Grammatical transformations in translation. Grammar changes of words by deaf children

The development of the grammatical structure of the English language

2. System of weak verbs

3. Preterite-present verbs

4. Irregular and suppletive verbs

5. The formation of analytical forms of the verb

6. Development of the syntactic structure of the English language

List of sources used

1. 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 non-personal (nominal forms): infinitive, participle I, participle II;

6) Old English verbs had 4 basic forms - the infinitive; unit ave. time; plural ave. time; communion II.

In addition, verbs were divided into two groups (on the basis of the formation of past tense and participle II forms) - strong with alternating 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 so-called. preterite-present verbs (with features of both strong and weak verbs) and several irregular verbs(anomalous verbs). Strong verbs are older than suffixed verbs. In OE there were about 300 such verbs, they were words of indigenous origin, dating back to the common Indo-European language-base. 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 dating back to the common Germanic language:

OE drīfan int. trivan di. drifta

OE helpan ext. helfan di. hjalpa

OE rīdan dn. ritan di. riþa

By their morphological nature, strong verbs are 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 antiquity. The further history of strong verbs, which is the disintegration of this system and its replacement by a system of suffixed verbs, confirms the archaic character of this system.

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

The ablaut alternation had three steps. In Indo-European languages ​​(except Germanic) there is a qualitative and quantitative ablaut. I-e ablaut - alternation of vowels e - o - zero of the vowel (I take - cart, take - collection, took, drive - drove). In languages ​​where there is an alternation of vowels in number, an alternation of a long and a short vowel is possible: Lat. legō - lēgi (e - e:), fodiō - fōdi (o - o:). In the Germanic languages, ablaut had the following form i / e - a - zero of the vowel: 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 complicator, i.e. an additional vowel, or a consonant following an ablaut vowel. The complicator vowel, when combined with the ablaut vowel, creates a long vowel or diphthong. However, in Old English verbs, neither the ablaut 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 on the basis of comparison with other languages, especially with Gothic.

Although three degrees of ablaut were used to form forms of strong verbs, the basic forms of OE. there were four verbs (like Gothic) - infinitive, past. unit time h., last time pl. h., participle II. The ratio of the main forms of the verb and the steps of ablaut is as follows: the 1st step of the ablaut corresponds to the 1st basic form of the verb - the infinitive, the 2nd step - to the 2nd basic form - the past form. time unit hours, 3rd stage - the 3rd and 4th main forms of the verb - the form of past. time pl. h. and participle form II. Thus, the essence of vowel alternation is that at the heart of the infinitive, participle I, present. tense and imperative mood, verbs from classes 1 to 5 have the vowel e or i (depending on the sound following it). At the heart of the unit h past. tense is the vowel a. In the basics pl. h past. tense and participle II, the vowel was absent or the alternation was equal to zero. At the base of many h past. time in the 4th and 5th grades, a long front vowel of the lower rise appeared.

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

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

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

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

During the Middle English period, many strong verbs become 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 breaks up: most of the verbs turn into weak ones, 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, there was a significant restructuring morphological structure strong verb: instead of the four basic forms, strong verbs retain only three. This change affected all strong verbs, but it happened differently in the following ways:

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

ME risen - rōs - risen - risen

MnE rise-rose-risen

b) alignment of the vowels of the past tense according to the vowel plural. numbers

ME binden-bōnd-bounden-bounden

MnE bind-bound-bound

c) alignment of past tense vowels according to the vowel of participle II:

ME stēlen - stal - stēlen - stolen

MnE steal - stole - stolen

d) individual type alignment:

ME spēken – spak – spēken – spēken

MnE speak-spore-spoken

The transition of strong verbs from the four-basic to the tribasic system can be represented as the following scheme:

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 an opposition based on the principle of form formation: verbs that form their forms according to a certain model, according to a certain standard, and verbs whose main forms are not amenable to standard form formation. Thus, by the beginning of the modern period (18th century), verbs began to be divided into regular Standard Verbs) and irregular (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 the language. In particular, throughout history, the emergence of new grammatical categories or individual new grammes has been observed.

