Two-part infinitive, one-part, and infrequent communicative metamodels

Komovskaya Elena Vital'evna ORCID: 0000-0002-0544-8934 PhD in Philology Docent, the department of Russian Language, Saint Petersburg Military Engineering-Technical University 196605, Saint Petersburg, Pushkin, Peterburgskoe shosse 6, Russia, Pushkin, Peterburgskoe Shosse oblast', g. Pushkin, ul. Peterburgskoe Shosse, 6, kor 14, of. pushkin, peterburgskoe shosse 2 komovskaya86@mail.ru

Research in recent decades has been aimed at identifying a universal syntax pattern capable of presenting in an abstract form both the grammatical features of the utterance and the semantic meaning. N.Y. Shvedova ^[5] introduced the concept of a minimal structural scheme of a sentence into scientific use, but V.A. Beloshapkova ^[1] insisted that a minimal structural scheme for all G.A. Zolotova ^[3] proposed to consider syntaxeme as a minimal unit of syntax ^[2], however, in our opinion, despite the undoubted advantage of her approach, which for the first time actively began to include semantics, it is devoid of universal schemes that could reflect all the features of Russian communication. Consequently, syntaxists of the modern generation face an important task: to find a universal form that would have the same degree of abstraction as a minimal structural scheme, would be able to preserve constitutive meanings as an extended sentence scheme, but at the same time would reflect a typed communicative meaning. In our opinion, a meta-model can cope with these tasks, since it retains an abstract form from the structural scheme, and an important constitutive distributor (actual and potential) from the extended one, which becomes an obligatory element of the scheme, and therefore conveys typed communicative meanings of a frequency nature. By an actual constitutive distributor, we mean such a distributor, without which meaning is impossible. For example: They ended up here. Under potential is such a distributor, the absence of which is possible, but its presence significantly changes the meaning of communication. For example: He is reading. Cf.: He is reading a book (magazine, article, dissertation, etc.); His goal is to enroll. Cf.: His goal is to enter the academy (university, service, etc.).

In general, the entire hierarchy of communicative metamodels can be represented by the following four blocks: two-part, two-part infinitive type, one-part and infrequent. In detail, two-part minimal schemes were described by us in the article "Two-part communicative metamodels. Their difference from minimal and extended schemes of Russian syntax" in the journal Philology and Culture ^{[4, p. 45]}.

The block of minimal structural two-part infinitive schemes is represented by the following types of communicative metamodels.

1. N 1 (Cop is) Inf. This minimal block diagram of a two–part infinitive sentence in communication can be completed only with the reverse order of words, that is, in the communicative meta-model Inf (Cop is) N 1. For example: To enroll is the goal. Teaching is a dream. To describe is a task. To help is a desire. If the action is thought of as generalized and absolute, then the minimal scheme is equal to the communicative meta-model. However, if what is said is perceived relative to some person, then the meta-model will look like this Inf (Cop is) PronN1. For example: To enroll is his goal. Teaching is their dream.  To describe is his task. It is our desire to help. This is the first kind of meta-model with the reverse order of words. The second also has the value of clarifying the subject or person performing the claimed action and the model will look like Inf (Cop is) N 1 N 2. For example: To describe is the task of science. To help is the task of a doctor. To help is the desire of the class. To enroll is the goal of life. Therefore, universally, this model can be represented as Inf (Cop is) (Pron) N 1 (N 2), where the distributors N2 and Pron, like the verb-copula, may be present, or may be absent.

This communicative meta-model in the indirect order of words is not viable without distributors, since it constantly requires a clarification question in the dialogue, and a contextual explanation or a constitutive distributor in the utterance. For example: His goal is to enroll (Where? When?). His task is to describe (What? Where? When?) His dream is to teach (What? Where? When?). His desire is to help (Who? Where?). In the direct word order N 1 (Cop is) Inf this minimal block diagram of a two-part infinitive sentence will have four distributors and, accordingly, four communicative metamodels. Let's consider them in the order of communicative frequency: A) N 1 (Cop is) InfAdv. The most frequent meta-model, since it gives a characteristic of the main action being performed. For example: The goal is to enroll immediately. The task is to describe in detail. The dream is to learn quickly.

