Home Useful properties of fruits Does the sacrament have a future tense. Real participles of the future tense in Russian at the beginning of the 21st century. Formation of real participles

Useful properties of fruits

Does the sacrament have a future tense. Real participles of the future tense in Russian at the beginning of the 21st century. Formation of real participles

St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg

ACTIVE FUTURE PARTICIPLE

PERFECT FORM IN RUSSIAN LANGUAGE1

1. In the vast majority of grammatical descriptions of the Russian language, the paradigm of real participles includes 3 members: present participles and past participles of the perfect (CB) and imperfect form (NSV). However, a number of researchers (V. A. Plotnikova in [Shvedova (ed.) 1980], V. V. Vinogradov in [Vinogradov 1947] and others) note the presence in the language of the so-called future participles, derived from the verbs NE according to the formation model participles of the present tense and which are “a deviation from the literary norm; for example: hundreds of excerpts from Green's books that excite everyone (Paust.); samples of headlines that can attract attention (gas.) ”[Shvedova (ed.) 1980].

2. Proposals have been repeatedly put forward to introduce participles of the future tense into the participial paradigm of the Russian language. The first of these attempts (which has dealt with the Church Slavonic language) should be considered the grammar of M. Smotrytsky [Smotrytsky 1619], which contains real and passive participles of the future tense, such as etc. [Smotrytsky 1619: 182]. However, this grammar was more focused on translating texts from the ancient Greek language (in which there are participles of all times, including the future), rather than on live colloquial speech, for which it was criticized, in particular, by Y. Krizhanich, who wrote in 1666 that "...single verbs do not have a present participle", and "Smotrytsky gives out many perverse words as a model" [Kpgats 1984: 144].

1 The study was supported by the RFH grant No. 09-04-00264а "Grammar of attributive secondary predications (relativization in Russian)".

In recent years, future participles have also attracted the attention of researchers more than once, but all the articles and notes we know about them are mainly aimed at resolving the issue of their status in the literary Russian language, see, for example, [Epshtein 2000; Shapoval, manuscript]. We set ourselves the task of analyzing the use of future participles on the material of texts found on the Internet by the Google search engine (www.google.com), as well as assessing their acceptability based on an experiment with native speakers.

3. For the study, 100 frequent NE verbs were selected that do not have morphonological "contraindications" for the formation of future participles, and the first important result can be considered that some of these participles (losing, leaving, writing, finding, opening, saying) Google finds more than a hundred uses, and for the coming communion - more than five hundred.

To resolve the issue of independence (independence from context) of future participles, we analyzed 312 cases of their use from different points of view. We traced the cases in which they are more often used, whether they are necessarily part of the participial phrase, how often they are paired with cognate participles (drinking and drinking, singing and singing), and compared the data obtained with the data for participles allowed by normative grammar.

The results speak in favor of the usefulness of the considered forms. So, for example, the case distributions of the use of future participles CB and past participles CB2 do not show statistically significant differences (p >> 0.10), i.e. from this point of view, future participles behave exactly the same as "full" past participles.

From the point of view of inclusion / non-inclusion in the turnover, between the participles of the future and the past tense (for comparison, we analyzed 312 examples of past participles

2 The distribution for past participles was calculated for the contexts found in the National Corpus of the Russian Language (www.ruscorpora.ru) in the subcorpus with grammatical homonymy removed.

time SW) there are quite significant differences. So, in our materials there were only 13 sentences with single participles of the future tense (4.17%), while single participles of the past tense account for 30.13% of uses (94 examples). However, these differences, in our opinion, are quite understandable, given the “repressed” status of the future participles and their rarity in the Russian language: a fairly large proportion of the single past participles we examined are fully or partially adjectivized participles, such as the past (grew by 6% over the past year) or sunken (switches with sunken lips), and adjectivation, as is known, occurs as a result of prolonged use of a word and a gradual change in its meaning, see [Lopatin 1966: 47].

An important parameter to make an assumption

about the reasons for the appearance of future participles in speech is their position in the participial turnover: they are almost 6.5 times more likely than the past participles CB from our sample to occupy a non-initial position in the participial turnover (46.15% versus 7.34% for past participles).

It can be assumed that it is precisely such cases that are “extreme”, forcing the carrier to fill in the usually unfilled cell in the participial paradigm. Indeed, the most successful replacement for the turnover with the participle of the future tense in Russian, as we will show below, is the relative clause, see (1):

(1) Thus was born a form with its own individuality and originality, a happy combination of functionality and aesthetics that does not lose / which will not lose its attractiveness for many years. (Google)

However, since in relative clauses the term expressed by the relative pronoun always (with the exception of some special cases associated with the "rat-catcher effect") moves to the left periphery, starting the dependent predication from any phrasal category that does not dominate the allied word (circumstances of time, etc.) etc.), the speaker can no longer use the “permitted” way of expressing the necessary meaning and is forced to use a non-literary form, see (2):

(2) I remember at the time I wrote this, I considered myself a Great Writer, sooner or later to write / *who will write a work of genius... (Google)

The last assumption that could indicate the lack of independence of the participles of the future tense was that they are used exclusively or mainly in tandem with past participles, see (3), or present participles, see (4), formed from a verb of the same aspect couples:

(3) We present to your attention a catalog of literary works published or published under the label "Neue Partisanen". (Google)

(4) Poland is generally a unique, eternally dying, but by no means dying phenomenon in world history. (Google)

However, although such uses do occur, they account for only 3.8% (12 cases), which, of course, cannot serve as a strong argument in favor of the lack of independence of the forms under consideration.