An example of the emergence of a new category is the emergence of the category of certainty/indefiniteness in the Romance and Germanic languages. In ancient times, neither this category, nor its "carrier" - the article in these languages ​​yet existed.

Gradually, however, the use of the demonstrative pronoun `that` expanded, and at the same time there was a process of "extinction" of its lexical meaning. From the word, which specifically emphasized the particular subject relatedness of the noun, it turned into a grammatical indicator of definiteness, into an article that could already act in the case of a general subject relatedness. The Latin combination ilte canis also meant `that dog`, the French form le chien developed from it already means `(certain) dog`, and often `dog as general concept`. Following the definite article, the indefinite article appears (tin chien `one dog` → `indefinite, some dog` and, finally, → `any 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 expressed desirability or obligation. Such is the English future tense with the auxiliary verbs will (literally, `want`) and shall (literally, `must`), partly preserving the modal coloring, the Serbian, Bulgarian and Romanian future tense, which developed from combinations with the verb meaning `want`, Western Romansh (like French `faitnerai `I will love`), going back to folk-Latin constructions like amare habeo `I have to love`, etc.

Another way is to rethink formations with the meaning of beginning, becoming (the German future tense is cwerden letters, `to become`, Russian will be, originally meaning `become`) or with the specific meaning of completeness (the Russian future tense of the type I will 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. So, with the emergence of the future tense, the scope of use and, accordingly, the volume of the 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 can be the disappearance of the dual number in a number of languages, the disappearance of the neuter gender in Latin, the merging of the masculine and feminine genders in Swedish and Danish into a “common gender”, which retains 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 very opposition of numbers became more generalized in the language.

An example of the loss of an entire category is the fate of the grammatical gender in English: 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 prime 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 the syntactic connections of a noun using prepositional combinations, as well as word order. In a number of cases in the history of the Russian language, the old unprepositional combinations of oblique cases were replaced by prepositional ones. Wed other Russian Mstislav Novgorod (local settlement) came to Kiev (indefinite date) and modern. “sitting in Novgorod”, “they came to Kyiv, to Kyiv”.

However, the opposite trend can also be traced in languages ​​- the replacement of analytic forms by synthetic ones, as well as the development of new synthetic forms. Thus, the Old Russian analytic perfect wrote esm, 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 other known cases of the origin of grammatical affixes from individual words that acted as an auxiliary function (cf. lat. aniare habeo and fr. j`aimerai). All this shows that the theories that considered evolution “from synthesis to analysis” to be universal were wrong.

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

In the practice of translation, grammatical transformations are usually combined with lexical ones. In many cases, a change in the construction of a sentence is caused by lexical, rather than grammatical reasons. Since the communicative load of a sentence most often requires a careful choice of the word, the solution of the translation task depends on the successful choice of the form of the word, 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 - the transformation of the sentence structure in the process of translation in accordance with the norms of the TL. Transformation can be complete or partial, depending on whether the structure of the sentence is completely or partially changed. Usually, when the main members of the sentence are replaced, complete T. occurs, but if only minor ones are replaced, partial.

It is important to take into account all the factors that may affect the application of grammatical transformations, namely:

1) the syntactic function of the sentence;

2) its lexical content;

3) its semantic structure;

4) the context (environment) of the proposal;

5) its expressive-stylistic function.

Analytical work of the translator on syntactic structure the 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 (nuclear) one. In the Russian sentence, the object of predication of possession (a dog) is a formal subject, the predication of possession is expressed by the verb of existence (is), and the logical subject of predication, the owner of the object, is represented by a formal circumstance (for me).

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

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

The main types of grammatical transformations include:

Syntactic assimilation (literal translation);

Division of the proposal;

Consolidation of proposals;

Grammar substitutions:

a) changing the form of words,

b) substitution of parts of speech

c) replacement of members of the proposal.