B) N 1 (Cop is) Inf (in/on) N 2. For example:  The goal is to go to university. The task is to describe physics. The dream is to teach students. This meta model is the second most frequent. If the distributor is a subject type, then there is no preposition, with an object distributor, it may be present in communication; C) N 1 (Cop is) Inf (k/po) N z is used exclusively in relation to subjects, less often in relation to objects and exclusively with prepositional management. For example: The desire is to help the doctor. My dream is to call my mom. The task is to help the father. The task is to learn everything on the subject D) N 1 (Cop is) Inf (in /on) N 6. For example: The dream is to study at school. The task is to understand in class. The dream is to paint on canvas. In terms of communication, the last meta-model is the least frequent, since it is not communicatively sufficient, because the propagating element begins to require additional explanation in the form of N 4 or Adv.

Therefore, the following can be considered a communicative model for this minimal structural scheme in reverse order of words: 1) Inf (Cop is) N 1 2) Inf (Cop is) N 1 (N 2) ; 3) Inf (Cop is) Pron N 1 . In the direct order of words:1) N1 (Cop) InfAdv;  2)N 1 (Cop is) Inf (in/on) N 2; 3) N 1(Cop is) Inf (k/po) N z ; 4) N 1 (Cop is) Inf (in/on) N 6.

2. N 1 (this is) Adj/Adv.This model coincides with the communicative meta-model, but provided that the phenomenon and its characteristics are thought of generically. For example: Reading is useful. A friend is important. Heat – for a long time. However, if an object or an object with its characteristic is not thought of generically and as a whole, then significant distributors are needed for these communicative statements. For example, for me, for life, for everyone, for society, then the meta-model will be propagated by the construction (for) N 2 and can be represented by the meta-model N1 (this is) Adj/Adv + (for) N 2.For example: Reading is useful for children. A friend is important for life. The heat is for a long time for this territory.

The distributor may be of an adverbial type, but is represented either by adverbs of the type now, always, here, etc., then the scheme looks like N1 (this is) Adj/Adv + Adv.  For example: Reading is always useful. A friend is important now. The heat is here for a long time. The distributor can express a locative value, then it is represented by substantive adverbs and the scheme will look like N1 (this is) Adj/Adv +N 6. For example: Reading is useful in childhood. A friend is important at school. The heat is in the field for a long time.

Therefore, this minimal scheme has three communicative meta-models: N1 (this is) Adj/Adv + (for) N 2; N1 (this is) Adj/Adv +Adv; N1 (this is) Adj/Adv + (in/on) N 6.

3.           N1 (Cop) Nkosv/ Adv.Statements constructed according to this minimal structural scheme have semantic completeness, therefore they do not require a mandatory communicative distributor, therefore this structural scheme is equal or identical to the communicative meta-model. For example: He is excited; Apple trees are in bloom; Polka dot dress; She is married. The typical meaning of sentences of this type is a subject or a person, an object or a state, a phenomenon and its sign, therefore, distribution in these sentences is optional, since it does not complement the main topic, but clarifies the sign that has already been named. For example: Apple trees in bloom in spring. She is married to Ivan. The house is at the bottom of the mountain. In these examples of this type, the distributor is not a constitutive component of communication and is not thought of as potentially necessary, therefore it can be omitted.

4. Inf (Cop is) N1/N5.This minimal block diagram in relation to communication should be considered as two independent meta–models, one of which is Inf (Cop is) N 1, the second is Inf (Cop is) N 5.

The first model, as a result of the fact that there is no fixed word order in communication in the Russian language, can be represented by the forward and reverse order of the structure elements: Inf (Cop is) N 1 and N 1 (Cop is) Inf. The latter variety does not necessarily require a constitutive distributor, since it is a complete statement in semantic terms. For example, the goal is to win. Happiness is to love. The dream is to fly. With the direct word order Inf (Cop is) N 1, this meta-model needs a semantic distributor, as a rule, the distributor form N 4. For example: Winning is the goal of life. Flying is a childhood dream. To love is the happiness of youth. In this case, the meta model looks like Inf (Cop is) N 1 + N 4.  and describes the generalized nature of the course of action.

