Theoretical problems of verb combinatorics

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Odessa National Polytechnic University

Theoretical problems of verb combinatorics

Borisenko T.I.

Kudinova T.I.

Mikeshova G.P.

Problem statement. At the present stage of the development of linguistics, preference is increasingly given to study of patterns of linguistic units compatibility in the course of their functioning in texts than to individual speech units.

According to scientists the analysis of these patterns will contribute to a more effective solution of some applied problems, namely, intensification of teaching a foreign language for achieving communicative and sociolinguistic purposes, creating programmes for automatic text processing in the corpus linguistics framework, etc.

Indeed, the latest methodological literature used in the English teaching process has shown that, in the increasing number of lexicographi¬cal studies, phrases or word combinations are considered to be more preferable as units than just single words [1; 2]. Thus they confirm that word combinations are of primary importance for memorizing.

We can also mention some dissertation research, as well as journal publications relating to such an important for linguistics and lexicography direc¬tion as the compatibility of various text units [3; 4].

So, the subject of compatibility is of current impotance.

Analysis of recent research and publications.

The issue of combinatorics, i.e. connecting the language elements in speech, was the subject of study of many linguists.

So, the well-known scientist L. Tesniere within the framework of his grammar of subordinations in the structural analysis of sentence began to proceed from the ability of the verb to accept and retain a certain number of «actants». As we see L. Tesniere compared this ability with the known property of the atom in chemistry and called it «valence» [5, с. 4]. Thus, the concept of valence appears.

Analysis of the literature on the background showed that since the very emergence of this concept, it was treated from different points of view. However, if L. Tesniere, followed by H. Brinkman [6], focusing on the functional and semantic features of the verb, distinguish only three «partici- pants», namely, the subject, objects in the accusative and dative cases, then Erben, guided by the principle of sense obligation of the verb-subordinated words and highlighting the basic structural models of a simple sentence in the German language, no longer limits the sphere of valent connections of the verb to the presence of only a subject and two objects, but extends this sphere by adverbial modifiers of different types [7]. And it was only after J. Erben that this view was firmly rooted in theoretical grammars.

Later on, a more detailed study of valency was due to the fact that the question about the application of this concept to all parts of speech, and not only to the verb [8] was raised. Currently, this approach to valency is shared by most linguists.

H. Helbig makes an attempt to take into account the selection, valence properties of the verb in compiling the Dictionary of the Valence and Distribution of German Verbs, where a qualitative description of the obligatory verbal ties is given [9].

Determining the previously unresolved parts of a general problem. So, the concept of valence (combinatorics) was interpreted in the most general sense as the ability of the verb (and later, of other parts of speech as well) to attach subordinated words to itself.

It should be noted that, despite the fairly detailed study of the combinatorics of the verb, a number of issues remained unresolved.

First of all, it concerned such topics as:

the volume of the verbal environment determined by valence, and hence the problem of separating those units in which valence was manifested: the grammatical connection of the verb, the verbal word combination, or it should have been a whole sentence;

the volume of the verb attributes that determine its valence;

the number of verb attributes that determine its valence (combinatorics), i.e. whether the meaning of the verb is necessary or the data about its syntactic properties will suffice.

However, the most pressing issue for the correct description of the combinatorics of both the verb and other parts of speech was, as it often happens in linguistics, the ordering of terminology and the formation of the necessary terminology system for the purpose of its further use in theoretical and applied research. In the process of solving the terminological questions, the very concept of combinatorics was crystallized.

The lack of certainty in this issue has shown that the problem of combinatorics or, in the terminology of French and German linguists -- valence, requires further theoretical development.

Formulating the aims of the article. The aim of the article is to analyze various theoretical approaches to the terminology used in the combinatorics of language units.

We would like to stress the overview nature of this article. It is a description of the foundation on which further theoretical as well as practical developments of such important phenomenon in linguistics as combinatorics will be based.