Syntactic assimilation (literal translation) - a method of translation in which the syntactic structure of the original is converted into a similar structure of the TL. This type of "zero" transformation is used in cases where there are parallel syntactic structures in FL and TL. Syntactic assimilation can lead to a complete correspondence between the number of language units and the order of their location in the original and translation: I always remember his words. - I always remember his words.

As a rule, however, the use of syntactic similitude is accompanied by some changes. structural components. When translating from English into Russian, for example, articles, linking verbs, and other service 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 transmitted using a similar Russian structure, keeping the same set of sentence members and the sequence of their location in the text. Syntactic similitude is widely used in English-Russian translations. A change in the structure of a sentence during translation is usually explained by the impossibility of ensuring the equivalence of a translation by means of a literal translation.

Division of the proposal is a method of translation in which the syntactic structure of a sentence in the original is converted into two or more predicative structures of the TL. Articulation transformation 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 annual reviews of the Labor government were not discussed among the workers at any stage. They were discussed only with entrepreneurs.

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

For English newspaper and information messages, the desire to fit into the framework of one sentence as much as possible is characteristic. more information by complicating its structure. The style of the Russian press is more characterized by the desire for a relative brevity of sentences containing informational materials.

Combining offers is a translation method 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 that fifty years had passed.

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

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

It is clear that when translating, the forms of the FL are always replaced by the forms of the TL. Grammar substitution as a special way of translation implies not just the use of FL forms in translation, but the rejection of the use of FL forms similar to the original ones, the replacement of such forms with others that differ from them in expressed content (grammatical meaning). So, in English and Russian there are forms of the singular and plural, and, as a rule, the related nouns in the original and in the translation are used in the same number, except 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, the replacement of the form of a number in the translation process can be used as a means of creating an 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 substitution in the translation process is part of speech substitution. The translator resorts to it when there is no part of speech or construction with the corresponding meaning in the TL, when it is required by the norms of TL compatibility, 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 translated text are often used in syntactic functions other than their counterparts in the original text, which certainly requires a restructuring of the entire sentence structure. In this case, the type of the predicate is often replaced: the compound nominal is replaced by the 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 a different structure. Most often, words that are semantically redundant are subject to omission, i.e. expressing the meaning that can be extracted from the text without their help.

All of the above 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.

Translated adverb editorially is passed as a noun with an adjective, because in Russian there is no equivalent to the English dialect.

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

Combination public knowledge has no analogue in Russian. Therefore the noun knowledge replaced by a verb; adjective public due to its broad semantics, it can be replaced by the pronoun all. The syntax of the sentence undergoes changes: the subject disease becomes an addition, the compound nominal predicate in the 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 the Russian sentence. This is due to 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 Russian, the word order is determined not by the syntactic function of words, but by the logical structure of thought - the semantic center of the message or rheme (that “new” that is reported in the sentence) is at the end of the sentence, and minor members sentences, including circumstances of place, time, etc., are located at the beginning of the sentence.

The translation of 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 is a three-time loser at marriage. He was unsuccessfully married three times.

Adjective three-timethree times a day is replaced by the adverb three times, noun marriage- adjective married;loserloser, loser replaced by adverb unsuccessfully.

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

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

Suffix -er. Analyzing the translation of nouns formed with the suffix -er(-og), we, of course, do not intend to touch upon those words that have constant correspondences in the lexical system of the Russian language, such as traveller traveler, painter artist, and others. 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 the Russians use the verb, the English in most cases will use the 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 she wasn't in the habit of crying.

He is a heavy eater. He eats a lot.

At the same time, in the dictionary of V.K. Muller, the equivalent of the noun eater is eater, and the noun crier - kpukun, herald.

Such examples could be cited innumerable.

He is a poor swimmer. - He doesn't swim well.

She is no good as a letter writer. She can't write letters.

I am a very rapid packer. - I fit very quickly.

The meanings of such nouns are regularly translated using Russian verbs:

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

(Occasional - not corresponding to the generally accepted use, characterized by individual taste, due to the specific context of use. An occasional word or phrase is used by the speaker or writer "once" - for this case.)