However, realizing that the examples found on the Internet could well have been generated by people who do not speak Russian well, we considered it necessary to conduct an experiment with literate native speakers, which would allow us to assess the acceptability of future participles from the point of view of speakers.

4. For the experiment, we selected 8 sentences from those considered earlier, diverse in terms of actional characteristics and argumentative structure of the verb from which the participle is formed, the structure of the participial turnover, etc. For each of the examples, we selected peculiar “analogues”: two sentences, repeating, if possible, all the characteristics of the original one listed above, but differing from it in that in one, instead of the future participle, there was the past participle CB with the same taxis value, and in the other, a relative clause3.

All the sentences included in the questionnaire were found by us in the NRC or on the Internet using the Google system, some of them were subjected to minimal editing before being presented to the carriers.

Here is an example of such a trio of sentences:

(5) And without respect, there is no love, do not believe women who say otherwise! (Google)

(6) And I tell you right away: a person who has announced his candidacy will need to go through an interview.

(7) And to anyone who reports the presence of corruption at Moscow State University or Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, I will laugh in the face with pleasure.

During the experiment, respondents4 were asked to rate the proposals on a four-point scale from absolutely acceptable (3) to absolutely unacceptable (0). According to the results of the experiment, for each proposal, the average score was calculated, which was used later for comparison.

As expected, the future participles forbidden by the norm turned out to be the least acceptable of the three options (the average score is 1.26), however, since, for one reason or another, the two options allowed by the grammar did not score the maximum number of points (the average score for past participles amounted to 2.15, and according to the most acceptable option - the relative clause - 2.39), we can say that the assessment by the carriers of the participles of the future tense is 53% of the recorded maximum, which, of course, is not much, but not so much that it could be neglected .

5. Thus, although in the Russian language the real participles of the future tense CB are prohibited by grammar, but, being allowed structurally, they are periodically found in texts (especially when replacement is impossible, i.e., first of all, in a non-initial position in participial turnover) , demonstrate noticeable similarities in behavior with "full" participial forms and are not perceived as absolutely marginal by native speakers.

4 For the experiment, 20 people aged 18 to 43 years who have received or are receiving higher education were selected. Schoolchildren and people with a philological education were not allowed to participate (these two groups of people, it seemed to us, could be guided in their assessments primarily not by a sense of language, but by knowledge of normative grammar, which prohibits the studied forms).

Literature

Vinogradov 1947 - V. V. Vinogradov. Russian language. The grammatical doctrine of the word. Moscow: Uchpedgiz, 1947.

Lopatin 1966 - V. V. Lopatin. Adjectivation of participles in its relation to word formation II Questions of Linguistics 5, 1966, pp. 37-47.

Shvedova (ed.) 198G - N. Yu. Shvedova (ed.). Russian grammar. T. 1-2. Moscow: Nauka, 198G.

Smotrytsky 1619 - M. Smotrytsky. Grammar of Slavensk is correct Syntaґma. Evye, 1619. Reprint: Kiev, 1979.

Shapoval, manuscript - V.V. Shapoval. Draw a house - a prize! (Participles of the future tense in our speech). (http:IIwww.ruscenter.ruI 73G.html)

Epstein 2GGG - M. N. Epstein. Participles of the future tense (doing) II Mikhail Epstein's projective lexicon. Issue 17. 2GGG. (http:IIold.russ.ruIantologIintelnetIdar17.html)

Krizanic 1984 - J. Krizanic. Gramatico izkazanje ob ruskom jeziku. Sabrana djela Jurja Krizanica. Knj. 2. Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti

Future participle in Russian.

Do we have future participles? Despite the prohibitions of academic and school grammar, they exist. "The one who does, is able, wishes, sees, reads..." Relation to the future is an important sign of the present. Participles of the future tense are organic for the Russian language, and only conservative linguistic morality prevents their use.

Looking into modern textbooks of the Russian language, we will find such firm formulations: "participles have forms of the present and past tense, they do not have forms of the future tense"; "Unlike verbs, participles do not have a future tense"; "the form of the participle of the future tense is absent."

In the modern literary language, the forms of active participles in -sch from perfective verbs (with the meaning of the future tense) are not used, "thinking to compose "," trying to convince "," able to explain. (D. E. Rosenthal)

However, no convincing arguments are given against the participles of the future tense. I will be grateful to the grammarians who will be able to explain why this cannot be said.

Perhaps the logic of the ban is as follows. The participle combines the properties of a verb and an adjective: the action performed by an object acts as a sign of this object. "Reader" - the person whose sign is the action "read". It is impossible to define an object in terms of what it does not do or has done, but only will do.

But this logic is extremely vulnerable, especially taking into account the fact that the Greek language, on the model of which the Old Slavic grammar was largely created, has participles of the future tense. There are participles of the future tense in Sanskrit, and Latin, and in Esperanto, and in Ido, and in the language of the Avesta (beginning of the 1st millennium BC). Why can't a future action serve as a sign of an object, since potential signs are just as important as actual ones? Culture, as the unity and interaction of times, cannot do without potential signs as determinants for the phenomena of the present. The very word "culture", Latin " culture" is the future participle of the verb colere, "cultivate", "process", "care", "care", "cultivate", "educate".

We all bear the marks of our future, our possibilities. The fact that a student will read a book, even if presumably, sets him apart from those who will not read it. The fact that a politician will fulfill his promises, even if presumably, distinguishes him from those who do not.

