Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

МЕЛЬНИЦЬКИЙ НАЦІОНАЛЬНИЙ УНІВЕРСИТЕТ

КАФЕДРА ПРАКТИКИ ТА МЕТОДИКИ

ВИКЛАДАННЯ ІНОЗЕМНИХ МОВ

Реферат

На тему: Typological Characteristics of the English and Ukrainian Verb

Виконав:

Махніцький Артем

Перевірила:

Рогульська О.О.

Хмельницький 2020

Introduction

This part of speech in Eng. and Uk. has the largest number of features in common. They include all the general implicit meaning of the verb which serves to convey verbiality, different kinds of activity (go, read, skate), various processes (boil, grow, obtain), the inner state of a person ( feel, bother, worry) etc. due to these lexico-grammatical properties the verb generally functions in the sentence as predicate going into some combinations.

The verb is a part of speech which denotes an action. The verb has the following grammatical categories: person, number, aspect, voice and mood. These categories can be expressed by means of affixes, inner flexion (change of the root vowel) and by form words. Verbs may be transitive and intransitive. Verbs have finite forms which can be used as predicate of the sentences and non-finite forms which cannot be used as the predicate of the sentences.

Verbs of incomplete predication are of isomorphic and allomorphic features in English and Ukrainian. The finite verb in the contrasted languages has six common morphological categories which are realised partly with the help of synthetic means (inflexions) and partly through different analytical means. Tense is the form of the verb which indicates the time of the action. Voice is the form of the verb which shows the relation between the subject and the predicate verb in the sentence. Mood is the form of the verb which shows in what relation to reality the speaker places the action or state expressed by the predicate verb. The nomenclature and means of expressing some morphological categories of the verb in the contrasted languages have both isomorphic and allomorphic features.[2]

1. Grammatical categories of the verb

Morphological categories of the verbs in the contrasted languages are tense, aspect, taxis, mood, person and number. Though all the grammatical categories of the Verb are represented in English and Ukrainian, there are considerable differences in their manifestation in the languages.

The category of tense is a grammatical category of the verb reflecting temporal localization of the action or state expressed by the verb. The localization is correlated with real or imaginative "here and now". It is expressed by opposition of tense forms of the verb, indicating if the action is simultaneous, preceding or following the moment of speaking. The category of tense serves to localize the action expressed by the verb in time; grammemes of this category express different types of relation between time of the action and moment of speaking, and sometimes between the time of the action and some other moment, except the moment of speaking (see relative tenses).

In Modern Ukrainian verb tense forms, if used directly, indicate that the action coincides with the moment of speaking (“the Present Tense”), precedes the moment of speaking (“the Past Tense”) or follows the moment of speaking (“the Future Tense”). If the action is related to some other action (in subclause), it usually correlates with the verb of the main clause: “Йому здавалось, що у кімнаті хтось дихає”, i.e. the action of the sub-clause is thought to be simultaneous with the action in the main clause, therefore the present tense is used. If the action of the sub-clause is considered to follow that of the main clause, the verb in the sub-clause is used in the future tense-form: "Вони були впевнені, що він з'явиться". The present day Ukrainian tense category is expressed by three tense forms for the imperfective verbs and two tense forms for the perfective verbs (there is no Present Tense of the perfective verbs). In Ukrainian it is hard to state the meaning expressed by the Present Tense form, it does not come to just denoting the action, immediately connected with the moment of speaking. In the English verb system the three main divisions of time are represented by three tenses. Each of them may appear in the common and in the continuous aspect.

Some doubts have been expressed about the existence of the future tense in English. O. Jespersen discussed this question more than once. The reason why Jespersen denied the existence of the future tense in English was that the English future is expressed by the phrase "shall/will + infinitive", and the verbs shall and will which make part of the phrase preserve, according to Jespersen, some of their original meaning (shall: an element of obligation, and will: an element of volition). Thus, in Jespersen's view, English has no way of expressing "pure futurity", free from modal shades of meaning, i. e. it has no form standing on the same grammatical level as the forms of the past and present tenses.

