Grammatical transformations during translation. Grammatical changes of words by deaf children

Development of the grammatical structure of the English language

2. System of weak verbs

3. Preterite-present verbs

4. Irregular and suppletive verbs

5. Formation of analytical forms of the verb

6. Development of the syntactic structure of the English language

List of sources used

1. The evolution of strong verbs in English

The Old English verb system had:

The function of the future tense was performed by the present tense with certain adverbs of the future tense. At the end of the ancient period, a special form of the future tense and other complex (analytical) forms of time began to appear.

5) three impersonal (nominal forms): infinitive, participle I, participle II;

6) Old English verbs had 4 main forms - infinitive; units pr. vr.; plural pr. vr.; participle II.

In addition, verbs were divided into two groups (based on the formation of past tense forms and participle II) - strong with alternation of the root vowel and weak (with suffixation), i.e. with the addition of the dental suffix -d, -t to the verb stem. In addition to these two groups, there was a small group of the so-called. preterite-present verbs (with features of both strong and weak verbs) and several irregular verbs(anomalous verbs). Strong verbs are older than verbs with suffixation. In other English there were about 300 such verbs; these were words of indigenous origin, going back to the common Indo-European base language. This explains their high frequency. For example:

OE etan Lat edo rus. There is

OE sittan Lat sedeo rus. sit

OE beran Lat fero rus. take

Examples of verbs that go back to the common Germanic language:

OE drīfan dvn. trivan di. drifa

OE helpan dvn. helfan di. hjalpa

OE rīdan dvn. ritan di. riþa

By their morphological nature, strong verbs represent a system poorly adapted to quantitative growth, because Every verb must, according to the composition of its root, be included in one of the seven classes into which all these verbs were divided in ancient times. The further history of strong verbs, representing the disintegration of this system and its replacement by a system of verbs with suffixation, confirms the archaic nature of this system.

So, strong verbs formed their basic forms by alternating the vowel root, which was called ablaut (gradation). Ablaut is common in all Indo-European languages, but only in Germanic languages ​​is it used as a regular morphological device by which the basic forms of the verb are formed.

The alternation according to the ablaut had three stages. In Indo-European languages ​​(except Germanic) there are qualitative and quantitative ablaut. I-e ablaut - alternation of vowels e - o - zero vowel (I'm taking - cart, taking - collecting, took, driving - drove). In languages ​​where there is an alternation of vowels by number, it is possible to alternate between a long and a short vowel: Lat. legō – lēgi (e – e:), fodiō – fōdi (o – o:). In Germanic languages, ablaut had the following form i/e - a - vowel zero: rīdan - rād - ridon - riden. This alternation underlies the first five classes of strong verbs.

It should be noted that the first five classes differ not in the form of the ablaut, but in the type of complication, i.e. an additional vowel, or consonant, following the vowel of ablaut. The complicator vowel, when combined with the ablaut vowel, creates a long vowel or diphthong. However, in Old English verbs neither the ablauta vowel nor the complicator occurs in its pure form, because they are obscured by later phonetic changes. Verb classes and their typical alternations are distinguished based on comparisons with other languages, especially Gothic.

Although three stages of ablaut were used to form the forms of strong verbs, the main forms in OE. there were four verbs (like Gothic) - infinitive, past. unit time h., past time pl. h., participle II. The relationship between the main forms of the verb and the stages of the ablaut is as follows: the 1st stage of the ablaut corresponds to the 1st main form of the verb - the infinitive, the 2nd stage - to the 2nd main form - the past form. time units h., 3rd stage - 3rd and 4th main forms of the verb - past form. time pl. h. and participle form II. Thus, the essence of vowel alternation is that the basis of the infinitive, participle I, present. tense and imperative verbs from grades 1 to 5 have the vowel e or i (depending on the sound that follows it). Based on units part last time lies the vowel a. In the basics of plural part last tense and participle II, the vowel was absent or the alternation was zero. Based on plural part last time, in grades 4 and 5, a long front vowel of the lower rise appeared.

In addition to ablaut, in the first five classes of strong verbs, common Germanic refraction regularly occurs (for example, in the forms coren, holpen, boren) and voicing according to Werner’s law (ceosan - curon -coren).

Strong verbs of the sixth class in ancient Germanic languages, including Old English, were formed on the basis of the Indo-European quantitative ablaut o - ō. However, in Germanic languages ​​this alternation was reflected as qualitative-quantitative a – ō: faran – fōr – fōron – faren (to travel).

The seventh class was formed not by ablaut, but by reduplication, i.e. by doubling the first consonantal root, with the help of which the past forms are created. seventh grade verb tenses. However, in Old English reduplication is presented in a residual form and is difficult to trace.

Strong verbs of the seventh class do not have a main type, but are represented equally by different variants (for example: hātan – heht – hehton – hāten; rædan – reord – reordon – ræden; lætan - - læten, lēt).

During the Middle English period, many strong verbs became weak. Strong verbs retain six classes according to the method of formation, however, their main forms undergo significant phonetic and spelling changes. Seventh grade in Middle English language finally disintegrates: most verbs become weak; the remaining verbs, as a result of significant phonetic changes, lose their basic principle of formation and therefore do not form a single group.