The suffix -eg is so productive that nouns are formed with its help, which, 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-timer working week

Suffix -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.). These adjectives are easy to translate. Problems begin when one has 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 relative attributive sentences, i.e., to a descriptive translation:

actionable offense

dutiable goods

avoidable tragedy

It can hardly be expected 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 already ceased to be a neologism:

a put-downable book

an un-putdownable book

As can be seen from the examples, the replacement of a noun by a verb is often accompanied by the replacement of an adjective with this noun by the Russian dialect. The verb is often replaced by verbal nouns of a different type : 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. - The economic prosperity of Australia was followed by a crisis.

Wed also the British Government - the government of Great Britain; the American decision - US decision; the Russian Embassy - the embassy of Russia, etc. Often, a similar replacement is also used for 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 a raise wages and the shortening of the working day began on Monday.

Replacement of members of the proposal leads to a restructuring of its syntactic structure. This kind of restructuring also occurs in a number of cases when a part of speech is replaced. For example, in the examples above, the replacement of the noun by the verb was accompanied by the replacement of the definition by the 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 designations of 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 outerwear in the cloakroom.

designations of time (the subject is replaced by the adverb of time): 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 circumstance of the place): The little town of Clay Cross today witnessed a massive demonstration. - There was a massive demonstration in the small town of Clay Cross today.

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

Offer type replacement results in a syntactic rearrangement similar to transformations when using an articulation or union transformation. In the process of translation 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 fried eggs when these two nuns came in with suitcases.);

A complex sentence can be replaced by a complex one 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 ten o'clock when I woke up. I smoked a cigarette and immediately felt how hungry I was.);

A complex sentence with an allied link can be replaced by a sentence with an allied link 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 taken in time, 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, the Russian sentence does not match the English sentence in structure. It has a different word order, a different sequence of parts of a sentence, and so on. The reason for this is the difference in the structure of languages.

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

Considering that translation allows for some variants, all the structural changes that sentences undergo during translation are by no means dictated 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, mistakes are rare due to a misunderstanding of the sentence structure. This is me 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 different. They can also concern the entire grammatical system as a whole, as, for example, in the Romance languages, where the former Latin system of inflectional morphology (declension, conjugation) gave way to analytical forms of expression through functional words and word order, or they can be reflected in particular questions 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 rebuilt and instead of four Slavic past tenses (imperfect, perfect, aorist and pluperfect), one past tense (from the former perfect) was obtained, where the auxiliary verb was dropped, and the former connective part was the old short participle of the past tense with suffix -l- rethought as a form of the past tense verb, whence in modern Russian the unusual agreement of these forms (rattle, rumble, rumble, rumble) in gender and number, but not in person, which is characteristic of the Indo-European verb.

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

Firstly, a grammatical category unusual for a given language is transferred from one language to another, for example, aspect differences of a verb from the Russian language "to the Komi language, but this phenomenon takes shape by grammatical means borrowed language; interesting case observed in the Ossetian language, where in declension the material of affixes remains original - Iranian, and the paradigmatic model - multi-case, 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. On the language substrate // Reports and messages of the Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. 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 in the fact that word models on -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, i.e., those cases when the expression of a relation (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. Such, for example, is the assimilation by one of the Aleutian dialects of Russian verbal inflections to express certain relational meanings 1 .

1 See: Menovshchikov G. A. On the issue 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, which originated from participles that ceased to agree with their defined and “frozen” in any one, inconsistent form and thereby changed their grammatical appearance. Thus, within the groups of related languages ​​in the process of their historical development there may be significant discrepancies associated with the loss of certain former categories and the emergence of new ones. This can be observed even among closely related languages.

So, the fate of the Old 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, while in Bulgarian declension of names by cases was generally lost, but the vocative form was preserved (yunak - young man, ratai - ratai etc.).