Consequently, the block diagram Inf (Cop is) N 1 is represented by two communicative metamodels: the first coincides or is identical to the block diagram, the second is Inf (Cop is) N 1 + N 4.

The variety Inf (Cop is) N 5. In communication, it can also be represented by two main invariants. Inf (Cop is) N 5 + N 4, the third is Inf (Cop is) N5 + N6. For example: Flying has become a dream of life. Winning became the goal for the child. To love is happiness for a person. Flying was a childhood dream. Winning was the goal in the competition. To love was happiness in adulthood.

5.           Inf (Cop) Inf. These communicative metamodels completely coincide with the minimal structural scheme, since they represent a complete statement in semantic terms, one is often identical to the other and does not require a clarifying distributor. However, in terms of communication, it is logical to introduce communicative markers. For example, it is the same as and; it means; denotes; it means. Cf.: To love is to forgive. Waiting is the same as doing nothing. To prove is to convince.

6.                InfVf3s.This structural minimal scheme can be represented by four communicative meta-models. Inf Vf 3 s+ (in/on)N 6 or Inf Vf 3 s+(to/on)N 3.Inf Vf 3 s+(y/about) N4  . Inf Vf 3 s+(behind/ before) N 5. For example: Smoking is prohibited in the house / on the street / along the corridor / to a student / at a friend's / near the fence / behind the fence / in front of the fence.

In this meta-model, a potential constitutive distributor acquires its meanings based on its case design. The meta-model distributed by N 6 indicates the localization of the action. For example: Smoking is prohibited in the house / in the corridor / on the street / in the city. A constitutive propagator in the form of N 3 can indicate a subject generically or an extended space. For example: Smoking is prohibited in the corridor / Smoking is prohibited for students / students / patients.  N 4 defines the subject or object of the action, but it is specified. For example: Smoking is prohibited at a friend's / girlfriend's / parents' / at home / near the fence. N 5 indicates localization in space in relation to an object or person. For example: Smoking is prohibited behind the fence / behind the school / in front of the fence / in front of the school.

Consequently, this scheme is able to be combined with all case distributors, with the exception of the nominative and the accusative.

7.           Inf (Cop) Adj1/5. The typical meaning of these sentences is an action and its evaluation, a qualitative characteristic, therefore, the communicative meta–model completely coincides with the minimal structural scheme, since the sentence has completeness in semantic and semantic terms.For example: It was difficult to study. Swimming is useful. Making a movie was the most interesting.

8.           Inf (Cop)Nkosv/Adv. This minimal scheme also coincides with the communicative meta-model, since its main purpose in communication is to give an assessment and qualitative characteristic of the previously mentioned action, therefore it does not require an additional constitutive distributor in communication. For example: Silence is not in his habits. Silence is unbearable. It's good to rest.

The block of minimal structural one-part sentences can be represented by the following types of communicative meta-models.

1.                 (Cop) N1.This minimal structural scheme in relation to communication can be represented by a communicative meta-model completely identical to the minimal scheme, or have an important constitutive distributor in the form of Adj, then the communicative meta-model will look like (Cop) N 1 Adj. For example: Spring. Wed.: Long spring. My house. Old house. House. Escape. A tedious escape. Sadness. Quiet sadness. Since in the Russian language, the subject, action, state requires mandatory characteristics, if not thought generically and abstractly.

2.                Inf. This minimal block diagram can be represented in the communicative plan by three communicative meta-models, based on the number of important constitutive distributors.InfAdv. For example: To be silent. Always be silent. Don't open it. Never open it. Read. Always read, etc. or model Inf N 2. For example: Do not open your mouth. Do not close the window. Read the book. Go on stage. (Pron)N3Inf. For example:He's going out. For the boy to read. Children should be silent. I'll tell you.

3.                Vf3s.This minimal scheme may also coincide with the meta-model, but it may also have important constitutive distributors. For example: It's getting light. He's shivering. Engulfed in flames. I was shivering with cold. Therefore, based on the examples presented, this minimal block diagram can be represented by the following communicative invariants: Vf 3 s; N 2 (Pron 2)Vf 3 s ; Vf 3 s N 5.

4.                Praed.Since this minimal block diagram has a typical value – a description of the state of the environment, it can be supplemented in the communication Adv or (in / on) N 6) with an indication of a specific location. For example: Smoked. It's smoky in here. Cold. It's cold in Siberia. Joyfully. It's fun at the party. The second value is a description of the physical or mental state of a living being, so it can be supplemented with N 3 (Pron 3). For example, He's having fun. We are uncomfortable. I can go out.

5.                Vf1s/2s. In this minimal sentence scheme, the meta-model clearly depends on the verb used and can be represented by all types of case distributors. A) Vf1s/2s N 2. For example, Are you reading a book? – I'm reading a book.B) Vf1s/2s N 3. For example: Are you making a phone call? – I'm calling.C) Vf1s/2s N 4 – I wish you health and happiness. D) Vf1s/2s N 5. Are you fond of sports? – I'm getting carried away.E) Vf1s/2s N 6. Do you dream of a book? – I dream.

This verbal model is least predictable in terms of abstract communicative metamodels, but in a specific context it is predictable by a certain verb form.

However, this model has one universal meta-model with a constitutive ADV distributor.  For example: You read for a long time.

6.                Vf2s/1pl/2pl.  In this minimal structural scheme, as well as in the previous one, the meta-model clearly depends on the verb used, so it is not possible to present universal abstract meta-models, the only universal distributor is Adv. For example: You'll understand right away. Sometimes you don't understand. You'll always remember.

7.                Vf3pl. This construction is similar to the previous two, Adv is the universal distributor for it in the communicative meta-model, and in general, the specificity of the constitutive component is dictated by the semantics of the verb. For example, They make a lot of noise. They shout loudly. They called often. This is a metamodel of type Vf3pl.Adv. In general, this block diagram can be represented by all five nominative distributors. For example, the doorbell rings. There's a lot of noise in the yard. They're talking behind the house. We gathered at the house. Shouting to children. The specificity of the distributor is due solely to the semantics of the verb.

Consequently, the minimal structural schemes of single-component sentences coincide with the communicative meta-models, the universal distributor to the model (Cop) N 1 is Adj, to Inf and Vf, the Praed universal distributor is Adv. In addition, in the last three models, the constitutive component of communication depends entirely on the semantics of the verb.

The block of minimal infrequent communicative meta-models can be represented by the following variants of minimal structural and extended schemes, which both coincide with them and have distinctive features. In general, the entire group of infrequent communicative meta-models can be divided into three large classes according to formal organization: two-part and one-part and non-predicative. From the position of semantic content, all low-frequency communicative samples of the Russian language can be divided into four semantic groups according to the typical meaning expressed by them. The first, the most numerous group, are communicative meta-models that express the absence of something or someone.  For example: Sergey is not at home/ There is no time/ There is not a cloud in the sky / Nothing new/No hope. The second group reflects the amount of something, someone. For example, There are a lot of Cases / Rubles – a hundred / Flowers/People.  The third group indicates the inability to perform an action. For example, There is no one to argue with/ No one to work with/ There's no one to cook for. The fourth group in semantic terms is the expression of the characteristics of third parties. For example, He feels bad/ He was welcome/ At home in tears.

Let's consider the first semantic block "absence of something or someone". It can be represented by two single-component minimal block diagrams. For example,

1.                N2 (neg) Vf3s. For example, there was no Sergei/ There was no Document/ There was no cold/ There was no heat. All statements that fit this minimal structural scheme, in the case of the subject and its absence, require a mandatory communicative distributor in speech (Sergei was not) is not enough for a full-fledged statement, in the case of the object and its absence, with a high generalization, this minimal scheme may coincide with the communicative meta-model. For example, there was no Document. But in any case, this minimal structural scheme of the utterance in the communicative plan will be represented by three universal metamodels: N 2 (neg) Vf 3 s + ADV. For example: Sergey was not here. The document was not there. There was no heat at home. N 2 (neg) Vf 3 s + (in/on) N 6. For example: Sergey was not in the house. the document was not on the table. There was no heat in the apartment.N 2 (neg) Vf 3 s + (at about /) N 4. For example, Sergei was not near his grandmother / there was no document near the book/ They did not have heat.

2.           No (was not/ will not be) N2. For example, no time/ no doubt/ there are no people/ There were no problems/ There will be no ideas. If this meaning is thought of in the absolute as something permanent and unchangeable, then a communicative distributor is not required and, accordingly, the minimum scheme coincides with the communicative one, however, if it is not thought of as an absolute, then the refinement of the communicative plan becomes a very significant element, therefore three groups of distributors are possible, respectively, this minimal scheme of utterance will be represented by three of its communicative metamodels:  No (was not/ will not be) N2 +Adv. For example, there is no one here/ There is no time now/There was no doubt yesterday/ There will be no doubt tomorrow. No (was not/ will not be) N 2 + (in/on) N 6. For example, there is no one in the house/ There is no time in the office/There was no doubt about the project/ There will be no doubt on the street. No (was not/ will not be) N 2 + (y/about) N 4. For example, I don't have time/ Had no doubts at home/ People will have no doubts. This semantic meaning can be represented by a whole variant of non-predicative statements. For example,

3. None (no one/nothing, no/none/not the slightest) N2. For example, not a cloud. Not a speck. Nothing new. No one I know. No hope. Not a single friend. Not the slightest doubt. These statements can be thought of as an absolute or a statement of an unchangeable fact, in this case the meta-model completely coincides with the proposed minimal scheme of utterance, however, if this statement is changeable, then the necessary constitutive signals in speech, therefore this type sample will also have three varieties like the previous one. No (no one/nothing, no/none/not the slightest) N2+  Adv. For example, not a cloud now. Not a speck here. Nothing new there. No one familiar there. No hope at the top. Not a single friend downstairs. Not the slightest doubt now. No (no one / nothing, no / none / not the slightest) N 2 + (in / on) N 6. For example, not a cloud in the sky. Not a speck in the house. Nothing new in the report. No one I know on the street. No hope at the train station. Not a single friend at the university. Not the slightest doubt on the exam, No (no one / nothing, no / none / not the slightest) N 2 + (y / about) N 4. For example, not a cloud near the sun. Not a speck of it. Nothing new near the park. No one familiar at the door. No hope near the hospital. They don't have a single friend. The examiner has not the slightest doubt.

Consequently, low-frequency models expressing the absence of something or someone are represented by three minimal structural schemes of statements and three main varieties of these meta-models, which are repeated, therefore, we have the right to talk about a certain meta-model paradigmatics and universality.

This typicality of varieties of communicative metamodels of infrequent minimal structural schemes partly continues in the semantics of the subject and its quantity, and completely in the semantics of the absence of the possibility of action, and the semantics of the characterization of third parties. All these varieties, by analogy with those already mentioned, are distributed in a communicative way, if they do not convey the absoluteness of the utterance, in three communicative ways ADV; (in/on) N 6; (y / about) N 2.

For example, the statement "the subject and its quantity" is represented by two minimal structural schemes, which have either a one-part formal expression or a non-predicative one. 

1. N 2 For Example, People. Flowers.  For a minimal block diagram N 2, the communication metamodels can be as follows: N 2 + ADV; N 2 + N 1. For example, there are many colors. There are few people. There are a lot of colors. The people are a crowd.

2.           N2 (Cop) Quant. For example, there are plenty of cases. Mushrooms-a lot.

For the N2 (Cop) Quant model, there are three possible communicative distributors.N 2 (Cop) Quant +ADV; N 2 (Cop) Quant+ (in/on) N 6; N 2 (Cop) Quant+ (y/ about) N2. For example, there are a lot of things to do today. There are a lot of mushrooms here. A hundred rubles there. There are plenty of things to do on the street. Mushrooms are a lot in the forest. One hundred rubles in your wallet. The director has plenty to do. Mushrooms – a mass near the edge. He has a hundred rubles.

The communicative model of the "absence of the possibility of action" is represented by the minimal scheme Pron/Adv neg Inf. For example: Nowhere to work. There is no one to work with. There is no one to work. It's bad not to work. With such a communicative organization, the utterance of a meta-model may coincide with a minimal structural scheme if the described absence of action is thought generically, however, if the process is not perceived as absolute, variants of meta-models are possible. The most frequent among them is a meta-model characterizing the action of Pron/Adv neg Inf + Adv. For example: There is no place to work here. There is no one to work with today. There is no one to work today. It's bad not to work for a long time. In terms of communication, all models with Pron have a direct word order. When a model with Adv is distributed with an additional Adv, the reverse word order is always observed in communication. Compare: It's bad not to work for a long time. Not working for a long time is bad. The latter option is preferable for communication. Therefore, from a communicative point of view, this meta-model will be represented by one kind of Pron/Adv neg Inf + Adv and one invariant Adv neg Inf Adv.

The second type of frequency in communication is Pron/Adv neg Inf + (y/about) N 2. For example: There is no one to work with at the blackboard. There is no one to work with near the park. There is no one to work for him. There is no one to work near the house. It's bad not to work for her.

The third frequency model in this type of communication is Pron/Adv neg Inf + (in/on) N 6. For example: There is no one to work with in the classroom. There's no one to talk to on the street. There is no one to write to in the city. It's bad not to work in the city.

Consequently, the communicative meta-models of the absence of the possibility of action are represented by three variants (Pron/Adv neg Inf + Adv; Pron/Adv neg Inf + (y/about) N 2; Pron/Adv neg Inf + (in/on) N 6) and one invariant (Adv neg Inf + Adv).

The block with the value "characteristics of third parties" is represented by the model (Cop pl 3) Nkosv/Adj. For example: He feels bad. He was welcome. At home in tears. The streets are in the rain. This model can be represented in speech by three main types of communicative metamodels: 1) (Coppl3) Nkosv/ Adj+ Adv; 2)(Cop pl 3) Nkosv/ Adj+ (y/about) N 2; 3)(Cop pl 3) Nkosv/ Adj + (in/on) N 6. For example: 1)He was always welcome. At home in tears today. The streets are in the rain now./ 2) Houses in tears near the station. Streets in the rain at the artist. He feels bad around him./ 3) He was welcome at the hotel.  He feels bad on the bus. At home in tears on the street. Streets in the snow in the North. In terms of communication, only the model (Cop pl 3) Nkosv/ Adj + Adv in the absence of Cop has an invariant that manifests itself in the reverse order of words. Compare: He feels bad now. He's not feeling well right now. The latter statement is more legitimate from the point of view of communication. Consequently, the invariant of the meta-model can be represented by the following scheme Nkosv Adv Adj.

Based on the above, we can draw conclusions:

1. Communicative metamodels are minimal syntactic units of communication, which in an abstract form represent the formal expression of a statement, and at the expense of potential constitutive distributors convey the necessary lexical meaning.

2. All typed models and templates of the Russian language can be represented in communication by four blocks of communicative meta-models: two-part non-infinitive, two-part infinitive, one-part, low-frequency (or infrequent).

3. Two-part communicative meta-models are identical in some cases to minimal structural schemes. This happens when describing an object or subject. Single-component communicative meta-models of the nominative type of the same meaning require a potential constitutive distributor in the form of Adj.

4. Action-type meta-models, when characterizing the course of an action, necessarily need a potential constitutive distributor in the form of Adv.

5. Metamodels with copula verbs depend on the order of syntactic elements in the metamodel, in the reverse order, a constitutive potential distributor is required, which can be in the form of Adv or (in/on) N 6.