During the Early Modern English period, significant restructuring occurs morphological structure strong verb: instead of four main forms, strong verbs retain only three. This change affected all strong verbs, but occurred differently in the following ways:

a) alignment of the vowel of the past tense according to the unit vowel. numbers

ME risen – rōs – risen - risen

MnE rise – rose – risen

b) alignment of the past tense vowel with the plural vowel. numbers

ME binden – bōnd – bounden – bounden

MnE bind – bound – bound

c) alignment of the past tense vowel with the vowel of participle II:

ME stēlen – stal – stēlen – stolen

MnE steal – stole – stolen

d) alignment by individual types:

ME spēken – spak – spēken – spēken

MnE speak – spore – spoken

The transition of strong verbs from a four-base to a three-base system can be represented as the following diagram:

ME writen – wrot – writen – writen

MnE write – wrote – written

ME finden – fand – founden – founden

MnE find – found – found

In this regard, a prerequisite is created for restructuring the principle of dividing verbs into morphological types. The former opposition of strong and weak verbs is being replaced by a contrast based on the principle of formation: verbs that form their forms according to a certain model, according to a certain standard, and verbs whose basic forms do not lend themselves to standard formation. Thus, by the beginning of the modern period (18th century), verbs began to be divided into regular Standard Verbs and irregular ones (Non-Standard Verbs). In modern English, the group of irregular verbs includes all former strong verbs and all weak verbs in which the past tense and second participle forms are formed in a non-standard way (sleep - slepte; tell - told, etc.).

Historical changes occur in all aspects of the grammatical structure of a language. In particular, throughout history there has been the emergence of new grammatical categories or individual new grammes.

An example of the emergence of a new category is the emergence of the category of definiteness/indeterminacy in Romance and Germanic languages. In ancient times, neither this category nor its “carrier” - the article - existed in these languages.

Gradually, however, the use of the demonstrative pronoun “that” expanded, and at the same time there was a process of “fading away” of its lexical meaning. From a word that specifically emphasized the particular objective reference of a noun, it turned into a grammatical indicator of definiteness, into an article capable of appearing even in the case of general objective reference. The Latin combination ilte canis also meant “that dog”; the French form le chien, which developed from it, already means “(a certain) dog”, and often “a dog like general concept`. Following the definite article, the indefinite article appears (tin chien 'one dog' → 'indefinite, some dog' and, finally, → 'every dog').

An example of replenishing an already existing grammatical category with a new gramme is the development of the future tense in a number of languages. Special forms for expressing the future appear, as a rule, at a rather late stage. They can arise as a rethinking of forms that express desirability or obligation. This is the English future tense with the auxiliary verbs will (literally, `want`) and shall (literally, `should`), partly retaining a modal coloring, Serbian, Bulgarian and Romanian future tense, which developed from combinations with the verb meaning `want`, Western Romance (such as the French `faitnerai `I will love`), going back to folk Latin constructions such as amare habeo `I have to love`, etc.

Another way is to rethink formations with the meaning of beginning, becoming (German future tense cwerden letters, “become”, Russian budu, originally meaning “become”) or with the specific meaning of completion (Russian future tense like I’ll write is in form the present tense of the perfect form) .

It is clear that with the advent of a new gramme there is a greater or lesser change in the entire grammatical category as a whole. Thus, with the emergence of the future tense, the scope of use and, accordingly, the volume of content of the present changes.

The opposite processes are the withering away of individual grammes and entire grammatical categories.

An example of the loss of individual grammes is the disappearance of the dual number in a number of languages, the disappearance in Romance languages ​​of the neuter gender present in Latin, the merger in Swedish and Danish of the masculine and feminine gender into a “common gender”, which retains the opposition to the neuter gender. Of course, the loss of the gramme is also associated with the restructuring of the entire category. The meaning of the dual number was absorbed by the plural, which expanded the scope of its use; the opposition of numbers itself became more generalized in the language.

An example of the loss of an entire category is the fate of grammatical gender in the English language: in Old English, as in other Germanic languages, there were three genders - masculine, feminine and neuter, and modern English, having lost gender differences in nouns and adjectives, retained only the opposition he in pronouns / she / it, and uses the first two forms mainly for persons, according to their gender, and the third - for animals, objects and abstract concepts, regardless of the initial distribution of the corresponding nouns between genders.

A shining example of change external forms expressions of grammatical meanings - the transition of Romance, Germanic and some other languages ​​from synthetic inflectional cases to the analytical expression of syntactic connections of a noun using prepositional combinations, as well as word order. In a number of cases and in the history of the Russian language, the old non-prepositional combinations of oblique cases were replaced by prepositional ones. Wed. other Russian Mstislav Novgorod (local settlement) from here, came to Kiev (unspecified dates) and modern. “sat in Novgorod”, “they came to Kyiv, to Kyiv.”

However, the opposite trend can also be observed in languages ​​- the replacement of analytical forms with synthetic ones, as well as the development of new synthetic forms. Thus, the Old Russian analytical perfect wrote is, wrote ecu, etc., having lost the auxiliary verb, turned into a simple form of the past tense wrote.

In some languages, combinations with postpositions have become synthetic case forms, and the former postposition has become case ending. There are also other cases of the origin of grammatical affixes from individual words that acted in a service function (cf. Latin aniare habeo and French j`aimerai). All this shows that the theories that considered evolution “from synthesis to analysis” to be universal were incorrect.