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

Between the Indo-European languages ​​in the field of the case paradigm, there were the following differences (not counting the 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, a completely different fate of declension arose: in German, which received some features of analyticism and shifted all the "severity" of declension to the article, four cases still remained, and in English, where the article does not decline , the declension of nouns disappeared altogether, only the possibility of forming from the names denoting living beings, the "archaic form" "Old English genetive" ("Old English genitive") with "s : man "s hand -"human hand" horse's head -"head of a horse", 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, then in Finno-Ugric there are more than a dozen of them 1 . There are fierce disputes among linguists about the number of cases in the languages ​​of Dagestan, and the number of cases established varies (for individual languages) from three to fifty-two. This is connected with 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 functional 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 way or another of the solutions to this issue, it is quite clear that different languages extremely peculiar in relation to the grammatical structure and paradigms; it is a direct consequence of the operation 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, inessive, elative, allative, adessive, ablative, abssive, comitative, terminative, translative and essive.

2 See: Bokarev E. A. On the category of case // Questions of Linguistics, 1954. No. 1; and also: K uril o v i ch E. The problem of classification of cases // Essays on Linguistics. M., 1962. S. 175 ff.

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”, so, in the history of the Russian language, the former ratio rouca - routs "6 changed to 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, rinse, splash instead of forms Ichu, rinse, splash forms began to appear: hiccups(in the literary language - the only possible), rinse, sprinkle(coexisting alongside the previously only possible rinse, splash) here the basis of the analogy was the productive verbs of class I of the type read - read, throw - throw etc.; these phenomena are even more widespread in children's speech (crying, jumping instead of crying, jumping) colloquially (want, want, want instead of want, want) etc.

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 trank etc. by analogy with lieben-"be in love" - ich liebte, haben"have" - ich hatte(from habte) and etc.

This regularity of the grammatical structure of languages ​​in the era of Schleicher, when they thought that language changes occur according to the "laws of nature", considered a "false analogy", a violation of laws and rules, but in the 70s. 19th century neo-grammarists have shown that the action of analogy in language is not only a natural phenomenon, but a law-forming, regulating and bringing 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 per. M., 1960. Ch. V (Analogy), as well as: De Saussure F. A course in general linguistics / Russian translation. M., 1933. S. 155. (New ed.: De 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 fixing stylistic functions behind a number of structures.

1. In the field of a simple sentence, there have been some changes in the system of the predicate Shvedov N.Yu. Changes in the simple sentence system. - Essays on the historical grammar of Russian literary language 19th century M., 1964..

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

Constructions with the pronoun this, the combination of the pronoun this with the linking verb was, the combination this is in the role of a linking word are widely distributed. Bunin: And to visit the Donets ... - it was my old dream.

The use of predicates with the form of the connective essence is reduced, 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.

The infinitive predicates with the connective are disappearing from use, therefore the use of incoherent constructions becomes the norm for the modern language.

Predicates are widely used with a connective verb means (for V.G. Korolenko: To say too much - sometimes it means not to say anything) and a combination of this means (for V.I. Pisarev: ... Not to see anything higher and more charming in life mutual love... - this means not having a clue about real life).

At the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century, in the incoherent predicate, the instrumental predicative was activated, displacing the nominative predicative, but in the second half of the 19th century. the use of nouns in the instrumental case as part of a predicate is limited. The main thing for the modern language is the distinction between the meanings of these constructions: the instrumental case is used to denote the temporary stay of someone in a certain state, position. From M. Gorky: I am again a utensil on a steamer. The nominative case is used to indicate a permanent feature. At A.T. Tvardovsky: But even though the earth is everywhere the earth, but somehow the strangers smell of poplars and rotten straw in a different way.

The use of short forms of adjectives as a predicate is limited in the activation of full forms. Poetic speech is still dominated by short adjectives. From E. Yevtushenko: It is foggy, like the fogs of the Patriarch's Ponds on an autumn night; this boy is old. He became like that early.

Impersonal sentences are activated with the nominative case of a noun as the main member (Not all honey - he says. - Not just gentlemen - I.A. Bunin), infinitive sentences with various particles (Though to run away, I wish I could catch, etc.).

2. Changes occurred in the system of complicated sentences Kovtunova I.I. Changes in the compound sentence system. - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the XIX century. M, 1964..