Student, reading Vinogradov's entire textbook will easily pass the exam.
Politician, performing what he promises will be able to count on the confidence of the people in the next elections.
Leader again calling us into the distance bright, most likely will be the new dictator.
Soldier, first bringing news of victory, will be promoted to officer.
Ecofascism is cruel, but fair: to a person, breaking branch of a tree, cut off your hand.
brave, able defeat the dragon, will receive a princess as a reward.
Young woman, loving such an experienced heartthrob, is unlikely to be happy with him.

How to replace the participles of the future tense in these examples? They could only be replaced by definitive subordinate clauses ("brave man who can...", "girl who loves..."), which make the speech unwieldy. If it comes to that, then in general it is possible to remove subordinate turns from use, replacing them with subordinate clauses. But if the language still needs subordinate clauses, then there is no reason to exclude future participles from them ...

Comparison with Esperanto

Russian past participles can be perfect and imperfect: "who came" - "the one who came" and "come" - "the one who came", while future participles can only be perfect: "coming" - "one who will come"; there is no participle corresponding to the form "one who will come". In Esperanto, such participles are freely formed:

perfect view	imperfect species
past temp. veninta - who came	venadinta - coming
present temp. venanta - coming (now)	venadanta - coming (often)
weekday venonta - coming (who will come)	venadonta - who will come)

Examples

blessed coming in the name of the Lord! (Psalms, 117:26) (also Matt. 21:9; Mark 11:9; Luke 19:38) (in former translations - "coming").
God gave me a beautiful house in a place so beautiful that many rich people would envy, wishing have one for relaxation. (Elder Paisios)
...How pitiful a man is, the power of light that has already visited him cannot be restrained able! (St. Philaret of Moscow)
But in many places folklore is no longer preserved; except where he got into the stationary departments of the museum and only by chance a musician or writer stumbles upon him, wishing bring these parchments and scrolls to life. (Nikolai

The text of the work is placed without images and formulas.
The full version of the work is available in the "Job Files" tab in PDF format

Introduction…………………………………………………………………..3

Communion as a part of speech……………………………………………….4

Substantivation as a way of word formation of participles .................... 7

Conclusions……………………………………………………………….11

Introduction.

Language and time are the eternal problem of linguists. The language lives in time, but the time is displayed in the language. Language is changing and this evolutionary quality is inherent in it. Changes are observed at all language levels. One of the reasons for the transformation of the grammatical structure of a language is the transition of a word from one part of speech to another, a variation of which is substantiation.

The relevance of research. The substantiation of participles is a fairly ancient process. Substantives are already found in the Bible ( Going for mine ... will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire; Having ears to hear).

Lenghists have always strived for in-depth knowledge of the language (as an object of study) and those phenomena that have been analyzed for a long time. Recently, the question of the possibility of forming participles of the future tense has been increasingly raised. Philologists of different generations became interested in them: M.Ya. Glovinskaya, K.A. krapivina, V.V. Shapoval, M.N. Epstein.

Purpose of the study: studying a new type of substantiated participles - the future tense.

Research objectives:

The ability to select and systematize material for observation is developed;

To study the use of future participles in speech;

Consider the historical aspects of the formation of participles of the future tense;

Improve skills in working with scientific and reference literature.

Communion as a part of speech.

The participle is a hybrid verb-adjective form, which in the school tradition is considered as a special verb form. Participles connect the signs of a verb and an adjective, expressing the meaning of the procedural attribute of an object. Verbal signs of participles:

The nature of the verb control is preserved (for example: dream of freedom - dreaming of freedom);

The form of the corresponding verb is preserved;

The participle has two collateral forms (in accordance with the two-collateral concept) - the active and passive voice (for example: allowing - active voice, permitted - passive voice);

The sacrament has two tense forms - present (loving, beloved) and past (loving) tense.

All verbal signs of participles are constant, variable signs are signs of an adjective: gender, number, case, full or short (for passive participles) form and the corresponding inflection in a sentence - a predicate or a definition.

Present participles are formed from the verb stem of the present tense with the help of suffixes -usch-/-yushch, -ash/-yash- - real participles, suffixes -em-, -om-, -im- - passive participles. Past participles are formed from a stem with an infinitive stem. At the same time, to form real participles, the suffixes -vsh- are used if the stem ends in a vowel (for example: hear-be - heard) or -sh- if the stem ends in a consonant (for example: brought-ti - brought-shi). When forming passive participles of the past tense, suffixes -nn- are added to the verb stem if the stem ends in a vowel, except for /i/ (for example: hang-t - hang-n), -enn if the stem ends in a consonant or /and/, moreover, in the latter case, /and/ drops out (for example: shoot-th - shot-shot, brought-ti - brought-enny), -t- - to form participles from some verbs of unproductive classes with stems on i-, s-, o -, as well as from verbs of the IV productive class (for example: sshi-t - sshi-ty, wash-t - washed-ty, stab - stabbed, turn-t - turned-t). The initial form of the participle, like the adjective, is the nominative singular masculine.

A common feature of the use of participles is that they belong to book speech. This is explained by the history of the sacraments.

