);

● multi-beat (railway);

● unstressed (for example, he).

Morphologically words differ:

● changeable and unchangeable;

● simple, derivative, complex (move, walk, lunar rover).

By motivation:

● motivated (environment, cuckoo (because cuckoo), carpenter (because he makes tables));

● unmotivated (flour, beam, bread).

By vocabulary usage:

● active (common and very common words);

● passive (it is made up of words that are not commonly used, or are not commonly used at all for a given era).

In historical terms, the language is continuously updated, while:

1 .new words appear - neologisms(satellite, moon rover). Neologisms that are individual, speech are also called occasionalisms (egologisms). For example, the author's neoplasms of Mayakovsky;

2 .go into the passive stock of words that have become unnecessary - archaisms - the establishment of words displaced from active use (stable, neck, verb - word) and historicisms– obsolete words, denoting the realities and concepts of previous eras (potbelly stove), which have now come out of the life and life of the people;

3 .famous words acquire new value(pioneer - pioneer, pioneer - member of the pioneer organization).

From point of view areas of use vocabulary is:

● unlimited (typical for oral and written speech);

● limited (sometimes territorially limited - dialect, social - professional, jargon)

With positions of stylistic (connotative) allocate:

● neutral vocabulary

● technical vocabulary

● political vocabulary

● official vocabulary - business

Based on the semantic relationships between words, they distinguish:

1. synonyms(words that are similar in meaning, but differ in form (eyes, eyes, pupils, peepers, flashing lights, Zenks, balls, and also the organ of vision). Synonyms are synonymous rows. In the synonymic series there is always a word that expresses the "pure" meaning of this synonymic series without any additional shades, without emotional coloring, they call it indifferent;

2. antonyms(words that are opposite in meaning and differ in form (top - bottom, white - black, speak - be silent);

3. homonyms(words similar in form but different in meaning). Homonyms are words that coincide in sound and writing (onions - plants and onions - weapons). However, in this case, a discrepancy between pronunciation and spelling is possible, and on this basis there are homophones and homographs.

Homophones - different words which, while differing in spelling, are the same in pronunciation. For example, Russian: onion and meadow, take (take) and take (take), German: Saite - string and Seite - side. A significant number of homophones are found in French and especially in English: write - write and right - straight, straight; meat - meat and meet - to meet.

Homographs are different words that have the same spelling, although they are pronounced differently. For example, Russian: castle - castle; English: tear - tear and tear - tear.

4. paronyms(words that differ both in form and in meaning, but not significantly). For example, Russian: protect - watch out German: gleich-glatt-flach-platt; English: bash - mash - smash (hit, smash) - crash (collapse) - dash (throw) - lash (whip) - rash (throw) - brash (break) - clash (push) - plash (splash) - splash (splatter) ) - flash (flicker).

By source of origin:

● native vocabulary

● borrowed vocabulary (from the French language album)

Every developed language has its own vocabularies. thesauri. In addition to general dictionaries that have an alphabetical structure, ideographic dictionaries are also known, where words are divided into classes of concepts. The first ideographic dictionary modern type was "Thesaurus English words and expressions" by P.M. Roger, published in London in 1852. The entire conceptual field of the English language was divided into 4 classes - abstract relations, space, matter and spirit (mind), each class is divided into types, each type into groups: there are only 1000 of them. Large dictionaries are called academic (or thesauri).

Development of the lexical meaning of the word

Polysemy. Most words in the language have not one, but several meanings that have appeared in the process of a long historical development. Yes, noun pear means: 1) fruit tree; 2) the fruit of this tree; 3) an object that has the shape of this fruit. Often words have up to 10-20 meanings. Four-volume academic "Dictionary of the Russian language" in the word go notes 27 meanings, in the word case - 15 meanings, in words burn, give 10 values, etc. Polysemy is also characteristic of other languages ​​of the world. For example, English do‘do, perform’ has 16 meanings, French a11er ‘ to go somewhere, to move in one way or another’ has 15 meanings, German comment‘come, arrive’ - 6, Czech povoleni, Polish nastaviazh‘set, set’ - at least 5 values ​​each, etc. The ability of a word to have multiple meanings is called ambiguity or polysemy(from Greek. holysemos- multivalued). Words with at least two meanings are called polysemantic or polysemantic.