Presentation of the basic material. One of the theories in modern linguistics, which is necessary for the further development of the concept of combinatorics, is the requirement to distinguish between language and speech. This theory was a prerequisite for a new approach to the study of combinatorics of linguistic units in general, and verbs in particular. It allows researchers to approach the phenomenon of combinatorics taking into account the aforesaid dichotomy, singling out the language and speech aspects of this phenomenon, and substantiates the legitimacy of their separate consideration as a prerequisite for further in-depth study of the interaction of these sides of combinatorics existing in unity.

Numerous works on structural and semantic analysis show that all researchers have the same approach to the question of the need to take into account the condition of the language and speech differentiation as it is applied to the problem of combinatorics.

Study of this problem was complicated by the absence of a single terminology, which led to the fact that the language and speech aspects of combinatorics, as well as the phenomenon itself, can be found under different terms. On the one hand, combinatorics as a phenomenon of language is correlated exclusively with the concept and term «valence», but as a phenomenon of speech it manifests itself only in the concept and term «compatibility».

Thus, according to A.P. Klimenko, one should distinguish between «valence and compatibility as two categories related to different spheres: valence reflects the internal, semantic nature of the word, and the compatibility reflects it as external, formal one. Valence as a semantic opportunity, the potential, is realized by language (grammatical) means» [10, с. 118-119].

An indication of the need for distinguishing between valence and compatibility as phenomena of language and speech with the corresponding terminology for this approach is also found in the work of Tugujekova: «The difference between valence and compatibility is the difference between the potential ability of language element to be associated with other elements and the realization of this ability. Valence is possible in language insofar as there exists its speech realization -- compatibility» [11, с. 18]. The same point of view is shared by many other linguists [12-18].

On the other hand, there are cases when to both aspects of combinatorics, as well as the phenomenon itself, are given one name. But some linguists use the term «valence» herein, while others use «compatibility». Thus, delineating the aspects of combinatorics and separating the latter from the same phenomenon, the researchers do not differentiate the terms used.

Thus, M.D. Stepanova, making an attempt to generalize the existing definitions of valence, writes: «...here we will consider valence as a potency and as its realization, i.e. at the same time as a factor of language and as a factor of speech» [19]. A.P. Gribanovsky uses the term «compatibility» in an analogous case, considering that «...it (compatibility) exists and is realized only in speech, because compatibility is potentially inherent in the basic unit of language -- the word» [20, с. 93].

V.I. Perebeynos [16, p. 111] uses the term «compatibility» in much the same meaning.

In addition, very often each of the two aspects has both names -- «valence» and «compatibility». In this case, these concepts are identified, and the terms are used as synonyms. Thus, S.D. Katznelson understands valence as «the property of a word to be realized in a certain way in a sentence and enter into certain combinations with other words» [21, p. 132]. O.S. Akhmanova defines «the ability of elements to connect with each other in speech» as compatibility [22, p. 445]. V.A. Abramov, considering the syntactic potencies of the verb, notes in one of his works: «The study of the compatibility of words, i.e. their syntactic potencies is one of the actual tasks of syntax...» [23, p. 34]. In V.V. Raskin's works we find another name for the potencies of language elements, namely, «valence»: «Valence in linguistics, the potential compatibility of linguistic elements (phonemes, morphemes, words, etc.), a determinant ability to combine with other linguistic elements, mainly of the same level» [24, p. 259].

As you can see, there is no single approach to such an important issue as the formation of a unified terminological system among linguists. This to a certain extent indicates the complexity of the problem facing the authors.

But, recognizing the fundamental necessity of distinguishing the terminology on aspects of language and speech in such a problem as combinatorics, in the authors' opinion it is necessary to define valence as a phenomenon of language, and compatibility as a phenomenon of speech, fixing this distinction in terms of «valence» and «compatibility», respectively.

At present, however, the words «valence» and «compatibility» denote an inhomogeneous range of concepts. In order to clarify the terms, two interrelated phenomena should be distinguished: first, the phenomenon of combinatorics in the broadest sense, which includes both its language and speech sides.