Yu.S. Maslov. Introduction to linguistics - Moscow, 1987.

In translation practice, grammatical transformations are usually combined with lexical ones. In many cases, changes in sentence construction are caused by lexical rather than grammatical reasons. Since the communicative load of a sentence most often requires careful choice of words, the solution to the translation problem depends on the successful choice of the form of the word and its grammatical category. From a practical point of view (not to mention a theoretical one), it is advisable to consider grammatical transformations separately, abstracting from the lexical content of constructions.

Grammatical transformations are the transformation of sentence structure during the translation process in accordance with the norms of the TL. Transformation can be complete or partial, depending on whether the structure of the sentence changes completely or partially. Usually, when the main members of a sentence are replaced, a complete transformation occurs, but if only minor ones are replaced, a partial transformation occurs.

It is important to consider all factors that may influence the use of grammatical transformations, namely:

1) syntactic function of the sentence;

2) its lexical content;

3) its semantic structure;

4) context (environment) of the sentence;

5) its expressive and stylistic function.

Translator's analytical work on syntactic structure a sentence consists of two stages: its analysis in comparison with the logical (nuclear) structure and taking into account the usage that forms the preferred surface construction for expressing the same thought in the target language: I have a dog - I have a dog. Those. the formal syntactic (surface) structure of sentences does not coincide with the logical (core). In a Russian sentence, the object of the predication of possession (dog) is the formal subject, the predication of possession is expressed by the verb of existence (there is), and the logical subject of the predication, the owner of the object, is represented by the formal adverbial adverbial (my).

Semantic structure sentences require transformation when the subject is English. a sentence is an abstract concept: Long habithas made it more comfortable for me to speak through the creatures of my invention - Due to long-term habit, it is more convenient for me to speak through the people I have invented.

Contextual environment a sentence may also require its grammatical transformation in translation. For example, when translating English. sentences starting with the same personal pronoun - the stylistic norm of SL allows this, but such monotony is unacceptable in RL.

Basic types of grammatical transformations include:

Syntactic assimilation (literal translation);

Sentence division;

Combining offers;

Grammatical substitutions:

a) changing the form of words,

b) replacing parts of speech

c) replacing members of a sentence.

Syntactic assimilation (literal translation) - a translation method in which the syntactic structure of the original is transformed into a similar structure of the TL. This type of “zero” transformation is used in cases where parallel syntactic structures exist in the FL and TL. Syntactic assimilation can lead to complete correspondence of the number of linguistic units and the order of their arrangement in the original and translation: I always remember his words. - I always remember his words.

As a rule, however, the use of syntactic assimilation is accompanied by some changes structural components. When translating from English into Russian, for example, articles, linking verbs, and other auxiliary elements may be omitted, as well as changes in morphological forms and some lexical units.

All these changes do not affect the basic structure of the sentence, which is conveyed using a similar Russian structure, maintaining the same set of sentence members and the sequence of their arrangement in the text. Syntactic simile is widely used in English-Russian translations. The change in sentence structure during translation is explained, as a rule, by the impossibility of ensuring translation equivalence through literal translation.

Sentence division is a method of translation in which the syntactic structure of a sentence in the original is transformed into two or more predicative structures of the TL. The transformation of division leads either to the transformation of a simple FL sentence into a complex TL sentence, or to the transformation of a simple or complex FL sentence into two or more independent sentences in TL: The annual surveys of the Labor Government were not discussed with the workers at any stage, but only with the employers. - The Labor Government's annual reviews were not discussed among workers at any stage. They were discussed only with entrepreneurs.

In the example, separating the last part of the English statement into a separate sentence in the translation allows us to clearly express the opposition present in the original.

English newspaper news reports are characterized by the desire to fit as much information as possible into one sentence. more information by complicating its structure. The style of the Russian press is more characterized by the desire for relative brevity of sentences containing information materials.

Combining offers is a method of translation in which the syntactic structure in the original is transformed by combining two simple sentences into one complex one. This transformation is the reverse of the previous one: That was a long time ago. It seemed like fifty years ago. - It was a long time ago - it seemed like fifty years had passed.

Often, the use of a union transformation is associated with the redistribution of predicative syntagmas between neighboring sentences, i.e. there is a simultaneous use of combination and division - one sentence is divided into two parts, and one of its parts is combined with another sentence.

Grammatical substitutions- this is a translation method in which a grammatical unit in the original is transformed into a TL unit with a different grammatical meaning. A grammatical unit of a foreign language at any level can be replaced: word form, part of speech, part of a sentence, sentence of a certain type.

It is clear that during translation there is always a replacement of FL forms with TL forms. Grammatical replacement as a special method of translation implies not just the use of FL forms in translation, but the refusal to use FL forms similar to the original ones, the replacement of such forms with others that differ from them in the expressed content (grammatical meaning). Thus, in English and Russian there are forms of singular and plural, and, as a rule, correlated nouns in the original and in the translation are used in the same number, with the exception of cases when the singular form in English corresponds to the plural form in Russian (money - money; ink - ink, etc.) or vice versa, the English plural corresponds to the Russian singular (struggles - struggle; outskirts - outskirts, etc.). But under certain conditions, replacing the form of a number during the translation process can be used as a means of creating occasional correspondence: We are searching for talent everywhere. - We are looking for talent everywhere.