Metaphor(from Greek metaphorá - transfer) is the transfer of a name from one object to another according to the similarity of certain signs: in shape, size, quantity, color, function, location in space, impression and sensation. The main mechanism for the formation of a metaphor is comparison, therefore it is no coincidence that a metaphor is called a hidden, abbreviated comparison. For example, based on the metaphorical connection of the meanings of a noun nose there is a similarity in shape and location in space: 1) part of a person’s face, an animal’s muzzle; 2) bird's beak; 3) a part of a teapot or jug ​​protruding in the form of a tube; 4) front part of a vessel, aircraft, etc.; 5) cape.

Metonymy(from Greek metōnymia - renaming) - transfer of names from one object to another by adjacency. Unlike metaphor, metonymy does not provide for any similarity between the designated objects or phenomena. It is based on a close and easily understood contiguity, contiguity in space or time, involvement in one situation of designated realities, persons, actions, processes, etc.

For example: porcelain ‘ mineral mass from high-grade clay with various impurities’ and porcelain ‘ utensils, various products from such a mass’; audience ' room for lectures, reports and audience ' listeners of lectures, reports’; evening ‘ time of day and evening' meeting, concert’, etc.

Synecdoche(from Greek synekdochē - connotation, hint expression) - this is such a transfer of meaning when the name of the part is used in the meaning of the whole, the smaller - in the meaning of the larger and vice versa. Synecdoche is often considered a form of metonymy. However, its essential difference from metonymy lies in the fact that synecdoche is based on a quantitative sign of the ratio of direct and figurative meanings. Synecdoche is based on the relationship of objects and phenomena that are characterized by unity, integrity, but differ in quantitative terms: one is part of the other, that is, one member of the relationship will always be general, wider, and the other - private, narrower. Synecdoche covers a significant amount of vocabulary and is characterized by fairly stable relationships. The transfer of meaning can be carried out according to the following criteria: 1) part of the human body - a person: beard, long hair, head- a man of great intelligence, muzzle - a person with an ugly, rough face; 2) a piece of clothing - a person: ran after each skirt Little Red Riding Hood, pea coat - spy of the tsarist secret police; 3) a tree or plant - their fruits: plum, cherry, pear; 4) plant, cereals - their seeds: wheat, oats, barley, millet; 5) animal - its fur: beaver, fox, sable, nutria etc.

To replace forbidden words, other words were used, which in linguistics were called euphemisms. Euphemism(from Greek euphēmismos - I speak politely) - this is a substitute, permitted word, used instead of a taboo, prohibited. Classic example hunting euphemism - various designations bear in Slavic, Baltic, Germanic languages. The original Indo-European name of this animal is preserved in Latin as ursus, in French as ours, in Italian as orso, in Spanish as oso, etc. The Slavic, Baltic and Germanic languages ​​have lost this name, but retained euphemisms for the bear: German Bär - brown, Lithuanian Lokys - slime, Russian bear - the one who eats honey, extinct Prussian clokis - grumbler. Euphemisms could be like new words (cf. Russian bear) so and old, already known to the language, but used with a new value. The classification is very important. according to semantic and grammatical indicators(parts of speech).

Already from the proposed description of the word it is clear that the structural-semantic types of words are heterogeneous and that this heterogeneity of the structure of words depends most of all on the nature of the combination and interaction of lexical and grammatical meanings. Semantic types words are not placed in the same plane. Established in Russian grammar since the 18th century. dividing words into significant and official interesting as a symptom of the consciousness of the structural heterogeneity of different types of words.

Seven distinguishing features of function words were noted: 1) the inability to separate nominative use; 2) the inability to independently spread the syntagma, or phrases (for example, union and, relative word which, prepositions on, at etc. are unable by themselves, independently of other words, to construct or distribute a phrase or syntagma); 3) the impossibility of a pause after these words in the composition of speech (without a special expressive justification); 4) morphological indivisibility or semantic indecomposability of most of them (cf., for example, at, at, after all, here etc., on the one hand, and because to, then what, though etc. - with another); 5) inability to wear phrasal stresses (except in cases of opposition by contrast); 6) the absence of independent stress on most of the primitive words of this type; 7) the originality of grammatical meanings, which dissolve the lexical content of service words. This is the division of words into significant and auxiliary under different names- lexical and formal words (Potebnya), full and partial (Fortunatov) - was adopted in all works on Russian grammar. Along with these two general categories of words in the Russian language, researchers have long outlined a third category - interjections.

The traditional solution question about the main semantic-grammatical classes of words are different doctrines of parts of speech. But these teachings - for all their diversity - do not take into account the general structural differences between the main types of words. All parts of speech are placed in the same plane. More about this V.A. Bogoroditsky wrote: "It is necessary to pay attention to the subordination of some parts of speech to others, which is ignored in school grammars, and all parts of speech are put on the same line."

The identification of parts of speech should be preceded by the definition of the main structural-semantic types of words.

Classification of words should be constructive. She cannot ignore any side of the structure of the word. But, of course, lexical and grammatical criteria (including phonological ones) must play a decisive role. In the grammatical structure of words, morphological features are combined with syntactic ones into an organic unity. Morphological forms are settled syntactic forms. There is nothing in morphology that does not exist or did not exist before in syntax and vocabulary. The history of morphological elements and categories is the history of the displacement of syntactic boundaries, the history of the transformation of syntactic breeds into morphological ones. This offset is continuous. Morphological categories are inextricably linked with syntactic ones. In morphological categories there are constant changes in relationships, and the impulses, pushes for these transformations come from syntax. Syntax is the organizational center of grammar. Grammar, immanent to a living language, is always constructive and does not tolerate mechanical divisions and dissections, since the grammatical forms and meanings of words are in close interaction with lexical meanings.

An analysis of the semantic structure of a word leads to the identification of four main grammatical-semantic categories of words.

1. First of all, a category stands out words-names, by the traditional definition. All these words have a nominative function. They reflect and embody in their structure objects, processes, qualities, signs, numerical connections and relationships, circumstantial and qualitative-consequential definitions and relationships of things, signs and processes of reality and are applied to them, pointing to them, designate them. Adjoining words-names are words that are equivalents, and sometimes substitutes for names. Such words are called pronouns. All these categories of words form the main lexical and grammatical fund of speech. Words of this type form the basis of syntactic units and unities (phrases and sentences) and phraseological series. They serve as the main members of the sentence. They can - each separately - make up a whole statement. The words belonging to most of these categories are grammatical and combined complexes, or systems, of forms. With different forms or modifications of one and the same word are associated with different functions of the word in the structure of speech or utterance.

Therefore, when applied to these classes of words, the term "parts of speech" is especially appropriate. They form the subject-semantic, lexical and grammatical foundation of speech. These are "lexical words", according to Potebnya's terminology, and "full words", according to Fortunatov's qualification.

2. Parts of speech are opposed by particles of speech, connective, function words. This structural-semantic type of words is devoid of a nominative function. He is not characterized by "subject relatedness". These words relate to the world of reality only through and through the medium of words-names. They belong to the sphere of linguistic semantics, which reflects the most general, abstract categories of existential relations - causal, temporal, spatial, target, etc. They are closely connected with the technique of language, complicating and developing it. Linking words are not "material", but formal. in them the "real" content and grammatical functions coincide. Their lexical meanings are identical with grammatical ones. These words lie on the verge of vocabulary and grammar, and at the same time on the verge of words and morphemes. That is why Potebnya called them "formal words" and Fortunatov - "partial".

3. The third type of words differs markedly from the two previous structural types. This is modal words. They are also devoid of a nominative function, like linking words. However, many of them do not belong to the same extent as connective, functional words, to the field of formal linguistic means. They are more "lexical" than link words. They do not express the connections and relationships between the members of the sentence. Modal words seem to be wedged or included in the sentence or lean against it. They express the modality of the message about reality or are the subject-stylistic key of speech. The sphere of assessments and points of view of the subject on reality and on the methods of its verbal expression finds expression in them. Modal words mark the inclination of speech towards reality, due to the point of view of the subject, and in this sense they are somewhat close to the formal meaning of verb moods. As if modal words introduced into the sentence or attached to it are outside both parts of speech and particles of speech, although in appearance they can resemble both of them.