This view of the problem is characteristic, mainly for domestic linguists. Second, the reflection of the dichotomy «language-speech» with reference to the phenomenon of combinatorics should be expressed by the words «valence» and «compatibility».

Therefore, these terms should have a strictly differentiated use. The first is to denote the language combinatorics, the second is to name its speech aspects.

Conclusions and prospects of the research. The undifferentiated use of these two terms leads both to their identification and to the identification of concepts they designate. However, the above analysis allows us to conclude that, despite operating with the terms «valence» and «compatibility» in different plans, all the authors mean the same thing, namely, the ability of words to connect with each other.

The authors should say here that while studying this phenomenon, some linguists, mainly Czech [25-27] use the term «intention», but are actually dealing with the same problem.

In the issue concerning various aspects of combinatorics and their terminological designation, the authors share the point of view of those scien- tists-theorists who believe that valence is a potential property of any unit of language, in particular, of a word, and compatibility is the actualization in speech of this property of the same language unit.

Consequently, compatibility and valence, representing, in fact, two different sides of the same phenomenon, combinatorics of language units, do not allow to put an equal sign between them.

We have already mentioned in this connection, that it seems inappropriate to confuse these two concepts and the terms that denote them, as some linguists do.

With the use of the terms «valence» and «com- patibility» to denote the «sum» of the language and speech aspects of combinatorics, that is, for a generalizing concept of this phenomenon, we can say that they probably could satisfy researchers if they did not involuntarily prompt the association by contrast of «valence» / «compatibility», i.e. the discrimination of potency and actualization.

To indicate the «sum» of the concepts «valence» and «compatibility» it would be more preferable to use the word «combinatorics».

Further analysis will cover such theoretical issues as various kinds of combinatorics, an approach to the study of grammatical links, models of grammatical links and word combinations, and others that are directly related to combinatorics and explain its nature.

References

combinatorics verb speech

1. Литвинов П.П. 100 английских глаголов. 1000 фразеологизмов. Ключ к суперпамяти / П.П. Литвинов. - Astrel, 2006.

2. Волкова Н.О., Гинзбург Р.З. Частотный словарь сочетаемости современного английского языка / Н.О. Волкова, Р.З. Гинсбург, В.И. Перебейнос, А.А. Санкин, С.С. Хидекель. - М.: МГПИЯ им. Мориса Тореза. Ч. 1. 1971.

3. Влавацкая М.В. Лексикографическая интерпретация сочетаемости слов: Модель построения русско-английского учебного комбинаторного словаря: Дис. ... канд. филол. наук: 10.02.19 Теория языка / М.В. Влавацкая. - Барнаул, 2004.

4. Данцевич Л.Г., Цапенко Л.Г., Попович Е.С. Структурные свойства моделей грамматических связей в глагольных словосочетаниях (на материале английского подъязыка радиоэлектроники) / Л.Г. Данцевич, Л.Г. Цапенко, Е.С. Попович // Proceedings of Odessa Polytechnic University - Изд. 1(38) - 2012. - С. 321-325.

5. Tesniere L. Esquisse d'une syntaxe structurale / L. Tesniere. - Paris: Libr. Klincksieck, 1953. - 30 p.

6. Brinkman H. Die Deutsche Sprache «Gestalt und Leistung» / H. Brinkman - Dusseldorf: Schwann, 1962. - 654 S.

7. Erben J. Abriss der Deutschen Grammatik / J. Erben. - Berlin: Akad. - Verl., 1958. - 208 S.

8. Weisgerber L. Von den Kraften der Deutsche Sprache / L. Weisgerber // Die sprachliche Gestaltungder Welt. - Dusseldorf, 1962. - 431 S.

9. Holbig G. Untersuchungen zur Valenz und Distribution Deutschen Verben. Deutsch als Fremdsprache / G. Holbig. - Leipzig: Herausgeber Herder-Institute, 1966. - № 3. - S. 1-11.