The main categories of participles refer to elements of the literary language borrowed from the Old Slavonic language, which affects a number of their phonetic features, for example, the presence of u in present participles: current, burning corresponding to adjectives fluid, hot, which are Old Russian participles by origin, and are also available for a number of participles before a hard consonant under stress e, while in the verbs from which they are formed, under the same conditions, there is yo (o): come, but came, invented, but invented, blossomed, but blossomed. 6

The connection of participles with the Old Slavonic language in the 18th century. noted by Lomonosov, who in his "Russian Grammar" explains about several categories of participles that they are used only from Slavic verbs and are unacceptable from Russian. So, he writes: “The real tense of the present sacrament ending in -shchy, derived from verbs of Slavic origin: crowning, writing, nourishing; but not very decent from ordinary Russians, which are unknown among the Slavs: speaking, slurring". The same is noted by him regarding the passive participles of the present tense “From Russian verbs, which were not used by the Slavs, produced, for example: touched, shaken, soiled, are very wild and intolerable to hearing”, and regarding the past participles of the active voice: “... for example, blurted out, blurted out, dived, dived, very disgusting." At the same time, Lomonosov also notes the great relevance of participles for high styles of speech, pointing out that they "rely more decently in rhetorical and poetic writings than in simple calm or in common speech."

At present, two centuries after Lomonosov, there are no restrictions on the formation of participles from purely Russian verbs that are alien to the Old Slavonic language. And the examples of unacceptable participles demonstrated by Lomonosov do not create the impression of insulting the linguistic instinct about which he speaks with such categoricalness, and are quite acceptable. The main categories of full participles are productive and are easily formed from any verbs, including from neoplasms ( vernalizing, vernalizing, vernalizing). The passive participles of the present tense are the least common, but they are also productive in some types of verbs ( polluted, formed, stored) and are unproductive only with the suffix -om- (carried, driven, sought).

But even now, firstly, participles are an accessory of the literary language (they are absent in dialects); secondly, they almost never occur in colloquial speech.

Despite the prohibitions of academic and school grammar, they exist. "The one who does, is able, wishes, sees, reads..." Relation to the future is an important sign of the present. Participles of the future tense are organic for the Russian language, and only conservative linguistic morality prevents their use.

Substantiation as a way of word formation of participles.

In the 60-80s. In the 20th century, the attention of researchers on the problem of substantiation was concentrated mainly on the grammatical essence of the phenomenon, methods of word formation (I.G. Golanov, E.A. Zemskaya, N.M. Shansky).

In recent years, the phenomenon of substantiation has become the subject of research in many dissertations. However, there are still different views on substantiation as a way of word formation, many problems have not been fully resolved and a number of issues remain debatable: there is no single view on the nature of substantiated words, the issue of substantiation of participial phrases has not been considered.

At the turn of two millennia, it is necessary to take stock of what has been achieved on the problem of "Communion in the Russian language", to determine the direction and path of further research.

The frequently raised topic of future participles is periodically discussed at linguistic forums, relevant questions are sent to the Russian language reference services.

Until now, we have considered only lexical neoplasms on the topic of time. But even in the field of grammar, the development of the language does not stop, of course, more slowly. The best thing we can do for a language is to free it from artificial prohibitions, to legalize what the language has never stopped doing "on the sly". One of the most urgent changes in grammatical legislation is the admission of future participles.

Are there such words in the modern Russian language as "doing", "able", "succeeding", "seeing", "reading", "coming", "wishing"? Many examples of future participles can be cited from quite worthy sources of Russian literature :

Saint Philaret of Moscow: ... How pitiful is the person who has already visited him, the power of light, who is unable to hold back!

Elder Paisios: God gave me a beautiful house in such a beautiful place that many rich people would envy, who would like to have one for their vacation.

Nicholas Roerich, "Origins": But in many places folklore is no longer preserved; except where he ended up in the immovable departments of the museum, and only by chance a musician or writer will stumble upon him, wishing to revive these parchments and scrolls.

Psalms 117:26: Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! (also Mat.21:9; Mar.11:9; Luk.19:38) (in former translations - "coming").

Future participles are regularly and productively used in modern Russian. In particular, on the Internet, where "deviations from the norm" are less subject to editorial control. The Google search engine finds 88 cases of the use of the participle "willing", 70 - "doing", 45 - "seeing", and these statistics apply only to the masculine singular form of the nominative case.

It should be noted that future participles in the modern language are found in all stylistic contexts: scientific(Modern science is waiting for a new Einstein, opening the unified law of all four physical interactions), literary(I will be the wife of a knight able tame the dragon, or I will never marry, - the princess stamped her foot), official business(Publishing house, publishing this novel may make a hefty profit, but will be forced to spend it on legal fees), journalistic(India, ranked third ... among the world's largest economies and soon becoming the most populous power in the world, concluded that, in order to occupy its rightful place in world affairs, it must become a member of the nuclear club) And informal communication of Internet users(Probably, just as directly, his writer will look into his eyes soon coming of death; Baghirov hoped that someday he would turn out a big deal, and the amount would fall into his pocket, making his enough independent and independent from the will of his parents).

However, from the point of view of the dominant grammar, there are no such word forms and cannot be: they represent a forbidden, "repressed" category of "future participles".

However, no convincing arguments are given against the participles of the future tense. I will be grateful to the grammarians who will be able to explain why this cannot be said.