They left the room with their heads held high. - They left the room with their heads held high.

A very common type of grammatical replacement in the translation process is replacement of part of speech. The translator resorts to it when there is no part of speech or construction with the corresponding meaning in the TL, when this is required by the compatibility norms of the TL, etc. A noun is often translated by a verb, an adjective by a noun, an adverb, etc.

When replacing parts of speech, words in the translation text are often used in different syntactic functions than their correspondence in the original text, which necessarily requires a restructuring of the entire sentence structure. In this case, the type of predicate is often replaced: a compound nominal is replaced by a verb and vice versa. The “passive-active” transformation is also accompanied by the replacement of parts of speech.

Structural transformations of this kind often require the introduction of additional words or the omission of some elements. The introduction of additional words is often due to the fact that Russian and English sentences have different structures. Most often, words that are semantically redundant, i.e., are omitted. expressing meaning that can be extracted from the text without their help.

All of the listed substitutions and transformations are complex: permutations are combined with substitutions, grammatical transformations with lexical ones, etc.

The accusation was disproved editorially. This accusation was refuted in editorial.

In translation the adverb editorially is conveyed as a noun with an adjective, since in Russian there is no equivalent to the English adverb.

Ben's illness was public knowledge. About Ben's illness everyone knew.

Combination public knowledge has no analogue in Russian. Therefore noun knowledge replaced by a verb; adjective public due to its broad semantics, can be replaced by a pronoun All. The syntax of the sentence undergoes changes: subject illness becomes an addition, the compound nominal predicate in translation is replaced by a simple verb.

It should be said that in English sentence the order of its components is often opposite to the order of the components of a Russian sentence. This is explained by the fact that in an English sentence the order of its members is determined by the rules of syntax - the subject precedes the predicate, circumstances are often located at the end of the sentence. In the Russian language, the order of words is determined not by the syntactic function of words, but by the logical structure of thought - the semantic center of the message or rheme (the “new” that is communicated in the sentence) appears at the end of the sentence, and minor members sentences, including circumstances of place, time, etc., are located at the beginning of the sentence.

Translating the following sentence requires a whole range of substitutions. This is dictated by the fact that in Russian there is no noun equivalent to English:

Not a three-time loser at marriage. He was unsuccessfully married three times.

Adjective three-timethree times a day replaced by an adverb three times, noun marriage- adjective married;loserperson, loser, defeated replaced by adverb unsuccessful.

It is difficult, almost impossible, to list and illustrate all possible substitutions and permutations and arrange them into any system. We can only note some grammatical phenomena in the English language, in the transmission of which the likelihood of structural transformations, in particular, the replacement of parts of speech, is the highest. Such grammatical phenomena include words formed using suffixes -eg(-og) And -able.

They are interesting and difficult because the suffix -er forms a noun with the meaning of doer from almost any verb, and the suffix -able forms adjectives from the stem of both a verb and a noun.

Suffix -er. Analyzing the translation of nouns formed with the help of the suffix -ег(-ог), we, naturally, do not intend to touch upon those words that have constant correspondences in the lexical system of the Russian language, such traveler traveler, painter artist, etc. We will talk about words that are translated by replacing them with other parts of speech or descriptive translation. As already noted, the suffix -er is extremely productive. Moreover, due to the established linguistic tradition, in the most ordinary situations, where Russians use a verb, the English in most cases will use a noun with the suffix -eg. For example:

Mother's eyes were dry. I knew she was not a crier“The mother’s eyes were dry. I knew that she was not in the habit of crying.

He is a heavy eater. He eats a lot.

Moreover, in V. K. Muller’s dictionary the equivalent of the noun eater is eater, and the noun crier - kpukun, herald

Countless examples could be given.

He is a poor swimmer. - He swims poorly.

She is no good as a letter-writer. - She doesn't know how to write letters.

I am a very rapid packer. - I get ready very quickly.

The meanings of such nouns are regularly conveyed in translation using Russian verbs:

Since these nouns are often formations of an occasional nature, that is, they are created in the process of speech, they are not recorded in dictionaries and sometimes attract attention with their unusualness and unexpectedness.

(Occasional - not corresponding to generally accepted usage, characterized by individual taste, determined by the specific context of use. An occasional word or phrase is used by the speaker or writer “once” - for a given case.)

The suffix -er is so productive that with its help nouns are formed that, strictly speaking, do not have the meaning of an agent, since they are formed not from verbs, but from other parts of speech. For example:

first-nighter regular visitor to theater premieres

full-time worker, full-time worker working week

The suffix is ​​-able. The suffix -able is interesting for us not in those adjectives that are borrowed from French and which have constant correspondences in Russian (reliable - reliable, laudable - commendable and etc.). Such adjectives are not difficult to translate. Problems begin when you have to look for adequate Russian adjectives, which sometimes have nothing to do with the meaning of the English verb from which the corresponding adjective is derived. For example:

disposable syringe disposable syringe

collapsible boat collapsible boat

teachablepupil smart student

payablemine profitable mine

Sometimes you have to resort to the help of subordinate qualifying clauses, i.e. descriptive translation:

actionable offense

dutiable goods

avoidable tragedy

One can hardly expect that such an occasional neoplasm as do-gooder, will be included in the dictionary. But here's an adjective put-downable (un-putdownable), also formed according to the occasional principle, has ceased to be a neologism:

a put-downable book is a boring, uninteresting book

an un-putdownable book

As can be seen from the examples, replacing a noun with a verb is often accompanied by replacing the adjective with this noun with a Russian adverb. Verbal nouns of another type are often replaced by a verb. : It is our hope, that an agreement will be reached by Friday. - We hope that an agreement will be reached by Friday.

English adjectives replaced by Russian nouns are most often formed from geographical names: Australian prosperity was followed by a slump. - Australia's economic prosperity was followed by a crisis.

Wed. also the British Government - the government of Great Britain; the American decision - the decision of the USA; the Russian Embassy - Russian Embassy, ​​etc. Often, a similar replacement is also used in relation to English adjectives in a comparative degree with the meaning of increasing or decreasing volume, size or degree: The stoppage which is in support of higher pay and shorter working hours, began on Monday. - Strike in support of demands for increase wages and the reduction of working hours began on Monday.

Replacing sentence members leads to a restructuring of its syntactic structure. This kind of restructuring also occurs in a number of cases when replacing a part of speech. For example, in the examples above, the replacement of a noun with a verb was accompanied by the replacement of a definition with an adverbial circumstance. A more significant restructuring of the syntactic structure is associated with the replacement of the main members of the sentence, especially the subject. In English-Russian translations, the use of such substitutions is largely due to the fact that in English more often than in Russian, the subject performs functions other than designating the subject of the action, for example, the object of the action (the subject is replaced by an object): Visitors are requested to leave their coats in the cloak-room. - Visitors are asked to leave their outerwear in the cloakroom.

time designations (the subject is replaced by a time adverbial): The last week saw an intensification of diplomatic activity. - Last week there was an intensification of diplomatic activity.

designations of space (the subject is replaced by the adverbial adverbial place): The little town of Clay Cross today witnessed a massive demonstration. - Today a mass demonstration took place in the small town of Clay Cross.

designation of the reason (the subject is replaced by the circumstance of the reason): The crash killed 20 people. - As a result of the disaster, 20 people died.

Replacing offer type leads to a syntactic rearrangement similar to transformations when using a division or union transformation. During the translation process a) a complex sentence can be replaced by a simple one (It was so dark that I could not see her. - I couldn’t see her in such darkness.);

The main clause can be replaced by a subordinate clause and vice versa (While I was eating my eggs, these two nuns with suitcases came in. - I was eating scrambled eggs when these two nuns came in with suitcases.);

A complex sentence can be replaced by a complex sentence and vice versa (I didn't sleep too long, because I think it was only around ten o'clock when I woke up. I felt pretty hungry as soon as I had a cigarette. - I didn't sleep long, it was about ten o'clock when I woke up. I smoked a cigarette and immediately felt how hungry I was.);

A complex sentence with a conjunction connection can be replaced by a sentence with a non-conjunction method of connection and vice versa (It was as hot as hell and the windows were all steamy. Had the decision been taken in time, this would never have happened. - If the decision had been made in a timely manner, this would never have happened .).

Translation from one language to another is an endless process of transformations - lexical, grammatical and stylistic, which inevitably entail structural transformations. In most cases, when translated, a Russian sentence does not coincide with the English one in structure. It has a different word order, a different order of parts of the sentence, etc. The reason for this is the difference in the structure of languages.

All of the listed types of transformations are rarely found in their pure form, in isolation. As a rule, transformations are complex.

Considering that translation allows for some options, all structural changes that sentences undergo during translation are dictated not by the personal taste of the translator, but by necessity, and this necessity, in turn, is determined by the grammatical structure of the TL, its norms of compatibility and word usage.

In translation practice, errors due to misunderstanding of sentence structure are rare. I'm talking about qualified translators who are fluent in foreign language. Problems arise when an additional function, semantic or expressive-stylistic, is superimposed on the syntactic structure.

The most stable part of the language - grammar - is also, of course, subject to change. And these changes can be of different nature. They may concern the entire grammatical system as a whole, as, for example, in Romance languages, where the former Latin system of inflectional morphology (declension, conjugation) gave way to analytical forms of expression through function words and word order, or they may reflect on particular issues and only certain grammatical categories and forms, as, for example, it was during the XIV-XVII centuries. in the history of the Russian language, when the system of verbal inflection was restructured and instead of the four Slavic past tenses (imperfect, perfect, aorist and plusquaperfect), one past tense was obtained (from the former perfect), where the auxiliary verb disappeared, and the former linking part became the old short participle of the past tense with suffix -l- – rethought as a past tense verb form, hence the unusual agreement of these forms in modern Russian (rattled, thundered, thundered, thundered) in gender and number, but not in person, which is characteristic of the Indo-European verb.

The grammatical structure, as a rule, in any language is very stable and is subject to changes under the influence of foreign languages ​​only in very rare cases. Such cases are possible here.

Firstly, a grammatical category that is unusual for a given language is transferred from one language to another, for example, the aspectual differences of a verb from the Russian language to the Komi language, but this phenomenon is formalized grammatical means borrowing language; interesting case observed in the Ossetian language, where in declension the material of affixes remains original - Iranian, and the paradigmatic model - multi-case, the development of cases of locative (local) meaning and the general nature of agglutination - follows the patterns of Caucasian languages ​​1.

1 See: Abaev V.I. About the linguistic substrate // Reports and communications of the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences. IX, 1956. P. 68.

Secondly, the word-formation model is transferred from one language to another, which is often called “borrowing affixes”, for example suffixes -ism-, -ist- into Russian in words: Leninism, Leninist, otzovism, otzovist etc. The point here is not that we borrowed suffixes -ism-, -ist-, but the fact that models of words in -ism- And -ist- with certain grammatical meanings, regardless of the meaning of the root.

Thirdly, much less often, almost as an exception, one can find in languages ​​the borrowing of inflectional forms, that is, those cases when the expression of a relationship (relational meaning) is adopted from another language; as a rule, this does not happen, since each language expresses relations according to the internal laws of its grammar. This is, for example, the assimilation by one of the Aleut dialects of Russian verbal inflections to express certain relational meanings 1 .

1 See: G. A. Menovshchikov. On the question of the permeability of the grammatical structure of the language // Questions of linguistics, 1964. No. 5.

In the process of grammatical development of a language, new grammatical categories, for example, gerunds in the Russian language, derived from participles that ceased to agree with their modifiers and “froze” in any one, inconsistent form and thereby changed their grammatical appearance. Thus, within groups of related languages ​​in the process of their historical development Significant differences may arise due to the loss of certain previous categories and the emergence of new ones. This can be observed even among closely related languages.

Thus, the fate of the ancient Slavic declensions and the system of verb forms turned out to be different in modern Slavic languages. For example, in Russian there are six cases, but there is no special vocative form, whereas in Bulgarian language the declension of names by case has been completely lost, but the vocative form has been preserved (yunak - young, ratay - ratay and so on.).

In those languages ​​where the case paradigm exists, there are significant differences due to the action of different internal laws of development of each language.

The following differences existed between the Indo-European languages ​​in the field of the case paradigm (not counting differences in the vocative form, which is not a case in the grammatical sense). There were seven cases in Sanskrit, six in Old Church Slavonic, five in Latin, and four in Greek.

In the closely related German and English languages, as a result of their independent development, completely different fates of declension arose: in German, which received some features of analyticism and shifted all the “heaviness” of declension to the article, four cases still remained, and in English, where the article is not inflected , the declension of nouns disappeared altogether, leaving only the possibility of forming from names denoting living beings the “archaic form” “Old English genetive” (“Old English genitive”) with "s : man's hand –"man's hand" horse's head –“horse head”, instead of the more usual: the hand of the man, the head of the horse.

Even greater differences exist in grammar between unrelated languages. If in Arabic There are only three cases, but in Finno-Ugric there are more than a dozen of them 1. There is fierce debate among linguists regarding the number of cases in the languages ​​of Dagestan, and the number of established cases varies (in individual languages) from three to fifty-two. This is related to the question of function words - postpositions, which are very similar in their phonetic appearance and grammatical design to case inflections. The issue of distinguishing between such function words and affixes is very important for the Turkic, Finno-Ugric and Dagestan languages, without which the issue of the number of cases cannot be resolved 2 . Regardless of one or another solution to this issue, it is absolutely clear that different languages extremely unique in relation to grammatical structure and paradigms; this is a direct consequence of the internal laws of each language and each group of related languages.

1 For example, in Estonian there are 15: nominative, partitive, accusative, genitive, illative, innessive, elative, allative, adessive, ablative, abessive, comitative, terminator, translative and essive.

2 See: B o k a r e v E. A. On the category of case // Questions of linguistics, 1954. No. 1; and also: Kurilovich E. The problem of classifying cases // Essays on linguistics. M., 1962. P. 175 et seq.

In grammatical changes, a special place is occupied by “changes by analogy” 1, when morphemes that have diverged due to phonetic changes in their sound design are “aligned”, “unified” into one general form “by analogy”, thus, in the history of the Russian language, the former relationship rouka – rows"6 replaced by hand - hand by analogy with braid - braid, price - price, hole - hole etc., the transition of verbs from one class to another is also based on this, for example, in verbs hiccup, gargle, splash instead of forms I churn, rinse, splash forms began to appear: I hiccup(in literary language - the only possible), rinse, spray(coexisting along with the previously only possible I rinse, splash), here the analogy is based on productive verbs of class I type read - read, throw - throw and so on.; these phenomena are even more widespread in children's speech (crying, jumping instead of I'm crying, I'm jumping) in common parlance (want, want, wants instead of want, wants) and so on.

1 For analogy, see above – Ch. IV, § 48.

A similar phenomenon is observed in the history of the German verb, where the old archaic and unproductive forms of “strong verbs” in common parlance, by analogy with “weak verbs”, are conjugated without internal inflection; for example, in past tense forms: verlieren –"lose" - verlierte but not verlor, springen –"jump" - springte, but not sprang, trinken –"drink" - drinkte, but not trunk etc. by analogy with lieben -"be in love" - ich liebte, haben –"have" - ich hatte(from habte) and etc.

This pattern of the grammatical structure of languages ​​in the era of Schleicher, when they thought that language changes occur according to the “laws of nature”, was considered a “false analogy”, a violation of laws and rules, but in the 70s. XIX century Young grammarians have shown that the effect of analogy in language is not only a natural phenomenon, but also one that establishes laws, regulates and brings into a more orderly form those phenomena in the field of grammatical paradigms that were violated by the action of phonetic laws 1 .

1 See: Paul G. Principles of the history of language / Russian lane. M., 1960. Ch. V (Analogy), as well as: De Saussure F. Course of general linguistics / Russian lane. M., 1933. P. 155. (New edition: D e Saussure F. Works on linguistics. M., 1977.)

In the literary language of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. the main changes took place in terms of activating some models and limiting others, in terms of eliminating one of the types of identical structures, in terms of consolidating stylistic functions behind a number of structures.

1. In the field of simple sentences, some changes have occurred in the predicate system of Shvedov N.Yu. Changes in the simple proposal system. - Essays on the historical grammar of Russian literary language XIX century M., 1964..

In the first half of the 19th century. The use of many forms of copular predicates ceases, and in the language of the second half of the 19th century. only one form is used: the copula is and the noun is in the nominative case. Constructions of this type are assigned to book texts with logical speech. From I.S. Turgenev: Self-love, as an active striving for perfection, is the source of everything great.

Constructions with the pronoun this, a combination of the pronoun this with the linking verb was, and the combination this as a linking word are widespread. From Bunin: And to visit the Donets... - it was my long-time dream.

The use of predicates with the form of the copula is decreasing, already in the second half of the 19th century. characteristic only of scientific literature and business speech, although such constructions continue to be used in scientific writings throughout the 19th century.

Infinitive predicates with the copula “is” are falling out of use, so the use of incoherent constructions is becoming the norm for the modern language.

Predicates with a copular verb mean (in V.G. Korolenko: To say too much sometimes means not saying anything) and with a combination it means (in V.I. Pisarev: ... Not to see anything higher and more charming in life) are widely used mutual love... - this means having no idea about real life).

At the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century, in the incoherent predicate there was an activation of the instrumental predicative, displacing the nominative predicate, but in the second half of the 19th century. the use of nouns in the instrumental case as part of the predicate is limited. The main thing for modern language is the differentiation of the meanings of these constructions: the instrumental case is used to denote the temporary presence of someone in a certain state or position. From M. Gorky: I am again a boatman on a ship. The nominative case is used to indicate a constant attribute. At A.T. Tvardovsky: But even though there is earth, there is earth everywhere, but somehow the poplars and rotten straw smell differently to strangers.

Short forms of adjectives are limited in their use as predicates when full forms are activated. Short adjectives still predominate in poetic speech. From E. Yevtushenko: It is foggy, like the Foggy Patriarch’s Ponds on an autumn night; this boy is old. He became like that early on.

Impersonal sentences with the nominative case of the noun as the main member are activated (It’s not good for everyone - he says. - Not just for gentlemen - I.A. Bunin), infinitive sentences with various particles (At least to run away, If only to catch, etc.).

2. Changes have occurred in the complex sentence system of I.I. Kovtunova. Changes in the complex sentence system. - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the 19th century. M, 1964..

Participial phrases that coincide in meaning with subordinate clauses are lost, being replaced by subordinate clauses.

The use of participle phrases with the participle being is decreasing. From M.Yu. Lermontov: Being an egoist to the highest degree, he was always known as a kind fellow. The nominal part, while maintaining this turnover, is expressed in the form of the instrumental case.

In the second half of the 19th century. Participial phrases with comparative meaning are distributed.

Participial phrases with short forms of participles related to the predicate disappear from various styles of literary language and the language of fiction, remaining the property of poetic speech. From I.A. Bunin: And, exhausted by the heat, I stand on the way - and drink the life-giving moisture of the forest winds.

In the language of fiction, the use of isolated adjectives, full and short, is intensified, having the meaning of a qualitative additional characteristic of someone or something.

Separate groups with adjectives in short form remain the property of poetic speech.

3. Changes have occurred in the complex sentence system Pospelov N.S. The main directions in the development of structural types of complex sentences in the Russian literary language of the 19th century, as well as: Development of sentences of a “monomial” structure. - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the 19th century. M..1964..

In the second half of the 19th century, a number of synthetic constructions narrowed their scope of use, other constructions completely disappeared from the language, the shades of meaning of many complex sentences became clearer, the desire for the closest unification of the parts of each construction appeared, the subordinating connection was strengthened and the role of subordinating conjunctions as means of expression was strengthened one relationship or another.

In attributive clauses, the relative pronoun occupies a place characteristic of modern word arrangement, i.e. appears at the beginning of a subordinate clause if it is the subject or member of a sentence depending on a verb, but if the pronoun depends on a noun, then it appears after the main word of the phrase in which it is included.

Since the 19th century, constructions in correlative pronouns such as - which

And even if you were invented by me, like this,

Which one did I want to meet?

I don't want to meet you in winter

So that my invention does not fly apart.

Since the second half of the 19th century, the use of attributives has become stronger subordinate clauses with the relative pronoun as and the demonstrative pronoun the same in the main clause.

Consequently, by the end of the 19th century, conjunctions began to be widely used if, when, provided, in case, because, then that, in view of the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, in connection with the fact that, displacing unions if, if, if, if only, if, as much as possible.