4. The fourth category of words leads to the sphere of purely subjective - emotional-volitional expressions. To this fourth structural type words belong interjections, if we give this term a slightly wider meaning. The intonational, melodic peculiarities of their form, their lack of cognitive value, their syntactic disorganization, their inability to form combinations with other words, their morphological indivisibility, their affective coloring, their direct connection with facial expressions and expressive gesture sharply separate them from other words. They express emotions, moods and volitional expressions of the subject, but do not designate or name them. They are closer to expressive gestures than to words-names. Whether interjections form sentences is a matter of debate. However, it is difficult to deny the meaning and designation of "sentence equivalents" behind interjectional expressions.

So, there are four main structural and semantic categories of words in the modern Russian language: 1) words-names, or parts of speech, 2) connective words, or particles of speech, 3) modal words and particles, and 4) interjections.

Apparently in different styles book and colloquial speech, as well as in different styles and genres fiction frequency of use of different types of words is different. But, unfortunately, this question is still only in the preparatory stage of the examination of the material.

TYPOLOGY OF WORDS

I. Structural-semantic types of words. Their signs.

II. Principles of classification of parts of speech.

III. Classification of speech particles.

V. Correlation of the concepts "part of speech" and "word". Words "outside the parts of speech".

VI. The phenomenon of transitivity as a dialectical process of accumulation of quantitative changes:

1. Causes of the transition phenomenon.

2. Consequences of the phenomenon of transition:

Functional homonymy; the concept of functional homonyms;

Syncretism; concept of hybrid words.

VI. Methodology for the analysis of homonymous and hybrid word forms.

The problem of word classification, the allocation in the language of some generalized categories (parts of speech) is very ancient. The doctrine of parts of speech in one form or another is mandatory in any grammatical theory.

For the first time we meet the doctrine of parts of speech in the writings of Dionysius of Thrace (Alexandrian school) c. 170-90s BC. He established 8 parts of speech for the ancient Greek language: name, verb, participle, member (article), pronoun, preposition, adverb, union. Sample definitions of parts of speech given by scientists: “A name is a declined part of speech denoting a body or thing (a body - for example, a stone, a thing - for example, education) and expressed as general and as private: general - for example, a person, private - for example, Socrates." "A verb is a non-case part of speech that takes tenses, persons, and numbers and represents action or suffering." In these definitions, the desire for a multidimensional description is noticeable - the heterogeneity of the pexical meaning is taken into account (lexico-grammatical categories are outlined) and the nature of the change (declension, conjugation).

Eight parts of speech were also transferred to the grammar of the Latin language (instead of the article, which was not in Latin, an interjection was introduced).

In the first Church Slavonic grammars of the XII-XVI centuries. the doctrine of the eight parts of speech (in the Latin version) was presented (M. Smotrytsky, 1619).

In "Russian Grammar" M.V. Lomonosov the same 8 parts of speech. In "Russian Grammar" by A. Vostokov, the participle as a part of speech was replaced by an adjective. G. Pavsky (1850) and F. Buslaev described the numeral. Particles as part of speech were described already in the 20th century.

Let's look at the words of the Russian language. They have absolutely different properties. The very nature of the combination of lexical and grammatical meanings in the system of different types of words is not homogeneous. "Structure different categories words reflects different types relations between grammar and vocabulary of a given language” (V.V. Vinogradov). First of all, they are not the same in meaning: for example, oak - names an object that can be seen, touched, drawn, but the concept of beauty, regardless of its carrier, cannot be felt and depicted; run - calls an action that can be seen and depicted (however, together with its performer), and such as thinking, having and not actions at all, they cannot be seen, depicted; on - does not name anything, but expresses the attitude of the direction of the action. Words are not the same in structure, the system of word-formation possibilities. The first ones freely have case forms, less freely - numerical ones, the second ones change according to tenses, persons, etc.; both are capable of producing other words. The word na has no forms of inflection, cannot attach affixes. Words and functions are not the same. Some can be both main and secondary members of the proposal, others are only secondary, and others are not members of the proposal. If we take into account all the structural and semantic features of the words of the Russian language, then 4 structural-semantic types of words can be distinguished in it (these types were partly outlined by N. Grech in "Practical Russian Grammar", 1834 - parts and particles of speech; characterized in detail these and two others in the work of V. V. Vinogradov "Russian language", 1947). Typology of words in any textbook or study guide for universities, as well as the classification of parts of speech in school textbooks, by all means directly or indirectly reflects the concept of V.V. Vinogradov.