But this logic is extremely vulnerable, especially considering the fact that the Greek language, on the basis of which the grammar of Old Slavonic was largely created, has participles of the future tense. There are participles of the future tense in Sanskrit, and Latin, and in Esperanto, and in Ido, and in the language of the Avesta (beginning of the 1st millennium BC). Why can't a future action serve as a sign of an object, since potential signs are just as important as actual ones? Culture, as the unity and interaction of times, cannot do without potential signs as determinants for the phenomena of the present. The very word "culture", the Latin "cultura" is a future participle from the verb colere, "cultivate", "process", "care", "care", "cultivate", "educate".

conclusions

The ban on the participles of the future tense, perhaps, reflects the traditional culture's distrust of the future and the possible, the underestimated, in comparison with the past and present, the logical and grammatical status of the future as definitive for things. This ban existed not only in the Soviet era, but apparently even earlier. Otherwise, Vadim Shershenevich would not have proclaimed in his 1920 Imagist manifesto:

It is necessary, finally, to create the communion of the future according to the principle: whoever comes, who sees, who makes noise. "My surname, noisy for centuries" - this is an example of an agrammatical phrase of a truly poetic speech.

Shershenevich's appeal, as far as I know, went unanswered, but the need for future communions remained. Recently, the poetess Olga Sedakova admitted: " I miss the future participle or something like a gerund in Russian". And sometimes she resorts to this form, for example" this is a saucer of water that reads the location of the planets". Like Felix Krivin: " And Cirrotauma, who has never seen the light and will never see it, shines, shines..."Like Viktor Pivovarov, writing about Genrikh Sapgir:" moral man without moralism. Easily, naturally does no evil."

Not only poetry, but speech as a whole lacks participles of the future tense, especially since the modern language provides convenient grammatical forms for their formation. The same suffixes "-usch-" ("-yusch-"), "-asch-" ("-yash-"), which serve to form present participles, can also be used to form future participles - but already from perfective verbs ("to do, to be able, to see, to read...").

The question of the future participles is debatable, but this phenomenon is already a real linguistic fact of our time, and the recognition of the forms of the future participles as the norm is a matter of the near future, and the proof of this is the ever-increasing frequency of their use in all styles of language, both in participial phrases and their substantiated forms, for example: finder lost mobile phone with heart keychain, please call…(from ad); Not passing medical examination will not be allowed to work(from ad); reading from cover to cover, the entire encyclopedic dictionary will not necessarily become an erudite; Wishing have a good rest in Turkey can contact the travel agency at the address ...(from ad).

Bibliography.

Dal V.I. Explanatory dictionary of the living Great Russian language. T.Z.M., 1955, p.459

A. N. Gvozdeev. Essays on the style of the Russian language.

Access mode: http://www.zaslavsky.ru/rez/vahtangov2.htm/

http://lib.ru/RUSS_DETEKTIW/BONDAR_A/dog.txt_Piece40.01/

Access mode: http://www.veer.info/59/dar_fut_partic1.html

Melikyan V.Yu. Essays on the syntax of an indivisible sentence / V.Yu. Melikyan. - Rostov n / D., 2001.

Chernega L.V. Substantiation of participles in diachronic and synchronic aspects / Bulletin of the TSPI, humanities, spec. Issue No. 1, 2011.

Vysotskaya I.V. Syncretism in the system of parts of speech of the modern Russian language / I.V. Vysotskaya. - M., 2006.