Tense forms can be absolute, i.e. those which do not depend on the other tense forms and determined by the moment of speaking: the present tense form, denoting the action, taking place at the moment of speaking; the past tense form, denoting the action, which took place before the moment of speaking; and the future tense form, denoting the action after the moment of speaking. Relative tense forms denote actions, regarded not in connection with the moment of speaking but depend on other tense forms or time indicators.

According to some researchers, the tense system of the English verb includes two sets of forms: absolute tense forms (Indefinite) and relative forms (Continuous and Perfect). Aspect meanings, which do not have any morphologically expressed forms should be observed within the tense system of the verb. The use of tense forms can be stylistically marked. In this case the tenses are used metaphorically, the speaker found in some other time plane, as if looking closely at the past events (this use of past is called the “dramatic past”): “I remember it as if it were yesterday: he comes in, takes the newspaper and reads those horrible lines to me”. Another example of metaphorical use of the tense forms is when some future actions are anticipated by the speaker: “Ну, я пішов.” Means of expressing the tense category are various, both analytical and synthetic means are found in English and Ukrainian. Though in English analytical forms prevail, while in Ukrainian they are few in number.

The category of aspect is a lexical-grammatical category, characterizing the process or action, expressed by the verb (if the action is repeated, continuous, frequent, immediate, complete, incomplete, terminative, nonterminative). These characteristics are expressed in different languages in various morphological (morpho-syntactic) forms, therefore we can speak about different sub-classes of aspect category.

In the Ukrainian language aspect distinctions are drawn according to the relation of the action to its own limit, and two aspect forms are singled out, perfective and imperfective aspects. The imperfective aspect expresses the action in process, no limit implied - писати, говорити, малювати, стрибати. Perfective aspect expresses the action bounded by some limit, some result of it is implied - написати, прийти, сказати, стрибнути.[2]

The aspect system in Ukrainian is characterized by the correlated pairs of perfective and imperfective verbs, close or similar in meaning: носити-нести, носив-ніс. Ukrainian has a special morphological system for expressing aspect category, namely it is expressed by affixes, such as:

1) Suffixes -ів, -ув and interchange of vowels or consonants are used to form imperfective verbs: зігрівати, показувати.

2) Suffix -ну-, added to the verb stem is used to form perfective from imperfective verbs: стрибнути.

3) Prefixes з-, зі-, по-, за- and other: з'їсти, зірвати, побудувати, занести.

4) Change of the stressed syllable: насипати - насипати.

There are also pairs of verbs formed from different roots: брати - взяти. As far as the English language has no perfective/imperfective aspects, and still the way how the action is going on is characterized morphologically, we are to speak about different aspectual properties of the English verb in comparison with the Ukrainian one. Treating the category of aspect as characterizing the actions by their behaviour and having certain morphological signs, Smirnitsky singled out two aspects, common and continuous. Common aspect is expressed by zero ending 34 or -s in the Present, -ed ending or vowel interchange in the Past, shall/will + verb forms in the Future and denotes the fact. Continuous aspect is expressed by the verb to be in the corresponding tense form and -ing ending of the verb and denotes the process.

As distinct from Ukrainian aspect category, where all the verbs form correspondent pairs of perfective and imperfective verbs with their own morphological characteristics, presenting two correspondent sets of forms, in English verbs of common and continuous aspect do not form such pairs, almost any verb can appear in both common and continuous form.

So, it is obvious that there is no direct correspondence between English and Ukrainian aspects, thus the English continuous aspect is not identical with the Ukrainian imperfective. The relation between the two systems is not simple. On the one hand, the English common aspect may correspond not only to the Ukrainian perfective but also to the Ukrainian imperfective aspect; thus he wrote may correspond both to написав and to писав. On the other hand, the Ukrainian imperfective aspect may correspond not only to the continuous but also to the common aspect in English: писав - wrote, was writing.

The category of taxis is a lexical-grammatical category characterizing such relations between the actions as simultaneity, precedence, interruption, etc. The notion of taxis was introduced by R.Yakobson. It characterizes the action from the point of view of another action but not from the point of view of the moment of speaking. As distinct from the category of tense, closely connected with the fact of speaking (as well as other verb categories, such as person, number, mood), the category of taxis does not reflect the fact of speaking. Alongside the term “taxis” there are also other terms denoting the same notion: “relative tense”, “time correlation”, “order”.

Taxis can be expressed by special means (morphological, syntactical, morpho-syntactical, lexical), which are closely connected with the means expressing tense and aspect categories. Taxis is found in every language, but it can be called a grammatical category only for the languages that have a special system of grammatical forms. Thus, for instance, in English it is expressed by the system of perfect forms of the verb. They are the forms of relative time, expressing the precedence of one action to the other.

In Ukrainian the verb category of taxis is expressed by means of combination of tense-forms in complex sentences with sub-clauses of time, as well as in sentences with homogeneous predicates and compound sentences if such time indicators as «спочатку», «потім» are found in them.

The Modern English perfect forms have been the subject of a lengthy discussion. The difficulties inherent in these forms are plain enough and may best be illustrated by the present perfect. This form contains the present of the verb to have and is called present perfect, yet it denotes an action which no longer takes place, and it is (almost always) translated into Ukrainian by the past tense, e. g. has written -написав, has arrived -приїхав, etc. The position of the perfect forms in the system of the English verb is a problem which has been 35 treated in many different ways. Among the various views on the essence of the perfect forms in Modern English the following three main trends should be mentioned: [2]

1. The category of taxis is a peculiar tense category. This view was held, for example, by O. Jespersen.

2. The category of taxis is a peculiar aspect category. This view was held by a number of scholars, including G. Vorontsova.

3. The category of taxis does not belong to the tense system or to the aspect but a specific category different from both. This view was expressed by L.Bloomfield, A. Smirnitsky, E.Koshmider.

Thus, the opposition between writes and wrote is that of tense, that between wrote and was writing is that of aspect, and that between wrote and had written is that of taxis. It is obvious that two oppositions may occur together; thus, between writes and was writing there is an opposition of tense and aspect; between wrote and will have written there is an oppositions of tense and taxis, and between wrote and had been writing there is an opposition of aspect and taxis. And, finally, all three oppositions may occur together: thus, between writes and had been writing there are the oppositions of tense, aspect, and taxis.

The category of voice is a morphological category of the verb, expressing the subject-object relations. In most languages the relation between the subject and the action is expressed by personal inflexions of the verb; while relation between the action and the object may be expressed by case correlation and other means, due to the language typology.[2]

On the basis of morphological means of expressing the voice, we can say that the number of voices differs in various languages. In the Ukrainian language the correlative pairs of active and passive verb forms are characteristic of transitive verbs only. The category of transitivity is based on the peculiarities of valency and meaning of the verb, so it should be treated as a lexical-grammatical, not morphological category. Thus, transitive verbs have correlative active and passive voice forms, the voice category being expressed morphologically; while intransitive verbs have no correlative passive forms and function as one-voice active verbs. However, if intransitive verbs develop their meaning and obtain some semes of transitivity (i.e. require a direct object), they have all the properties of transitive verbs, therefore can have passive forms: to fly - to fly a plane; to run - to run a hotel.

In English some forms of the active voice find no parallel in the passive: the forms of future continuous, present perfect continuous, past perfect continuous.

The fact that the both languages have similar grammatical categories does not prove their typological similarity. One should take into account their distribution and functioning. If we compare the use of passive voice forms in the contrasted languages, we will see that it differs considerably. Thus, for instance, in English the passive forms are widely used when the action is directed at the subject of the sentence, while in Ukrainian and Russian word order is used in this case (the object in the accusative case is placed before the predicate: this long bridge was built at the beginning of this century - цей довгий міст побудували на початку сторіччя). The Ukrainian verb in the active voice form functioning as the predicate of the indefinite-personal sentences corresponds to the English passive verb form: нам повідомили приємну новину - we were told good news. John was given a good mark - Джону поставили гарну оцінку.

The category of mood is a morphological word-changing verb category, which denotes the relation of the action to reality from the point of view of the speaker.

The relations of the action to reality can be different: if the action is thought to be real, we deal with the indicative mood, if it is considered to be unreal, possible or impossible, desirable or probable, we talk about the subjunctive mood. The imperative mood serves to express orders or requests.

The indicative mood in the contrasted languages denotes a real action, taking place in the present or past, or which is to be performed in the future. However means of expressing indicative mood differ in the languages under analysis (see the categories of tense, aspect, taxis, voice).

Much greater differences can be found in the system of the subjunctive mood forms in English as compared to Ukrainian. In Ukrainian there is just one mood, expressing unreality, called either subjunctive, or conditional or suppositional. It is used to denote an action, thought to be unreal, desirable or possible. It is formed by means of the past tense form of the verb and particle би (б), which can both precede or follow the verb. The action can be referred to the present, past or future: він би пішов; якби ви йому все розповіли.

As distinct from Ukrainian, in English there are 4 oblique moods: subjunctive I (Be it as it is), subjunctive II (It is time we went home), suppositional (It is only natural that we should do it) and conditional (To go there would be unreasonable), expressed both synthetically and analytically.

The system of Oblique Moods in English, represented by the abovementioned forms, functions in the set of sentence-patterns, used to express different attitude of the speaker to the unreal action. The number of sentence-patterns if large, and it is traditional use of this or that form of the verb, which is important, not the meaning of the form.

Thus, for instance, in conditional sentences, expressing unreal condition, we use the Subjective II in the conditional clause, while in the main clause we find the Conditional Mood (If it didn't rain, they would go for a walk).

The main controversy and difficulty in the mood system of the English language is that it has no special form of expressing subjunctive (no particle, no morphological means of its own). It results in the use of existing analytical and synthetic forms of the verb to express unreal, desirable action, some supposition or intention. Thus, the forms of the Subjective II coincide with those of the Past Indefinite and Past Continuous (if the action is referred to the present) and the Past Perfect and Past Perfect Continuous (if the action is referred to the past):

It is time he were here! Oh, if only they were going home now! (present)

I wish she had not said a word to them.

The Conditional Mood coincides in form with the Future-in-the-Past and modal verbs would and could plus Infinitive.

To speak to them would be to waste time.

He could have done it long ago.

The Suppositional Mood has the same form as the Future-in-the-Past and the modal verb should plus Infinitive.

The request is that the students should bring their papers by the 1 March.

So we can see that there is no straightforward mutual relation between meaning and form.

There is another peculiar complication in the analysis of mood. The question is, what verbs are auxiliaries of mood in Modern English? The verbs should and would are auxiliaries expressing unreality (whatever system of moods we may adopt after all). But the question is less clear with the verb may when used in such sentences as Come closer that I may hear what you say (and, of course, the form might if the main clause has a predicate verb in a past tense). Is the group may hear some mood form of the verb hear, or is it a free combination of two verbs, thus belonging entirely to the field of syntax, not morphology? The same question may be asked about the verb may in such sentences as May you be happy! where it is part of a group used to express a wish, and is perhaps a mood auxiliary. We ought to seek an objective criterion which would enable us to arrive at a convincing conclusion.[2]

Imperative mood is used to express will, request, order, command, and encouragement. The main seme of the imperative mood is “incentive” or “prohibition”. In Ukrainian the paradigm of the imperative mood contains analytical and synthetic forms, derived from the present tense verb stem (for imperfective aspect verbs) and from the present and future tense forms (for perfective aspect verbs). The simple forms of the indicative mood are the second person singular: бери, неси, знай; and first and second persons plural: робімо, ходімо, знаймо, знайте. The simple forms are directed at encouraging the addressee to do something, while the first person singular form implies that the speaker is also encouraged to do something. Analytical forms of the third person singular and plural are formed with the help of the particle хай (нехай) and the present tense form of the verb (imperfective aspect) and present/future tense forms (perfective aspect): Хай нап'ються донесхочу ниви! Нехай я заплачу. Хай ми на них подивимось. morphological verb infinitive participle

In Ukrainian the category of mood has person and number characteristics. The second person singular and plural has the synthetic forms of читайте, пишіть, in English there is only one form for singular and plural: read, write, etc. The form of the first person plural, addressed both to one and to several interlocutors, can be expressed in two ways in Ukrainian: if the verb is perfective, the form of the imperative mood is synthetic (підемо, візьмемо, скажімо); whereas if the verb is imperfective, this form is expressed analytically and synthetically (будемо писати, будемо читати, читатимемо, робитимемо, зароблятимемо). These forms in Ukrainian correspond to the one analytical form in English: let us read, let us go. The imperative form of the third person singular and plural is expressed analytically in Ukrainian and English: let him come - хай він прийде. [2]

Beside the main seme of “incentive”, the indicative mood in Ukrainian has the semes of “condition”: знайди він цього листа, все було б краще and the seme of “supposition”: хоч вбий, не розумію.

The categories of person, number and gender. The category of person is a grammatical word-changing category of the verb, expressing the relation of the subject (of the action, process, quality) to the speaker. As soon as the category has a regular expression of verb forms, often in combination with personal pronouns, it is considered to be an explicit category.

Some forms of person can have an impersonal (Розвидняється), indefinite-impersonal one (Його не розуміють), generalized-personal (Що посієш, те й пожнеш) meaning. The category of person in connected with other verb categories, such as the category of tense, aspect, mood, voice.

The category of number, expressing the quantitative characteristics of different phenomena, depends on the number of the noun or pronoun in the function of the subject of the sentence. In Ukrainian the agreement of the subject with the predicate in person, number and gender is mandatory (the morphological paradigm according to the conjugation of the verb). English, being mostly analytical with the destroyed inflection system, is characterized by sporadic agreement of the subject with the predicate in person and number. The ways to express this agreement are: the ending -s for the third person singular in the Present Indefinite, the Past Indefinite form were of the verb to be for the plural, the Present Indefinite of the verb to be (am for the 1st person singular, is for the 3rd person singular and are for the plural forms and 2nd person singular).

The category of gender is characteristic of the Ukrainian verb only and alongside with the categories of person and gender is included into the morphological word-changing paradigm of every verb.

One must bare in mind that in English the system of tense-aspect forms is one for all the grammatical categories, including tense, aspect and taxis, as well as voice, person, number. The two forms “has been writing” and “has written” represent two forms of one and the same verb to write.

As far as Ukrainian is concerned, the category of aspect is represented by a set of the opposed word-forms, i.e. one and the same verb cannot change from perfective to imperfective, it can be of either perfective aspect or imperfective. Therefore, the category of aspect is not a word-changing category but the characteristic feature of the individual verb, so to express the same idea in Ukrainian we will need the following:

where “wrote” and “has written” are two forms of one and the same verb “to write”.

where “пишу” and “написав” are two different verbs, the first is imperfective, while the second is perfective.

2. The non-finite forms of the verb

The non-finite forms of the verb, also called verbals are special forms of the verb that have a double nature, they combine the features of the verb with those of the noun or adjective and adverb. As soon as the verbals differ a lot from the verbs, they are sometimes singled out into an individual class of words, still they do not have specific characteristics of their own (their categories coincide with those of the verb, while the functions in the sentence are the same as those of nouns and adjectives), which proves that they cannot form an individual class of words.

The verbals in English are represented by the infinitive, the gerund, the participle and in Ukrainian there is the infinitive, the participle and the adverbial participle. So allomorphic are the gerund in English and the adverbial participle in Ukrainian.

The forms of the infinitive in both languages represent allomorphic features. Thus, the English infinitive is always distinguished by its identifier "to" (to come, to be asked, to be doing), whereas the Ukrainian infinitive is characterized by the suffixes -ти, -ть, -тись, -тися (бігти, везти, сісти, їхать, сіять). In Ukrainian every verb has just one form of the infinitive, while in English we find a paradigm of six analytical forms baring specific grammatical meaning (to do, to be doing, to have done, to have been doing, to be done, to have been done).

Specifically Ukrainian is the diminutive infinitive formed by suffixes: спатки, спатоньки, спатусі, спатусеньки, купці, купоньки, сістоньки, їстоньки. Lexically non-finites do not differ from finite forms. Grammatically the difference between the two types of forms lies in the fact that non-finites may denote a secondary action or a process related to that expressed by the finite verb. Non-finites possess the verb categories of voice, perfect, and aspect. They lack the categories of person, number, mood, and tense.

None of the forms have morphological features of non-verbal parts of speech, neither nominal, adjectival or adverbial. In the sphere of syntax, however, non-finites possess both verbal and non-verbal features. Their nonverbal character reveals itself in their syntactical functions. Thus, the infinitive and the gerund perform the main syntactical functions of the noun, which are those of subject, object and predicative. Participle I functions as attribute, predicative and adverbial modifier; participle II as attribute and predicative. They cannot form a predicate by themselves, although unlike non-verbal parts of speech they can function as part of a compound verbal predicate.

Syntactically the verbal character of non-finites is manifested mainly in their combinability. Similarly to finite forms they may combine with nouns functioning as direct, indirect, or prepositional objects, with adverbs and prepositional phrases used as adverbial modifiers, and with subordinate clauses.

Non-finites may also work as link verbs, combining with nouns, adjectives or statives as predicatives, as in: to be/being a doctor (young, afraid). They may also act as modal verb semantic equivalents when combined with an infinitive: to have/having to wait, to be able/being able to stay. So the structure of a non-finite verb group resembles the structure of any verb phrase.

All non-finite verb forms may participate in the so-called predicative constructions, that is, two-component syntactical units where a noun or a pronoun and a non-finite verb form are in predicative relations similar to those of the subiect and the predicate: I heard Jane singing; We waited for the train to pass; I saw him run, etc. So, verbals make up a part of the verb system, and have some features in common with the finite forms, and in so far as they are singled out amid the forms of the verb, they must have some peculiarities of their own.

Let us have a look at the system of verbal categories and state which of them are expressed in the English and Ukrainian verbals. In English none of the verbals has any category of person, number and mood, while in Ukrainian the participles have the categories of number, and gender (стрибаючий, стрибаюча, стрибаючі).

Still the greatest interest present the categories of aspect, tense, taxis and voice which are explicitly presented in both languages. In Ukrainian the category of aspect is represented in the system of non-finite forms of the verb in the same way as in the system of the finite verbs, that is by the set of opposed perfective and imperfective verbs.

The infinitive (бути - бувати, ходити - заходити, замислюватися - замислитися). The participle (будувавший - побудувавший). The adverbial participle (розмовлявши - порозмовлявши).

In the English infinitive, we find an opposition between two sets of forms: (to) speak--(to) be speaking (to) have spoken-(to) have been speaking.

As soon as the continuous infinitive is opposed to the indefinite infinitive, we come to the conclusion that the infinitive has the category of aspect, i.e there is a distinction between indefinite and continuous aspect. As the continuous verb forms the continuous infinitive expresses some process in contrast to the 43 fact expressed by the indefinite infinitive. Still there is a great difference between continuous-indefinite in the system of the finite verb and continuousin definite in the system of the English infinitive forms. The category of aspect is very often correlated with the category of taxis. Compare the following examples:

He may read the book (in future).

He may be reading the book (now).

It is a common knowledge that the indefinite infinitive in many cases expresses the action following the action of the main verb, while to express the action simultaneous with that of the main verb, the continuous infinitive is mostly used.

The category of aspect is not so clearly represented in other non-finite forms of the verb, though sometimes the forms of the continuous gerund and continuous participle I are found in fiction: Catherine had no leisure for speech, being at once blushing, tying her gown, and forming wise resolutions with the most violent dispatch. (J. Austen). The use of the continuous participles seems to be a means of giving prominence to the fact that the actions indicated were actually happening at that very moment. It speaks of potential for such forms to be introduced to the language system.

The category of tense and taxis. The category of tense is mostly represented by the Ukrainian imperfective participles and adverbial participles that have present and past tense forms (діючий-діявший, діючи-дявши). In English verbals have no tense category.

As far as the time relations are concerned the relative, not absolute time can be expressed by the English verbal, so the category of taxis is widely represented by the infinitive, gerund and participle of the English verb.

In the infinitive, we find the following oppositions:

to speak - to have spoken

to be speaking - to have been speaking,

and in the gerund and the participle the oppositions

speaking -having spoken

being spoken -having been spoken

We can see the opposition of two forms in each case, one of which is unmarked (the first column), while the other is marked (the second column have + past participle). If we turn to the meaning of the second-column forms, we shall find that they express precedence, whereas the first-column forms do not express it. Once again we see that in each pair one item is unmarked both in meaning and in form whereas the other (the perfect) is marked both in meaning (expressing precedence) and in form (consisting of the pattern "have + past participle").

So, the category of taxis is universal in the Modern English verb system: it is found in all forms of the English verb, both finite and non-finite, except the imperative.

The category of voice. As well as the finite forms of the verb, the verbals have a distinction between active and passive, both in English and Ukrainian, as will readily be seen from the following oppositions:

to read - to be read

to have read -to have been read reading

being read - having read--having been read

руйнуючий - зруйнований

пишучий - написаний

Comparing the English and Ukrainian voice systems for verbals we can see that in English the infinitive, participle and gerund have both active and passive forms, while in Ukrainian it is only the participle that can be either active or passive, still it is represented by more than one form of each verb (gender and number distinctions are found here: написаний роман, написана книга, переказане оповідання, зшиті речі, etc).

To sum up, then, what we have found out concerning the categories in the verbals, we can say that all of them have the categories of correlation and voice; the infinitive, in addition, has the category of aspect. None of the verbals has the categories of tense, mood, person, or number in English.

So, allomorphism is observed in the categorical meanings of the infinitive and the participle. The infinitive in Ukrainian has no perfect (perfective) passive form, no continuous aspect form, no perfect active and perfect passive forms of the Participle, that are pertained to present-day English (to have slept, to be sleeping, to have been seen; having been asked/having asked, even to have been being asked, etc).

The Ukrainian adverbial participle, whether active or passive, or non-perfective present and perfective past, remains an indeclinable verbal form (несучи, працюючи, слухаючи)

The functions of the infinitive and the participles in the sentence generally coincide in both languages. Allomorphic for the Ukrainian language are some syntactic functions typical of the English participles and infinitives, which may form with some classes of verbs (for example, those of the physical and mental perceptions) complex parts of the sentence. These parts of the sentence are completely alien to Ukrainian:

He was seen to go/going home. We heard him sing/singing. He wants me to be reading. The lesson (being) over, the students went to the reading-hall.

Each of these secondary predication complexes, with the exception of the for-to-infinitive construction, has a subordinate clause or incomplete sentence equivalent in Ukrainian: Бачили, як він ішов/коли він ішов додому. Ми чули, як він співає/ співав. Після того/оскільки заняття закінчилося, студенти пішли до читальної зали.

Conclusion

Verbals with their nomenclature, forms, meanings and functions have in each contrasted language some peculiarities of their own. Verbs of incomplete predication are of isomorphic and allomorphic features in English and Ukrainian. We tried to show the typological characteristics of the Ukrainian and English verbs, classes of verbs in English and Ukrainian, the ways of expressing morphological categories of the English and Ukrainian verbs and using them into the sentences.

References

1. Мороховский А. Н. Стилистика английского языка / А. Мороховский, О. Воробьева. - К., 1984. - 156 с.

2. Корунець І. В. Порівняльна типологія англійської та української мов : [навч. посіб.] / І. В. Корунець. - Вінниця : «Нова книга», 2003. - 464 с.

3. Гумбольд В. фон. Избранные труды по языкознанию / В. фон Гумбольд ; [пер. с нем. Г. В. Рамишвили]. - М. : Прогресс, 1984. - 397 с.

Размещено на Allbest.ru