Lesson 1.6 Remaining parts of speech: adverb, adjective, numeral N: Vasily, I propose to analyze all the remaining and untouched parts of speech. B: Let's start. N: Let's start with the adjective. The adjective, both in Russian and in English, answers the question “what?

Since ancient times, the minds of scientists have been occupied with the question of parts of speech. Plato, Aristotle, Panini, Yaska were engaged in research on them. As for Russian linguistics, the names of V.V. Vinogradov, L.V. Shcherba, A.A. Shakhmatov, and others should be noted.

Difficulty in separating parts of speech

Parts of speech are the most essential and common categories in the grammar of any language. With the clarification of the question about them, its grammatical description begins. Speaking of parts of speech, they imply the grammatical grouping of certain units of the language. In other words, certain categories or groups are distinguished in the vocabulary, characterized by some characteristics. However, on what basis should the parts of speech be distinguished? What is the distribution of words over them based on? Let's answer this question together.

The problem of the essence of parts of speech, as well as the principles of their selection in different languages is one of the most in linguistics. The statements on the question of interest to us are varied and numerous. Very often they contradict each other and are not clear. Some believe that individual parts are distinguished on the basis of one leading feature, which is inherent in words related to a particular grouping. Others believe that the selection of parts of speech is based on a set of various features, while none of them is the leading one. If the first opinion is considered correct, then what will be the main sign in this case? A logical category enclosed in a lexical meaning? Or is it itself? Or the relationship of the lexical meaning with grammatical category? Its syntactic function or morphological nature? Should different parts of speech be distinguished on different or on the same basis?

Agree, there are a lot of questions. Our knowledge of the grammatical nature of words is still not deep enough for their grammatical classification to be built on a scientific basis. The distribution of various words by parts of speech that arose gradually and subsequently entrenched in tradition is not yet a classification. Such a division is simply a statement that there are various groupings of words that are united by some features that are common to them. The latter are more or less significant, but not always clear.

Highlighting parts of speech in Russian

In modern Russian there is a large number of variant morphological forms. Of particular difficulty is word formation of significant variable parts of speech. Some of their forms were recognized as normative and entrenched in literary language, others are considered This determines the need in-depth study such a topic as word formation of significant variable parts of speech. They are usually given special attention at school.

Parts of speech are studied in such a section of grammar as morphology. It examines words in terms of their meaning and change. They can vary by number, gender, person, case, etc. A noun, for example, denotes an object. It can vary in cases and numbers. The adjective does not denote an object, but its characteristic. It varies in number, gender and case. However, in Russian there are words that do not change in any way. These are, for example, conjunctions, prepositions and adverbs.

Service and independent parts of speech

So, groups of words that are combined based on common features are called parts of speech. Moreover, the features for different groups of words are not homogeneous. Significant and non-significant parts of speech should be distinguished. The latter are also called service. Significant parts of speech are independent. Both those and others perform different jobs... Independent words in a sentence, naming objects, actions, signs, are members of the sentence, while service words most often associate independent words. Let's consider the latter in more detail.

Pronouns and significant words

Independent parts of speech can be pronouns or significant. Significant words denote signs, objects, actions, quantities, relationships, naming them. Pronouns only point to them, but do not name them. In the proposal, they serve as substitutes for the significant ones. Pronoun words form a separate part of speech called the pronoun. Significant ones are divided into different parts of speech based on the following features:

Morphological;

Generalized meaning;

Syntactic behavior (functions and links in the text).

Allocate at least 5 groups, considering significant parts of speech. These are three names (adjective, noun, numeral), as well as a verb and an adverb. Sometimes the forms of the verb (participles and participles) are distinguished separately. As you can see, parts of speech are lexical-grammatical classes of words. That is, they are highlighted based on syntactic behavior and generalized meaning.

Noun

Let's begin to describe the parts of speech of the Russian language (significant) with words that are related to it:

1) are common or proper, inanimate or animate, have a permanent generic sign, as well as inconstant (for the main part of nouns) signs of case and number;

2) have the meaning of objectivity, therefore they answer the question "what?" or who?";

3) most often in the proposal are additions or subjects, but there may be other members.

Note that when highlighting nouns, the grammatical features of words are the main ones, and not, for example, their meaning. The main features of significant parts of speech can be different. You will soon see this. As for the meaning of a noun, this is the only part of speech, the meaning of which can be very different. Let's look at examples: face (girl), object (pen), animal (dog), abstract concept (pride), sign (height), attitude (inequality), action (study). From the point of view of meaning, these words are united by the fact that in relation to them we can ask one question: "what?" or who?" This, in fact, is their objectivity.