In the area of participles, a clearly developing area can be noted. Increasingly, both in oral and written speech, there is a form of the participle of the future tense (hereinafter - PRICH OWL BUD) of the closing type. There is an empty cell in the paradigm of participial forms: the writer (NESOV PROSH) - the writer (SOV PROSH), the writer (NESOV NAST), but there is no writer (SOV BUD).
This form, however, was occasionally encountered in speech, but grammarians invariably noted that it was outside the limits of literary use. Compare, for example: “In the styles of the bookish language, especially official-clerical and scientific-business, which tend to maintain a straightforward logical parallelism between the use of participial constructions and the use of personal forms of the verb in relative sentences, there were attempts to form participles from the bases of the perfect aspect of -ing , -going (-going, -going) (...). It is known that even Gogol tried to transfer such forms from the clerical language to the soil of literary speech. Prof. D. Kudryavsky wrote in “Introduction to Linguistics” (1912, p. 95): “Currently, the category of the future participle (perfect form) is apparently being created in the Russian language; in the language it is already often found, for example:
Relentless depth
Under you the opening abyss.
However, the form of the participle of the future tense was not included in the norm of literary speech" [Vinogradov 1947: 277].
V. I. Chernyshev in 1915 assesses as “an undoubted mistake” the example was promised to be placed on the first opening vacancies [Chernyshev 1915: 11], although he notes that the form of the opening “is understandable and well expresses the thought.”
A similar view is presented in academic grammars [Grammar-60: 506] and [Grammar-70:419]: such formations are recognized as singular and non-normative.
Examples are usually given from 19th-century literature; cf .: If there is a suspicious person in their province who does not present any evidence and passports, then detain him immediately (N.V. Gogol, Dead Souls); You can start a building flying to heaven (K. Aksakov). In [Itskovich 1968: 15] an example is given from the newspapers of the 1960s: If there are volunteers willing to register, the government can reopen the case against the party.
M. Epstein's virtual article provides additional examples of future participles from quite authoritative sources of Russian literature (unfortunately, sometimes without sufficient references, so we were not able to check the quotes): “St. Philaret of Moscow: ... How pitiful is the person who has already visited he who is unable to restrain his power of light! Nicholas Roerich, "Sources": But in many places folklore is no longer preserved; except where he ended up in the stationary departments of the museum, and only by chance a musician or writer will stumble upon him, wishing to revive these parchments and scrolls. (...) Recently, the poetess Olga Sedakova admitted: “I miss the participle of the future tense or something like a gerund in Russian.” And sometimes she resorts to this form, for example, "this is a saucer of water that reads the location of the planets." Like Felix Krivin: “But Cirrotauma, who has never seen the light and will never see it, shines, shines ...”. Like Viktor Pivovarov, who writes about Genrikh Sapgir: “a moral person without moralism. Easily, naturally does no harm” [Epshtein 2003]. The same article cites the Imagist manifesto of Vadim Shershenevich, who proclaimed in 1920: “Finally, it is necessary to create the communion of the future according to the principle: coming, seeing, making noise” (V. Shershenevich. 2x2 = 5. Imagist sheets // Literary manifestos from symbolism to the present day / Compiled and prefaced by S. B. Dzhimbinova, Moscow: 21st century - Consent, 2000, p. 265).
Note that V. Shershenevich not only called for the creation of participles of the future tense, but he himself formed them in his poems. Wed: The notes of this heat with your head / Immerse yourself / Into a too warm lake of blue eyes, / And limply get entangled, like in a sedge, in eyelashes, / Who rustle about tenderness in the evening hour (V. Shershenevich, Imagist calendar).
At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, examples of real participles SOV BUD cease to be sporadic, they are often found in the mass-media language and are present in large numbers on the Internet, where there is no editorial control.
At the same time, they have the same type of temporal meanings as the form of SOV BUD itself: ‘future action or state of affairs’; ‘potential action (which the subject may perform) or state of affairs (which may arise)’; ‘property of a subject or object’. Let's give examples.
Novelties that will surely interest everyone who is involved in this (Radio Liberty, Science and Technology Today, V. Kuzmin from New York); The goal is a high-quality and interesting product that will interest clubs and production centers (mus.maker.ru); “An excerpt from Ilovaisky, which will undoubtedly interest the new chronopods” (phorum.icelord.net/read.php); Surely an article of interest to you (EM, 03.08.2005).
In this region, there are many mines that are about to close (TV, Itogi, 02/04/1996);
I wonder if there is anyone who sees the deep meaning of these statements and does not notice any contradiction (Internet);
Only in this way does the self-affirmation of the immortal human I, not lost in the swells of time and space (dobroslav.onestop.net); In short, another brand new one, not lost in the company of the "old ones" (www.art-lito.spb.su);
Hardly ever buying your equipment, Sergey (powerhonda. webforum.ru);
The search for the real Pushkin, who will reveal the secret of how to become oneself (Radio Liberty, A. Genis in a program about Dovlatov); In the end, a person who discovers the laws of visual language will be worthy of the Nobel Prize (www.photographer.ru); Moving from one crevice to another, you will soon find a knife switch that will open a second white bird for you (pc-games.hl.ru); A jet plane of the Nicaraguan Royal Air Force, flying behind and about to open fire on it (F. Leiber, Wanderer, www. bestseller.pp. ru); A new market segment that unlocks the creative power of independent third-party developers around the world (sandisk.com.ua); These issues will be discussed at a meeting of representatives of European states that opens today or tomorrow (Radio Liberty, 05/20/1992); The climb may be steep, but the view that opens before you is worth it, worth every step you take (thefamily.dp.ua. 10/03 24.09.2001); As well as the ability to use the gaming and soon to open file server with a lot of movies, music and other necessary files! (www.kirishi.ru); The concert hall that will open in the new building of the school should become the pride of the city (www.mega.kemerovo.su/ 05.06.2003); Does anyone have photos in electronic form to post on our soon-to-be-opened site? (troll.pp.ru);
Garmash is a kind, cheerful person, a true friend, who does not spare either the last shirt or a sleepless night for a friend (EM, 02/16/2003, Ks. Larina);
Maybe there is even a daredevil who will try to prove that left-hand drive Sky left the factory? (www.tuningforum.ru); As a result, each user who tries to change the locked settings will receive an eloquent message (Internet);
And, of course, it is necessary to develop a system of compensation payments to workers who lose their earnings due to forced downtime (Capital, No. 38. 1991, p. 9); It will be bad for Ostankino, which is rapidly losing viewers (Izv., 1993, 23.2001, V. Turovsky, Which channel is more state-owned);
The established and friendly North Ossetian regime means incomparably more for Moscow than the phantom Ingush Republic, which is unknown to which shore, has washed up (NG, 05.11.1992. A. Anin);
A new president has been elected (...), who will take up his duties on January 20 (Radio Liberty, 05.11.1992);
I wonder if there is a daredevil who will vote against the celebration of March 8? (www.teron.ru/index.php7s); Any deputy who votes for the promotion of Ukrainian policy towards Russia (...) (EM, 11/11/2003, Dm. Kiselev);