Participles are lost, coinciding in meaning with subordinate clauses, being replaced by subordinate clauses.

The use of gerunds with the gerund being is reduced. From M.Yu. Lermontov: Being an egoist in the highest degree, however, he was always reputed to be a kind fellow. The nominal part, while maintaining such a turnover, is expressed in the form of instrumental case.

In the second half of the XIX century. adverbial phrases with a comparative meaning are distributed.

Participial phrases with short forms of participles related to the predicate leave various styles of the 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 separate adjectives, full and short, is activated, which have 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 taken place in the system of complex sentences Pospelov N.S. The main directions in the development of structural types of a complex sentence in the Russian literary language of the 19th century, as well as: The development of sentences of a "single-term" structure. - Essays on the historical grammar of the Russian literary language of the XIX century. M..1964..

In the second half of the 19th century, a number of synthetic constructions narrowed the scope of use, other constructions completely left the language, the shades of meanings of many complex sentences became clearer, a desire was shown to unite the parts of each construction as closely as possible, the subordinating connection was strengthened and the role of subordinating conjunctions as means of expression was strengthened. one relationship or another.

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

Starting from the 19th century, constructions with correlative pronouns such as - which

And even if you are invented by me, such

What I would like to meet

I don't want to meet you in winter

So that my invention does not shatter.

From the second half of the 19th century, the use of defining subordinate clauses with the relative pronoun as the demonstrative pronoun is the same in the main clause.

Consequently, by the end of the 19th century, unions begin to be widely used if, when, provided, in case, because, then to, because, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, displacing unions if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, because.

4. There are changes 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, horseback riding, a so-so person, free from work), many constructions are replaced by new ones (a teacher in eloquence - a teacher of eloquence, a lesson from geography - a 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 XIX century. M., 1964. .

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

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

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

5. There were no significant changes in the field of morphology. It is possible to ascertain only individual cases of the disappearance of certain forms (in the house, teachers, tooth, pud - the genitive plural, see, writing, etc.).

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

Many prefixed imperfective verbs have gone out of use: sin, hurry, drown, giving way to non-prefixed verbs (sin, hurry, drown).

A number of verbs with the suffixes -a- displaced verbs with the 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.).

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

The number of verbs formed from nouns with suffixes -nich-, -ich- (clown, monkey, secretive, familiarize), -ova- (secretary, teach), -irova- (balance, control, pose, promote) is increasing.

The use of multiple verbs (arguing-arguing, dinning-dining), past tense forms of verbs with the suffix -nu- (penetrated, faded, resurrected, avoided) 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- (melodic, automatic, mathematical), with the prefix -po and the suffixes -om, -him-, o-, -e- (in local , in a related way, truly, materially, impressively).

There were 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 11th century. M., 1964. the gender of nouns is determined, which are still used now in one form, now in another: vegetable and vegetable, cloud and cloud, shutter and shutter. The noun cloud has only the form of the middle gender, the form of clouds is possible only in poetic speech:

The bow sang.

And a stifling cloud rose above us.

And the nightingales dreamed of us.

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

The wind whirled the snow.

The crescent of the moon rolled;

And slowly, walking among the drunks,

Always without companions, alone,

Breathing in 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 plural forms of masculine nouns in -ya (leaves-leaves)

At the end of the 19th century, an orthographic reform was being prepared, which was 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: the further development of grammatical variant, doublet forms of assigning certain stylistic functions to such forms.

The 19th century is the century of the heyday of Russian literature. In the 30s and 40s, the language of fiction influences the development journalistic styles. In the 1960s and 1970s journalistic styles, influenced by scientific prose, influenced the language of fiction. The role of the writer in the process of further development of the language of fiction, its interaction with the literary language and live folk speech is growing. Lermontov, Gogol and other writers of the 19th-20th centuries develop Pushkin's traditions in the selection language tools 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 shaping the journalistic style. The formation of styles of scientific prose is associated with the names of Lobachevsky, Timiryazev, Sechenov, Mendeleev.

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