10. Клименко А.П. Лексико-синтаксическая сочетаемость глаголов движения «идти, ходити» / А.П. Клименко // Вопросы диалектологии и истории славянских языков. - Куйбышев, 1970. - С. 114-136.

11. Тугужекова Т.Н. Особенности сочетаемости существительных, связанны с выражением понятия «человек» в современном английском и хакасском языках: Дис. ... канд. филол. наук, специальность 10.02.04 «Германские языки» / Т.Н. Тугужекова. - М., 1981. - 236 с.

12. Вашунин В.С. К вопросу о лингвистической потенци / В.С. Вашунин // Ученые записки. - М.: Моск. Гос. Пед. ин-т иностр. яз. - 1963. - Т. 27. - С. 3-22.

13. Головин Б.Н. К вопросу о парадигматике и синтагматике на уровняю морфологии и синтаксиса / Б.Н. Головин // Единицы разных цровней грамматического строя языка и их взаимодействие. - М., 1968. - С. 73-87.

14. Лобода И.В. К вопросу обязательности и факультативности форм в глагольных конструкциях немецкого языка / И.В. Лобода // Некоторые проблемы структурно-семантического изучения современного немецкого языка. - Пятигорс, 1966. - С. 64-75.

15. Пашевская Т.Л. О различии валентных свойств глаголов sagen sprechen // Т.Л. Пашевская // Иност. яз. в школе. - 1971. - № 1. - С. 80-83.

16. Перебійні с В.І. Моделювання в лінгвістиці [лекції] / В.І. Пербійніс // Проблеми та методи структурної лінгвістики // Республіканський семінар викладачів кафедри пед ін-тів, 30.09. - Київ, 1964. - С. 43-47.

17. Перебійніс В.І. Методи дослідження. Визначення матеріалу дослідження / В.І. Перебійніс // Статистичні параметри стилів. - Київ, 1967. - С. 23-43.

18. Румянцев В.Ф. Об использовании дихотомического анализа для выбеления ядерных и глубинных предложений / В.Ф. Румянцев // Вопросы английской филологии. - Горький, 1972. - С. 173-179.

19. Степанова М.Д. Теория валентности и валентный анализ [текст] / М.Д. Степанова. - М., 1973. - 110 с.

20. Грибановский А.П. Сопоставительное исследование сочетаемости и семантической структуры прилагательных со значением «короткий» и «длинный» в разных языках (на материале современного английского, испанского, португальсткого и французского языков / А.П. Грибовский // Исследование снматической структуры английских слов. - М., 1975. - С. 93-118.

21. Кацнельсон С.Д. О грамматической категории / С.Д. Кацнельсон // Вестн. Ленингр. Ун-та. - 1948. - № 2. - С. 114-134.

22. Ахманова О.С. Словарь лингвистических терминов / О.С. Ахманова. - С., 1969. - 607 с.

23. Абрамов Б.А. Синтаксические потенции глагола (Опыт синтакчисеского описания глаголов как системы в современном немецком языке: Дис. . канд. филол. наук, специальность 10.02.04 / А.Б. Абрамов. - М., 1968. - 357 с.

24. Раскин В.В. Валентность в языкознании / В.В. Раскин // БСЭ. - №-е изд. - М., 1071. - Т. 4. - С. 198-202.

25. Качала Я. Субстанциональные и несубстанциональные характеристики глагола / Я. Качала // Грамматическое описание славянских языков. - М., 1974. - С. 38-47.

26. Мразек Р. Синтаксическая дистрибуция глаголов и их классы / Р. Мразек // Вопр. языкознания. - 164. - № 3. - С. 50-62.

27. Кржижкова Е. Дистинктивные семантические признаки и структура предложения / Е. Кржижкова // Грамматическое описание славянских языков. - М., 1974. - С. 98-105.

Размещено на Allbest.ru