On November 13, the release of the 3rd album of the Leningrad group will take place. The album is called "Summer Residents" and consists of 17 new tracks, performed under the motto "Don't forget to water the tomatoes!" (news.mp3s.ru/view/news/2000/ll/10); "MIG" in advance joins the numerous wishes that will sound on such a serious occasion to the employees of the KRU (mig.com.ua); Gennady Seleznev said that the results of the forum, as well as all the proposals made, would be reported at a meeting with the president on Tuesday (news.mail.ru);
But now I look at the Internet and no longer grieve / shame, anger at the mouth that does not whisper “yes” (N. Gorbanevskaya, And again I hear “no” ...);
We looked with suspicion at the Americans and other Westerners who would not take a step without (...) (TV, 09.1992); The SPG also called on the State Duma to "pass a law making it impossible for Mr. Turner to buy a Russian channel" (www.religio.ru/arch/12Apr2001/news/); Somehow it was not thought that there would still be a person who would take the first practical step towards the death of the Galaxy movement in the form that we now have (www.uplanet.ru/archive/GSN/news/19990818/gua);
The consequence of this will be the accelerated development of hyperinflation, amounting to 1600-2000% by the end of the year (NG, 15.04.1992); the earth pitted, torn like your heart by a steel tooth of a plow and from which in due time a golden harvest will come out, which will make up all the happiness of a grain grower (rassvet2000.narod.ru/denis/den6.htm); An act of donation of over one hundred and fifty items and documents was signed, which will soon form the basis of the exposition "Kibalchichi: father and son" (www.aki-ros.ru/default.asp?).
Despite the numerous examples of participles SOV BUD in the texts, they still do not appear regularly enough to be able to judge the factors that promote and hinder their formation.
The formal formation of the participles BUD is facilitated by the presence of a non-prefixed deriving verb having the participle NAST, then PRICH BUD can be formed by adding a prefix to this PRICH NAST; cf .: doing - doing, remaking, etc .; covering - covering, overlapping, opening, closing, etc.; carrier - bringing, carrying, etc .; losing - losing, losing, etc.
The communicative need to create participles SOV BUD is narrowed in principle due to the ability of the participles PROSH and NAST to be used instead of PRICH BUD in some taxis contexts, that is, with the relative use of tenses. For their ability to break away from their absolute temporal meaning, see, for example: [Vinogradov 1947: 272-287]. Let's dwell on this in more detail.
First, consider the case of interchange of participles NESOV PROSH and NAST in the taxis context of the past tense; cf .: I turned around and saw a dog catching up / catching up with me. Both participles here mean essentially the same thing. “In those cases where the participle does not have an external temporal localization, in the construction with the supporting form of the past tense, the participle of the present tense conveys simultaneity with the action in the past” [Kozintseva 2003: 183]. PRICH PRES in this case also “transmits an action that unfolds simultaneously with the main one and against the background of which the main action develops” [Ibid: 186].
Let's return to PRICH BUD. Usually, replacements of PRICH BUD with PRICH SOV PROSH and PRICH NAST are admissible in case of non-specific-referential status of the subject. Let's look at a few examples.
You will be afraid of anyone who raises a hand against you [you can raise and even raise NESOV in a productive multiple]. Pragmatically, there can be only one sequence of situations: first someone will raise their hand, then the subject will be afraid; therefore, any of these participles will characterize the action as preceding. Moreover, this is consistent with the usual use of participles PROSH SOV in the context of future tense verbs [Ibid.: 184].
For any question that interests you (...), you will receive an answer [possibly interested]. As in the first case, statements with different forms of participles are pragmatically equalized: first someone will be interested in the question, then they will receive an answer.
The Tallinn City Hall intends to initiate a bill that will make compulsory drug treatment possible [perhaps doing]. Making possible here in any time plan (initiated a bill that makes possible), as PRICH NAST characterizes the permanent property of this bill. Therefore, it easily replaces PRICH BUD.
However, it is not clear whether he will want to provoke a large-scale crisis that will jeopardize the implementation of a key treaty [possibly putting]. The situation is the same as in the previous example.
The theatrical agency Rosemary moved out of its place and opened an office in a new location (...) in order not to be associated with the soon-closing Mondial [can be closed in the meaning of Praesens propheticum, if the situation is relevant at the time of speech, or closed if the situation belongs to the past].
In comparatively rare cases, replacement is not possible, for example, when the future is explicitly opposed to the past or present; compare:
Believe me, this is a worthy person who has done a lot and is still doing for Russia!
Perhaps the scientist of the Future, who put an end to this study, is now basking on the Artek beach under the Crimean sun.
The poor critic, who has never written a single story and will not write a single one - what is it like for him to criticize Leskov and Chekhov! And the profession obliges [an example from M. Epstein's article].
Consider one more case when replacement is impossible (an example is also from the article by M. Epstein):
Believing the fortune-teller's prediction, the king was afraid of the birth of a son who would raise a sword against him.
The chain of events here has the following order: first, the fear of the king, which exists even before the future event (the birth of a son) and relates to this future event; then the birth of a son; the event following the birth: the son will raise the sword against the king. Meanwhile, PRICH PRESENT SOV and PRICH NAST in the context of the past tense verb would have the meaning of simultaneity (see above commentary on the example with the dog on pp. 213-214).
But such examples are few.
Apparently, this pragmatic temporal "universality" of the existing participles erroneously extends to the use of new participles SOV BUD in situations where they are impossible in meaning - namely, when it comes to the past and the participles SOV PROSH should be used; compare:
My acquaintance with them began with the song 'Night Without Soft Signs', performed on the DDT studio compilation 'On the Road' (www.rockinform.com); Nadezhda Babkina's song 'Volokolamsk Bells' (www.orion-tv. ru); [Public interest] in the problems of Central Asia can be explained by the words spoken at the conference: “The security of the European Union begins with the Hindu Kush” (www.tpec.uz).
However, the non-normative lack of agreement in time is also found in other forms of participles. So, the participle NAST instead of PROSH is used in the following example: Here is an incomplete list of words that sounded (instead of sounded) yesterday at the session (MK, 11/29/1990, T. Tsyba).
New variants usually meet with the resistance of the bearers of the traditional norm. But this does not apply to future participles. Recognizing their unusualness, both linguists and ordinary native speakers of the Russian language note their necessity and convenience for expressing this meaning. See, for example, V. I. Chernyshev’s assessment: “The word usage is unusual and bold, although understandable and well expressing the thought” [Chernyshev 1915: I; cit. according to: Itskovich 1968: 15]. The real apotheosis of the participles of the future tense are the mentioned articles by M. Epstein.
Despite the calls of some and the benevolent attitude of others to the participles of the future tense, despite the emergence of sporadic formations for a long time, they have not made their way into the norm of the literary language. At the moment, we cannot judge what impact the existence of the Russian language on the Internet will have on the literary language.