4. Changes are taking place in the system of phrases: certain types of phrases leave the language (get bored with life), others appear in it (children from the street, a bottle of wine, a ride on horseback, a so-so person, free from work), many constructions are replaced by new ones (teacher in eloquence - teacher of eloquence, lesson from geography - lesson in geography, etc.) Beloshapkova V.A., Zolotova G.A., Prokopovich N.N., Filippova V.M. changes in the system of phrases - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the 19th century. M., 1964. .

The use of phrases with prepositions after, during, during, in continuation is intensified.

The free use of phrases consisting of nouns and adjectives denoting the belonging of an object to something is decreasing (in the Dictionary of 1847, for example, the following combinations are indicated as normative: umbrella handle, frying pan handle, dressing belt, bowl handle), replaced by combinations of two nouns.

A number of prepositional combinations of nouns are replaced by prepositional combinations (the troubles of leaving - the troubles of leaving, friends of the lyceum - friends from the lyceum). On the other hand, some prepositional phrases are replaced by non-prepositional ones (an order from the Senate is an order of the Senate, an answer from a friend is a friend’s answer).

5. There have been no significant changes in the field of morphology. It is possible to state only isolated cases of the disappearance of certain forms (at home, teachers, tooth, pud - genitive plural, vidnet, pisomy, etc.).

There have been a number of changes in the verb system Avilova I.S., Ermakova O.P., Cherkasova E.T., Shapiro A.B. Verb, adverb, prepositions and conjunctions. - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the 19th century. M., 1964.. In the second half of the 19th century. The process of ordering species correlation series continues. For example, in the series to crimson and stain - to stain, to nullify and destroy - to destroy, etc. One of the imperfective verbs ceases to be used, being used only in poetic speech and stylized prose works.

Many prefixed verbs of the imperfect form have fallen out of use: sin, hasten, drown, giving way to unprefixed verbs (sin, hasten, drown).

A number of verbs with suffixes -a- forced out of use verbs with suffixes -iva-, -yva- (entrust - entrust, evaporate - evaporate, stick - stick), on the other hand, many verbs with the suffix -a- were replaced by verbs with the suffix - willow-, -yva- (catch - catch, heat - heat, etc.).

The number of prefixed verbs is being replenished: with the prefixes -from-, -you-, times-, under-.

The number of verbs formed from nouns with the suffixes -nich-, -ich- (clown around, ape, be secretive, be familiar), -ova- (secretary, teach), -irova- (balance, control, pose, propagandize) is increasing.

The use of multiple verbs (argue - argue, dined - dined), past tense forms of verbs with the suffix -well- (penetrated, faded, resurrected, escaped) is reduced.

In the second half of the 19th century, the category of adverbs was replenished due to the formation of adjectives from names with the suffix -ichesk- (melodically, automatically, mathematically), with the prefix -po and the suffixes -om, -em-, o-, -e- (local , relatable, truly, materially, impressively).

There have been few changes in the system of nouns Zemskaya E.A., Plotnikova-Robinson V.A., Khokhlacheva V.N. and Shapiro A.B. Changes in word formation and forms of nouns and adjectives. - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the 19th century. M., 1964. The process of eliminating doublet is completed, i.e. the gender of nouns that are still used in one or another form is determined: vegetable and vegetable, cloud and cloud, shutter and shutter. The noun cloud has only a neuter form; the form of clouds is possible only in poetic speech:

The bow began to sing.

And a stuffy cloud rose above us.

And we dreamed of nightingales.

A number of nouns begin to be used both in the singular and in the plural: power-power, sphere-sphere.

The wind swirled the snow.

The crescent moon has set;

And slowly, walking among the drunks,

Always without companions, alone,

Breathing spirits and mists,

She sits by the window.

(A.A.Blok)

The use of -y forms in the genitive case of nouns is reduced male, fluctuation in the use of forms of nouns in the prepositional case, the use of nominative case forms of the plural of masculine nouns in -ya (sheets- leaves)

At the end of the 19th century, a spelling reform was being prepared, partially implemented in 1918.

Thus, in the literary language of the post-Pushkin era, the most significant changes occurred in the vocabulary. There were no major changes in the grammatical structure of the literary language of this period: further development of grammatical variant, doublet forms assigned certain stylistic functions to such forms.

The 19th century is the century of the heyday of Russian literature. In the 30-40s, the language of fiction influences the development journalistic styles. In the 60s and 70s, journalistic styles, influenced by scientific prose, influenced the language of fiction. The role of the writer is increasing in the process of further development of the language of fiction, its interaction with the literary language and living folk speech. Lermontov, Gogol and other writers of the 19th and 20th centuries develop Pushkin’s traditions in selection linguistic means from literary language and living speech.

When analyzing the language and style of the works of Lermontov, Gogol and other writers of this period, one should distinguish between their role in the history of the Russian literary language and in the history of the language of fiction.

Since the middle of the 19th century, the styles of the modern Russian literary language have been formed. Belinsky, Herzen, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov played an important role in the formation of the journalistic style. The formation of scientific prose styles is associated with the names of Lobachevsky, Timiryazev, Sechenov, Mendeleev.

At the end of the 19th century, the first Marxist circles appeared in Russia, and the terminology of Marxist teaching about the laws of development of economic and socio-political life was formed. The works of V.I. Lenin played an important role in the formation of economic, socio-political, and philosophical terminology, in the creation of modern scientific, popular science, and journalistic styles.