We turn to the consideration of the next part of speech - the adjective.

Adjective

This is an independent part of speech, significant. It combines words that:

1) They vary by case, number and gender, and some by degrees of comparison and by brevity / completeness.

2) They designate some non-procedural feature of the subject, and therefore answer the questions "whose?" or "what?"

3) They act in a sentence with the nominal part of the SIS (compound nominal predicate) or definitions.

Adjectives always depend on nouns. Therefore, questions to them should be asked from the latter. Adjectives are needed in order to select the one you need from the set of identical objects. Without them, our speech would be like a painting painted in gray paint. Thanks to adjectives, it becomes figurative and more accurate, since they allow you to highlight different signs of one subject.

Numeral

This is another significant part of speech, independent. It includes words denoting numbers, the order of objects when counting, or their number. The numeral answers next questions: "which?" or "how much?" It is a part of speech that unites words based on a common meaning. And the meaning of the numerals is the ratio to the number. Note that their grammatical features are not uniform. They depend on the category in terms of the value of a particular numeral.

These words are playing big role in our life. We measure by numbers time, distance, number of objects and their size, value, weight. Numbers in writing are often replaced by numbers. However, in documents, for example, it is necessary that the amount be indicated not only in numbers, but also in words.

Adverb

We continue to reveal the question: "What parts of speech are significant?" An adverb denotes a sign of a state, a sign, an action, rarely an object. Note that it is immutable. The only exception to this rule is quality adverbs ending in -o / -e. All of them adjoin either an adjective, or a verb, or another adverb, that is, they characterize the significant parts of speech. Examples: very fast, run fast, very fast. An adverb in a sentence is usually a circumstance. Sometimes it can also adjoin a noun. Examples are: racing, Warsaw coffee, soft-boiled egg. The adverb in these cases acts as. For two reasons, adverbs are classified by meaning and by function.

Verb

We pass to the verb, considering the significant parts of speech. This is a word denoting a state (to rejoice), an action (to write), a property (to limp), a sign (to be whitened), an attitude (to be equal). Different groups verb forms inhomogeneous grammatical features. Such a concept as a "verb word" unites: conjugated forms (impersonal and personal), unconjugated (adverbial and participial), as well as the infinitive ( indefinite form). For speech, verbs are very important. They allow us to name different actions.

Participle

As a morphological phenomenon, participles are interpreted ambiguously in linguistics. Sometimes significant words, which are participles, are considered as separate parts of speech, and sometimes - as a form of a verb. They designate a sign of a certain object in action. The participle combines the properties of a verb and an adjective. It is used in written speech more often than orally.

Gerunds

Let's talk a little about the participle, revealing the topic "Significant parts of speech". These are words that, like participles, can be considered either as a special form of the verb, or as an independent part of speech. The signs of the participle are as follows:

1) The designation of an additional action, so the participle answers the following questions: "what after doing?" or "doing what?"

2) The presence of grammatical features of both an adverb and a verb.

So, we have considered the significant parts of speech. verb, numeral, noun and adjective. Sometimes the participle and participle are also distinguished separately. Now you can't go wrong when answering the question: "Which parts of speech are significant?" However, we suggest that you go further and complete your acquaintance with the independent parts of speech by considering the pronoun.

Pronoun

A pronoun is an independent part of speech that indicates signs, objects or quantities, but does not name them. They are different. They depend on which part of speech the pronouns replace in the text. They can be classified by grammatical features and by value. Pronouns in speech are used instead of adjectives, nouns, adverbs and numbers. They help to combine sentences into a coherent text, to avoid repeating the same words.

So, we examined the independent parts of speech (pronominal and significant), and we briefly characterized. We invite you to get to know the latter in more detail on your own, since they also play important role in the language. We hope you have learned to distinguish between significant and service parts of speech.

FROM THE HISTORY OF THE TEACHING ABOUT PARTS OF SPEECH

For a very long time, people intuitively, based on a wide variety of criteria, established certain classes of words. In the history of the science of language, starting with the ancient Indian linguists, there has been a constant desire to characterize these classes of words. Yaska and Panini (5th - 3rd century BC) established four parts of speech in ancient Indian languages: name, verb, preposition and particle. They were combined in pairs on the basis of the preservation of meaning outside the sentence (name, verb) or its loss, a preposition, particle). The name and the verb in the sentence, i.e. as word forms of the speech chain, "case" and "action" were called. As a subgroup of names, Yaska singled out pronouns. The semantic criterion was the leading one in the classification by parts of speech in ancient Indian linguistics.

Aristotle (4th century BC) distinguished three parts of speech in ancient Greek: a name, a verb and conjunctions, to which he attributed articles, pronouns, and ligaments.

Later, Alexandrian grammars established eight parts of speech: name, verb, participle, article, pronoun, adverb, preposition, and conjunction. When highlighting parts of speech, they took into account their syntactic role, morphological properties, in particular, inflection, as well as semantics. At the same time, unlike the ancient Indian scholars, they did not come to the analysis of the morphological structure of the word, they remained unaware of the concepts of the root and affixes. Roman linguists, removing the article from the number of parts of speech (it was not in Latin), added an interjection.

In the Middle Ages, the adjective began to be emphasized. The classification of parts of speech in ancient linguistics was compiled in close connection with logic: parts of speech were identified with the members of the sentence and approached the members of the judgment, i.e. with categories of logic. But nevertheless, this classification was partially grammatical, since some parts of speech were established by the presence of certain grammatical forms and meanings (for example, verbs are words that change in numbers, tenses, persons and denote an action). Grammar the ancient world, the Middle Ages and even the Renaissance was mainly dealing with the Greek and Latin languages; when developing grammars of new Western European languages, scientists proceeded from the norms of the Latin language. The view of parts of speech as logical-grammatical categories prevailed until the end of the 18th and mid-19th centuries. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the traditional system of parts of speech ceases to satisfy scientists. There are indications of inconsistency and contradictions in the existing classification, of the absence of a single criterion. In the 19th century, in connection with the intensive development of linguistics, in particular morphology, the question arises of the principles of distinguishing parts of speech and their universality. The selection of parts of speech begins to be based on a morphological criterion, i.e. on the commonality of grammatical forms inherent in certain categories of words. An example of the allocation of parts of speech from a formal grammatical point of view is the classification of FF. Fortunatova. Parts of speech, which he called "formal classes", F.F. Fortunatov distinguished by the presence of inflectional forms in the corresponding words: inflected words, conjugated words, non-inflected and non-conjugated words. Along with the morphological approach, the logical-syntactic approach to the characterization of parts of speech continued to develop. Based on the narrow morphological or syntactic features of words, always in one way or another associated with their proper lexical meaning, parts of speech began to be designated as lexical and grammatical categories of words.

MAIN PROBLEMS OF THE THEORY OF PARTS OF SPEECH

The entire vocabulary of any language is subdivided into lexical and grammatical classes of words called parts of speech (literal translation from Latin Partes orationis; also in other languages: English Parts of speech, German Redeteile). This term cannot be considered successful, since it contradicts the terminological meaning of “speech”. Parts of speech are classes linguistic units, not units of speech. The existence of word classes does not raise doubts among any of the linguists, although the interpretation of them is not the same among different scientists. Parts of speech can be defined as classes of words in a language, distinguished on the basis of the generality of their syntactic, morphological and semantic properties. Significant parts of speech (noun, verb, adjective, adverb) and service parts (union, preposition, particles, articles) are distinguished. TO significant parts speech also includes a numeral and a pronoun. The composition of the parts of speech in different languages ​​is different. The question of the foundations of the classification of parts of speech remains controversial in modern linguistics. In linguistics, and in English in particular, there are several basic approaches to the classification of words by parts of speech - traditional (the most ancient), descriptive, functional and onomasseological. Despite the fact that all of these approaches deal with the same linguistic phenomenon, each of them has its own specifics.

If the traditional approach seeks to draw the line between parts of speech by identifying their semantic, morphological and syntactic features, then descriptive - by at least in its original form, it considers position to be the only relevant identifying feature of a class and categorically opposes taking into account the role of meaning in linguistic analysis.

The functional approach focuses on the study of the syntagmatic relational properties of words in speech, at the same time as a formal method. The one that allows will establish the nature of the relationship between individual words and whole classes, he uses the method of distributive analysis at the morphological level, which involves the selection, based on the principle of binary and contrast, of opposing groupings of units that are not interchangeable either formally or in terms of content.

The focus of the onomasseological approach is the question of how the choice and creation of names of various fragments of objective reality in a particular language is made, what are the features of the nominative specificity of different groups of words and how these features determine the possibilities of deployment based on specific nominative features of the corresponding grammatical and derivation categories.

Some linguists define parts of speech as a lexical category, lexical classification of words, as an invariant of a subject-logical plan. Others believe that parts of speech are logical categories of words and therefore morphological features are of decisive importance in isolating parts of speech. However, this criterion is unsuitable for languages ​​with a poorly developed morphological system.

A.A. Reformed defined parts of speech as grammatical categories (not lexical or lexical-grammatical), the composition of which is individual in each language and is determined by a set of morphological and syntactic properties. Some linguists, on the other hand, believe that the meanings of parts of speech are their main feature, and the basis for identifying parts of speech is their lexical and semantic features, generalizing categorical meanings (Shakhmatov, Shcherba, A.N. Savchenko). Finally, parts of speech are considered as lexical and grammatical categories of words that differ from each other not only in a number of grammatical features (morphologically - in mutability and immutability, in a way of change, in paradigmatics; syntactically - in ways of communication with other words, and a syntactic function), but also lexically ... This point of view is the most accepted in modern Russian linguistics.

An approach to the problem of parts of speech is possible based on the concept of functional-semantic word categories. Words that perform the functions of nouns, adjectives, pronouns, verbs, numbers, adverbs, etc., are found in all languages ​​of the world. The presence of categorical meaning and certain functions fully ensures the existence of functional-semantic categories in the language.

Questions related to the theory of parts of speech remain controversial; there are discrepancies regarding the number, nomenclature, as well as criteria for the selection of parts of speech.

THE PROBLEM OF PARTS OF SPEECH IN FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC GRAMMAR

Henry Sweet, the author of the first scientific grammar, put forward three basic principles for the classification of words: the meaning, form and function of the word. He divided the parts of speech into two main groups - changeable and unchangeable, raising the morphological form to the rank of the leading classification criterion. Within the group of declinables, he followed the traditional approach of nouns, adjectives, and verbs. Adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and interjections are combined into the group of unchangeable (indeclinables). Along with this classification, Sweet proposes a grouping based on the syntactic functioning of certain word classes. Thus, the group of nominal words (noun-words) includes, in addition to nouns, noun-pronouns, noun-numerals, infinitives and gerunds with similar functioning; the group of adjective words includes, in addition to adjectives, adjective-pronouns, adjective-numerals, participles. The verb group includes personal forms and verbal; here again the leading is the morphological criterion; all impersonal forms, as well as personal ones, have verbal categories of tense and voice. Thus, the verbals - the infinitive and the gerund - are assigned to nominal words on the basis of their syntactic functioning, and by their morphological properties they also appear in the verb group.

The classification of the representative of the classical school of grammar Otto Jespersen is also based on three principles: form, function and meaning. He criticizes almost all traditional definitions of parts of speech. O. Espersen also questions the distinction between conjunctions and prepositions as independent parts of speech. He believes that in the combination A man of honor, the preposition of is also a means of connecting words and is no different from the union, which was traditionally defined as a connector of words or a group of words. In his classification, O. Espersen distinguishes the following parts of speech: 1) a noun, 2) an adjective, 3) pronouns, 4) verbs, 5) particles to which all other words belong of English language, devoid of the ability to shape. The author insists that the difference between the words included in the 5th group is greatly exaggerated. If we take the sentence He was in and He was in the house, then traditionally in is referred to different parts speech: in the first case - to adverbs, and in the second - to prepositions. However, he emphasizes that it would never occur to anyone to attribute the verb to sing to different parts of speech on the basis that it can be used as transitive with an object and as intransitive: He can sing and He sings a song. There is no reason, therefore, to highlight the unions in a separate part of speech. In the examples “Before his breakfast” and “Before he had breakfast”, he sees the only difference in the fact that in the first case “before” introduces a noun phrase, and in the second - a sentence. However, O. Espersen sees the difference between the compositional and subordinate unions and calls the compositional unions the compositional connectors, and the subordinate unions and prepositions - the subordinate connectors.

Interjections also fall into group 5. O. Espersen interestingly analyzes this class of words, noting the features of interjections, for example, the presence in them of such sounds that are absent in the phonemic composition of the English language:

Aspirated bilabial (f) and aspirated (x).

Thus, although the scientist proposes to take into account all three signs of highlighting parts of speech, in his classification it turns out to be inconsistent. The fifth part of speech, singled out on the basis of only the form, turns out to be a kind of lumber room - “a pantry for trash, where all those words that have not found a place in other groups go.

Along with the above classification, Espersen proposed an analysis of word classes from the point of view of their functioning in syntactic combinations (phrases, sentences), which is called the theory of three ranks. This or that word can be primary, i.e. be the core of a phrase, a sentence, another word can be secondary, i.e. directly defining the primary, another word - tertiary, i.e. subordinate to the secondary.

A furiously (3)

Representatives foreign linguistics the middle of the 20th century, the structuralists of the descriptive direction, put forward a fundamentally new approach to the problem of classification of parts of speech. They opposed taking into account the role of meaning in linguistic analysis.

Structuralists believed that the classification should be based only on the signs of the position of the word in the sentence. A typical classification of this type can be considered the classification of the American structuralist Charles Fries, given by him in the book "The Structure of the English Language". He draws attention to the fact that even in a meaningless sentence it is possible to establish the belonging of a word to certain grammatical categories - parts of speech: Woggles ugged diggles ”. This can be established by the position that the words occupy in the sentence, and by their form as opposed to other positions and forms.

In order to find out which positional classes of words exist in the English language, you should find out which positions are the main ones. For this purpose, C. Freese selects a limited number of sentences, which he calls “test-frames”, and within these frames determines the basic positions characteristic of words in the English language. Applying the method of substitution, Freese, within each test box, identifies words that can occupy a certain position in the sentence. All words that can be substituted in a given syntactic position constitute one positional class. The scientist used the following sentences as a test framework: The (good) concert was good (always).

The clerk remembered the tax (suddenly). The team went there.

Words capable of taking the position of the word concert were substituted into the first test frame. All words that can be substituted into this position without changing the structural value are called by Frieze words of the first positional class (Class 1 words). In traditional grammar terms, these are words in subject position in a simple declarative sentence.

In the second frame, all words were substituted in the remembered position (i.e., in the position of the predicate verb in the personal form). These words made up the second positional class (Class 2 words).

The third positional class is the position of the adjective in the first test box (Class 3 words), i.e. in the position of the prepositive definition and the nominal part of the predicate.

The fourth positional class coincides almost with traditional adverbs that can modify the verb.

In addition to these four positional classes, Freese identifies 15 more groups of formal words (Function Words), for which he uses letter notation (A, B, C,… .O). Group A includes all determinants, determinatives, i.e. all words that can appear in position definite article in the first test frame. For group B, all those words are taken that can stand in the position may in the following frame: The concert (may) be good. This includes modal and auxiliary verbs. Group C includes only one word not (negative particle, in traditional terminology). For group D, C. Freese proposes to combine all words that can occur in the very position immediately before the word of the third positional class, they signal a certain degree of quality. When isolating this group of words, Fries still has to resort to meaning.

Four positional classes contain thousands of units, words of 15 groups - 154 units (very uneven division). The disadvantages of the classification should be attributed to its mutual intersection, since the same word appears in several digits. At the same time, C. Freese consistently applies the method of substitution and obtains interesting data on the distribution of words and their syntactic valence (combinability).

Consider two more structuralist classifications proposed by G. Gleason and J. Trail.

Gleason proposes a classification based on two formal features - morphological form and word order. He divides the entire vocabulary of the language into two large groups: a group that has formal signs of inflection, and a group that does not have such signs. The first group naturally includes nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs. However, Gleason excludes from this group all those words that do not have a similar paradigm. So, the adjective beautiful is not included in this group, since it does not have synthetic forms of formation of degrees of comparison. The second group includes classes that differ in positional characteristics, but it also includes words from paradigmatic groups that are excluded from them. Thus, beautiful, which occupies the same positions as fine, is included in the second group and belongs to a broader class called “adjectivals”, which includes the adjectives proper. Classes occurring in the same positions form “constituent” classes. However, Gleason does not provide a precise definition or listing of them. Thus, his classification turns out to be even less systematic than that of C. Vries.

J. Sledd's classification is very close to the principles of G. Gleason. He also distinguishes between "inflectional" and "positional" classes: nominals, verbals, adjectivals, adverbials; they are joined by eight small classes of words: auxiliary verbs, determinants, prepositions, conjunctions, various categories of pronouns. A positive point in the classifications of G. Gleason and J. Sledd is that they note the importance of taking into account word-formation affixes as indicators of a particular part of speech.

In the 70s of the 20th century, famous English linguists (Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, Svartvik, 1972) attempted to build a classification system of parts of speech synthesizing classical and structuralist theories. So, the description of interjections completely coincides with the corresponding section from “Philosophy of Grammar” by Otto Jespersen.

The division of parts of speech into groups is carried out under the influence of C. Vries's classification.

The first group includes nouns, adjectives, adverbs, verbs; to the second - the article, demonstrative pronouns (allocated in a separate part of speech), all other pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, interjections. The parts of speech belonging to the second group are called “elements of a closed system”, since their number is small, they can be specified in a list, and new words are rarely formed. The parts of speech of the first group form an “open system”, since their series can be continued almost indefinitely. The authors of the grammar draw attention to the fact that parts of speech are not isolated classes, they can intersect and interact. They distinguish the opposition static - dynamic (Stative - Dynamic) for an open system.

Thus, this grammar takes into account the provisions of both traditional and structural grammars. The authors tried to rethink the phenomenon of parts of speech, taking into account the awakened interest in meaning.

Domestic linguists, unlike foreign ones, consider the triune principle of classifying parts of speech as the leading one, although they admit the possibility of using two features: semantic and syntactic, since English is analytical and in some cases there may be no sign of form. In Russian English studies, researchers usually distinguish 13 parts of speech: 9 significant and 4 service ones. They refer to significant ones: noun, adjective. verb, pronoun, numeral, adverb, interjection, state category words, modal words. Officials include: preposition, conjunction, particle, article. Domestic scientists distinguish the so-called unconventionally distinguished parts of speech: words of the category of state, modal words and particles. According to grammatical meaning, linguists divide parts of speech into three groups:

Parts of speech that name objects, signs, phenomena, movement (nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, words of the category of state).

Parts of speech indicating objects, their quality, quantity (pronouns, numbers).

Parts of speech expressing the speaker's attitude to the content of the utterance (interjections, modal words).

Significant parts of speech have an independent lexical meaning, service parts of speech serve to indicate certain relationships between words or to clarify the grammatical meaning of the significant part of speech.

Most scientists believe that there is no impassable border between parts of speech and that it is possible to move from one part of speech to another, as well as the use of one part of speech in a function that is characteristic mainly of another part of speech: for example, the use of a noun in the definition function characteristic of the English language.

In the 70s of the last century, field theory became widespread in linguistics. The theory of the grammatical field on the material German language was developed by V.G. Admoni. In accordance with this theory, some phenomena of the language can be considered as central, while others - as peripheral. Central is understood as linguistic phenomena that have all the characteristics, properties of a given class. But there are also units that do not have all the features, for example, parts of speech, although they belong to it. The field, therefore, is heterogeneous in its composition. Field theory in relation to the description of parts of speech is very promising and fruitful, as it allows you to visually represent the structure and interaction of lexical and grammatical categories.

2. The main groupings of parts of speech and their ratio. Parts of speech: significant and service.

The question of parts of speech has occupied the minds of scientists since ancient times. Research in this area was carried out by Aristotle, Plato, Yaska, Panini, in Russian linguistics, L.V.Shcherba, V.V. Vinogradov, A.A. Shakhmatov, and others were engaged in this issue.

The most common and necessary categories in the grammar of each language are parts of speech. The grammatical description of any language begins with the clarification of the question of parts of speech. Speaking about parts of speech, they mean the grammatical grouping of lexical units of the language, i.e. selection in the vocabulary of the language of certain groups or categories, characterized by certain features (Maslov Yu.S., 155). But on what basis are groupings of words called parts of speech distinguished? Or otherwise - what is the traditional distribution of words by parts of speech based on?

The problem concerning the essence of parts of speech and the principles of their isolation in various languages ​​of the world is one of the most controversial problems of general linguistics.

Statements on the question of what the distribution of words by parts of speech is based on are numerous, varied, but very often not clear and contradictory.

According to F.I.Buslaev, there are nine parts of speech in the language: verb, pronoun, noun, adjective, numeral, adverb, preposition, union and interjection. F.I.Buslaev distinguishes the latter in a special section. The rest of the speech is divided into significant (noun, adjective and verb) and service (pronoun, numeral, preposition, union and auxiliary verb); adverbs according to this classification (as well as verbs) fall into two groups: those derived from the service parts of speech belong to the service parts of speech, and those derived from the significant ones - to the significant ones. Thus, it turns out that the division of words into significant and service words does not coincide with their division into parts of speech.

It is interesting to observe F. I. Buslaev over the closed character of the list of official words and the open character of the list of verbs, nouns, adjectives and adverbs, which, in his words, are "innumerable"; but he denies the open character of the list of numbers.

The most important in relation to the definition of parts of speech (which F.I. ) in relation to the dictionary 2) in relation to grammatical. In the first relation, attention is paid to the expression of ideas and concepts in a separate word, and in the last - to the meaning and belonging of each part of speech separately ”(Buslaev F.I., 289). This statement is, in essence, the key to defining the concept of parts of speech in modern linguistics.

For A. A. Ponebnya, it was extremely important to establish a connection between language and thinking in their functioning and development. The emphasized attention to psychology, to the very process of creative speech, led AA Potebnya to the assertion of the primacy of the sentence; a single word seemed to him a scientific fiction. And since a word is only an element of a sentence, A.A. Potebnya believes that it is possible to understand the parts of speech only on the basis of a sentence. Parts of speech for A.A. Potebnya are grammatical categories that exist only in a sentence. "Understanding language as an activity, it is impossible to look at grammatical categories such as a verb, a noun, an adjective, an adverb, as something unchanging, once and for all deduced from the eternal properties of human thought" (Potebnya A. A., 82). He said that these categories change even in relatively short periods.

AA Potebnya approached the process of speech, in which only language is revealed, from the standpoint of a separate individual. And therefore in his works there is a mixture of inflection and word formation, sometimes understanding almost every use of a word as a separate, independent word

In their early works When classifying parts of speech, A. A. Shakhmatov relied primarily on semasiological criteria, believing that a certain system of grammatical forms is inherent in each part of speech. Later, he attributed the definition of parts of speech to syntax, considering at the same time in morphology not only inflection and related categories, which received semantic content from A.A. Shakhmatov, but also the structure of the basis. "A word in its relation to a sentence or, in general, to speech is defined in grammar as a part of speech" (Shakhmatov A.A., 29). A. A. Shakhmatov also noted that in some languages, in particular in Russian, parts of speech may differ morphologically. Grammatical categories, Shakhmatov wrote, are cognized in syntax, therefore, when defining parts of speech, "one must take into account the connection that exists between individual parts of speech and grammatical categories" (Shakhmatov A. A., 29).

In accordance with those "ideas" that are expressed in words, A. A. Shakhmatov divides them into three groups: significant words, which necessarily express the basic concepts with or without relation to the accompanying grammatical categories (noun, verb, adverb); non-significant words that serve to express a particular independent grammatical category (pronoun, numeral, pronominal adverb); service parts of speech that serve to express one or another non-independent grammatical category (preposition, union, prefix, particle); the interjection as an equivalent of the word is especially worth (Suprun A.E., 31).

When dividing words into parts of speech, A. M. Peshkovsky introduces the concept of "syntactic", i.e. dependent on other words in speech, and the "non-syntactic" (derivational) form, which made it possible for adverbs, participles and infinitives, as words with non-syntactic forms, not only not to consider "formless", but also to distinguish among themselves (Peshkovsky A.M. , 37). AM Peshkovsky's syntactic forms are given by a list: case of nouns; case, number and gender of adjectives; face, number, gender, tense and mood of the verb. Associated with this is the composition of the parts of speech, as well as their classification table (see table No. 1) (Peshkovsky A. M., 43).

A. M. Peshkovsky attaches considerable importance to mental associations that arise in the speaker and the listener when pronouncing words. AM Peshkovsky identifies parts of speech with "the main categories of thinking in their primitive nationwide stage of development" (Peshkovsky AM, 74). In this regard, the discovery of objectivity as a psychological or primitive-logical category of thinking, corresponding to a grammatical noun, etc., the search for the common meaning of parts of speech, united not only by a bunch of similar forms, but above all by this common meaning (Suprun A.E. , 35).

L.V.Shcherba said that when classifying parts of speech, a researcher should use the scheme that is imposed by the language system itself, i.e. establish a general category under which one or another lexical meaning of a word in each a separate case or, otherwise, what general categories differ in this language system... Hence L. V. Shcherba's recognition of the possibility of experimentally establishing the composition of the parts of speech. L. V. Shcherba notes that there must be some external exponents of these categories, and such categories can be the "mutability" of words of different types, prefixes, suffixes, endings, phrasal stress, intonation, word order, special auxiliary words, syntactic connection etc. Shcherba believed that there is no reason to ascribe a special role in the allocation of parts of speech to formal morphemes. Shcherba's position on the bundle of formal features as a characteristic of a part of speech is also important (Shcherba L.V., 65), and it is assumed that individual words belonging to a given part of speech may not have individual features of this bundle; so, for example, the word cockatoo does not have the endings inherent in nouns, but by its compatibility it is sufficiently characterized as a noun (my cockatoo, cockatoo sits, my brother's cockatoo), as evidenced by its semantics.

L. V. Shcherboy also raised the question of varying degrees of brightness and severity of the properties of individual parts of speech. He believes that some words may have signs of two parts of speech (for example, participles are brought under the category of an adjective and under the category of a verb), and on the other hand, he allows the possibility of homonymy between parts of speech (the same word may in some cases belong to the same parts of speech, and in other cases - to another) (Suprun A.E., 40).

II Meshchaninov makes an attempt at a typological analysis of the members of a sentence and parts of speech in languages ​​of various types on the basis of the idea put forward by II Meshchaninov about "conceptual categories", i.e. a kind of grammatical universals, without which, in his opinion, the typological comparison of grammars of different languages ​​is impossible.

The genesis of parts of speech, according to I.I. "Those groupings of the vocabulary of the language, to which we assign the names of parts of speech, are formed in the language only if and only if the grouping of words occurs not only by their semantics, but also by the presence in them ... characterizing formal indicators" (Meshchaninov I. I., 17). Parts of speech, according to I.I.Meshchaninov, represent a lexical group characterized by the corresponding syntactic properties. These are acquired by them in a sentence, where a certain group of words is confined to the predominant appearance in the meaning of one or another member of the sentence or is included in its composition. At the same time, both a member of a sentence and a part of speech have their own characteristics that distinguish them: a member of a sentence in a sentence, a part of speech in the lexical composition of the language (Suprun A.E., 48).

V.V. Vinogradov defended a synthetic approach to parts of speech based on an in-depth analysis of the concept of words, its form and structure in the language. "The allocation of parts of speech should be preceded by the definition of the main structural and semantic types of words" (Vinogradov V. V., 29). The classification cannot ignore any aspect in the structure of a word, although lexical and grammatical criteria, in his opinion, should play a decisive role, and morphological peculiarities are combined with syntactic ones in "organic unity", since there is nothing in morphology that is not there or was not was in the syntax and vocabulary. Analysis of the semantic structure of a word led VV Vinogradov to identify four main grammatical and semantic categories of words: 1. Words-names, which are adjacent to pronouns, form the substantive semantic, lexical and grammatical foundation of speech and are parts of speech. 2. Particles of speech, i.e. ligamentous, service words, devoid of a nominative function, closely related to the technique of language, and their lexical meanings are identical with grammatical ones, words lying on the verge of vocabulary and grammar. 3. Modal words and particles, deprived, like connective words, of a nominative function, but more "lexical": "wedging" into the sentence, marking the relationship of speech to reality from the point of view of the subject of speech. Attached to a sentence, modal words are outside of both parts of speech and particles of speech, although "in appearance" they can resemble both. 4. Interjections in the broad sense of the word, without cognitive value, syntactically disorganized, unable to combine with other words, possessing an affective coloration, close to facial expressions and gestures

(Vinogradov V.V., 30).

V.V. Vinogradov notes that the ways of expression grammatical meanings and the very nature of these meanings is heterogeneous for different semantic types of words (Vinogradov V.V., 33). In the system of parts of speech, according to V.V. Vinogradov, grammatical differences between different categories of words appear most sharply and definitely. The division of parts of speech into basic grammatical categories is due to: 1. Differences in those syntactic functions that perform different categories of words in coherent speech, in the structure of a sentence 2. Differences in the morphological standing of words and word forms 3. Differences in the real (lexical) meanings of words 4. Differences in the way of reflecting reality 5. Differences in the nature of those correlative and subordinate categories that are associated with a particular part of speech (Vinogradov V.V., 38-39).

V.V. Vinogradov, noting that in different languages ​​there can be different composition parts of speech, emphasized the dynamism of the system of parts of speech in one language.

Completing the historical, linguistic and theoretical overview of the parts of speech in the Russian language, V.V. Vinogradov offers two schemes: one illustrating the relationship between the individual parts of speech (in the narrow sense of the word), and the second, characterizing all groups of words in the modern Russian language (see. scheme No. 1 and scheme No. 2). These diagrams list the parts of speech in Russian and demonstrate their relationship with each other.

Until now, scientists have not come to a consensus on the criteria for identifying parts of speech, thus, the question of the basics of classifying parts of speech in modern linguistics remains open. But the most productive and universal approach seems to be the approach to the parts of speech as to the lexical and grammatical categories of words, taking into account their syntactic role.

service parts of speeches service (non-significant) parts of speech, parts of speech that serve to connect independent parts of speech. They do not have shaping and inflection. Service parts of speech in Russian are a preposition, union, particle. The official parts of speech are replenished from the fund of independent ones: for example. , the preposition for - from a noun; the union that - from the pronoun. Literature and language. Modern illustrated encyclopedia. - M.: Rosman. Edited by prof. Gorkina A.P. 2006. significant parts of speech independent (significant) parts of speech are grammatical classes of words that call fragments of reality (object, event, feature) and have a special system of form formation and inflection, which is determined by grammatical semantics. In Russian, independent parts of speech are a noun, a verb, an adjective, an adverb, a numeral. Literature and language. Modern illustrated encyclopedia. - M.: Rosman. Edited by prof. Gorkina A.P. 2006.