Objective (associated with the adjective) signs of the participle are the categories of gender, number and case, the possibility of forming short forms in passive participles, the syntactic function of an agreed definition.

The participle is used in many Indo-European languages, Arabic, Hungarian, and also in many Eskimo languages (for example, in Sireniki).

In other languages, together with the gerund, it forms a special part of speech - English. Participle, German Partizip.

In russian language

The question of the status of participles has been and is being solved many times in Russian studies, however, linguists agree that participles are formed from a verb. The formation of participles is closely related to the category of aspect and transitivity. For example, present and past participles can be formed from imperfective verbs, and only past participles can be formed from perfective verbs (although the meaning of future participles is doer, writer- very transparent). In addition, passive participles can only be formed from transitive verbs.

The present participles are formed from the stem of the present tense. Active voice forms are formed using suffixes -usch- working) And -ash- holding). Passive forms of the present tense are formed with the help of suffixes -om- , -eat- for verbs of the first conjugation ( slave) And -them- - for verbs of the second conjugation ( persecuted).

Past participles are formed from the stem of the infinitive. Active participles are formed with the suffix -vsh- for verbs whose stem ends in a vowel ( holding). With a suffix -sh- such participles are formed from verbs with a stem into a consonant ( growing up).

Some verbs have specificity in the formation of participles, such verbs include verbs in -st , during the formation of which the original basis is truncated ( shrunken). From verbs with suffix -well- it is possible to form two forms of participles, for example, extinguished - extinguished.

Passive past participles are formed using suffixes -nn- (from verbs in -at : read, Lost), -enn- (from verbs in -it And -whose : baked), -T- (from monosyllabic verbs: crumpled).

Passive participles, as a rule, have full ( verified) and short ( verified) forms. Short forms vary by gender and number.

However, not all passive participles of the present tense have a short form. Since the passive participles of the present tense ( slave, readable) refer mainly to book speech, there are some stylistic restrictions on the formation of such forms.

Therefore, from colloquial and some neutral verbs (for example, beat, cover, feed and so on) passive participles of the present tense are often not formed.

Also, not all verbs form passive past participles in Russian.

Participles are divided into passive past and present tenses, real past and present tenses.

Passive present participles

Formed from imperfective verbs, transitive with the help of suffixes -em- and -im-:

-im- is written if the participle is formed from the verb of the II conjugation.
-eat- ; -om- is written if the participle is formed from the verb of the I conjugation.

Examples:driven, led, led

Passive past participles

Formed from perfective verbs, transitive with the help of suffixes -enn- (-enn-); -nn-; -T-; -en- (-yon-); -n-.

Examples: offended, fed, rejected.

Active present participles

Formed from verbs of an imperfect form, transitive and intransitive with the help of suffixes -usch- (-yusch-), and -ash- (-yash-).

-usch- (-yusch-) is written if the participle is formed from the verb of the I conjugation.
-ash- (-ash-) is written if the participle is formed from the verb of conjugation II.

Examples: whistling, trembling.

Real past participles

Formed from perfective verbs with the help of suffixes:

-vsh- is used in words whose stem ends in a vowel.
-sh- is used in words whose stem ends in a consonant.

Examples:staring, fading

Adjectivation

Adjectivation the transition of various parts of speech into adjectives is called, but most often it is participles that undergo adjectivation.

When adjectivized, participles lose their verbal categories and begin to designate a permanent, static, unchanging feature, thus, participles are rethought.

Grammar signs

The participle changes according to the characteristics of the adjective. It changes by numbers, by cases, by gender in the singular.

The participle can be perfective and imperfective, past and present. These signs for communion do not change.

Some scientists consider participles to be an independent part of speech, since they have a number of features that are not characteristic of the verb.

As verb forms, participles have some grammatical features. They are perfect kind and imperfect; present time and past; returnable And irrevocable. The forms of the future tense do not have participles.

Participles are real and passive.

Denoting a sign of an object, participles, like adjectives, grammatically depend on nouns that agree with them, that is, they become in the same case, number and gender as the nouns they refer to.

Participles change by cases, by numbers, by gender (in the singular).

Case, number, gender of participles is determined by the case, number, gender of the noun to which the participle refers. Some participles, like adjectives, have a full and short form., Formed by adding particles to the real participle of the past tense would, is debatable. However, similar forms are sometimes found in the works of N.V. Gogol, and in the form of a stable turnover would do honor- many other authors.

Participial

A participle with dependent words is called participle turnover. In a sentence, participial turnover and participle are a separate or non-separate agreed definition.

In Russian, the participial turnover is often separated by commas. If the participial turnover is after the word being defined, it is separated by commas on both sides. When the participial turnover is in front of the word being defined, commas are not put, except when the word being defined is expressed by a personal pronoun or the participial turnover denotes a reason. If after the participial turnover the end of the sentence, then a comma is placed only before the participial turnover.

Examples: