|
Litera
Reference:
Tumgoeva F.Z.
On the Grammatical Basis of Single-Compound Sentences in the Russian and Ingush Languages
// Litera.
2023. ¹ 2.
P. 94-107.
DOI: 10.25136/2409-8698.2023.2.39845 EDN: DECSXJ URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=39845
On the Grammatical Basis of Single-Compound Sentences in the Russian and Ingush Languages
Tumgoeva Fatima Zakreevna
ORCID: 0000-0002-1804-1818
Postgraduate Student of the Russian Language Department, Ingush State University
386001, Russia, Republic of Ingushetia, Magas, I. Zyazikova Ave., 7
|
fatik0696@mail.ru
|
|
 |
|
DOI: 10.25136/2409-8698.2023.2.39845
EDN: DECSXJ
Received:
26-02-2023
Published:
05-03-2023
Abstract:
The subject of this study is to identify varieties of single–compound sentences in two genetically unrelated languages - Russian and Ingush, to describe the structural and semantic properties of the specified syntactic unit from the typological aspect. The following tasks are put forward in this scientific article: firstly, to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the concepts of the predicative center of one-part sentences of the Russian language in comparison with unrelated Ingush; secondly, to identify criteria for determining the types of one-part sentences in the Russian and Ingush languages; thirdly, to conduct a structural and semantic analysis of the predication of the types of one-part sentences. Sentences from two languages studied: Russian and Ingush. The scientific novelty of the study is that for the first time the main structural and semantic features and grammatical ways of expressing the predicative basis of a one–part sentence of two different-structured languages are revealed from a comparative point of view. In addition, the scientific novelty is due to the fact that the predicative basis of a single-compound sentence in nominative Russian and ergative Ingush languages has not been sufficiently studied from a typological point of view: to date, there are no or few monographs, scientific articles and other scientific works in which it would be elaborated in detail or aspect. As a result of the study, seven varieties of single-compound sentences were identified and it was proved that, despite some structural and semantic differences, in general, the predication and types of single-compound sentences coincide in the Russian and Ingush languages.
Keywords:
Single - part sentences, predication, the face paradigm, grammatical basis, typological aspect, the person speaking, the person Pronouncing, genetically unrelated languages, predicative core, types of single-part sentences
This article is automatically translated.
We see prospects for further research of the problem under consideration in a more detailed consideration of the problem of determining the predication of single-compound sentences in the Russian and Ingush languages, as well as in identifying general and particular structural and semantic features of the predicative center of the syntactic unit under study from the point of view of the typological aspect.
References
1. Nichols J. Ingush Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010.
2. Abdullaev Z.G. Problems of ergativity of the Dargin language. – M., 1986.
3. Babaytseva V.V., Maksimov L.Yu. Syntax. Punctuation.-M.: Enlightenment, 1981.-271 p.
4. Beloshapkova V.A., Bryzgunova E.A., Zemskaya E.A. Modern Russian language.-Moscow: Higher School, 1989.-800 p.
5. Valgina N.S., Rosenthal D.E., Fomina M.I. Modern Russian language, ed. 4.-M., 1971.-512 p.
6. Gandaloeva A. Z. Topical issues of the syntax of a simple sentence in the Ingush language. Magas: Publishing House of Ingush State University, 2012.
7. Gandaloeva A.Z. Khianzara gIalgIai mott. Syntax. (Deshara posobi University studentashta lahrhIa). / Nazran. KEP LLC, 2018 – 352 p.
8. Dolin Yu.T. Questions of the theory of a one-part sentence. Edition 2. – Orenburg: IPK GOU OSU, 2008. – 129 p.
9. Evloeva A.M. G1alg1ai kitsash. – Nazran: LLC "Kep", – 2021. – 96c.
10. Kulbuzhev M. A., F.G. Ozdoeva. G1alg1ai meta deshara posobi / Manual on the syntax of the Ingush language. 2006. – 243 p.
11. Lekant P.A. Syntax of a simple sentence in modern Russian.-M.: Higher School, 1974.-159 p.
12. M.I. Chapanov. Ergative sentence construction in the Nakh languages.-Izvestia CHINIIIYAL. Volume IV. Issue. 2. Linguistics. Grozny, 1962. pp. 96-168.
13. Magdilova R.A. Syntax of the modern Avar language. A phrase and a simple sentence. – Makhachkala, 2022. – 112 p.
14. Nazarova M.R. Structural and semantic features of simple one-part sentences in Tajik and English: abstract. diss. ... K. philol. Dushanbe, 2016.
15. Ozdoev I.A. Syntax of the Ingush literary language. A simple sentence // Izvestia CHINIIIYAL, volume V. Vol.2. Linguistics. Grozny, 1964.
16. Ozdoev I.A., Ozdoev R.I. Grammar of the Ingush language: Textbook for 8-9 cl., part 2: Syntax. 8th ed., ispr., re-rab.-Magas: Publishing house "Serdalo", 2011.-240 p.
17. Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. 8th ed., additional M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2001.
18. Russian grammar: [In 2 volumes / Editorial board: N. Y. Shvedova (Chief editor), etc.]. Vol. 1. M.: Nauka, 1980. 784 p.
19. Tarieva L.U. Essays for the etymological dictionary of the Ingush language. T. I. – Rostov-on-Don, 2020. – 276 p.
20. Tarieva L.U. Speech components of the paradigm of the person in the languages of the ergative system. – Nazran, 2017-376 p.
21. Shakhmatov A. A. Syntax of the Russian language. Ed. 3-E. M.: Editorial URSS, 2001.
22. Yakovlev N. F. Syntax of the Ingush literary language. M., 2001.-472p.
Peer Review
Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.
The natural language system has long been a threshold limit practically unattainable by scientific thought. Research within the framework of the problem of grammatical ambiguity, as well as one-sidedness, refers to the primary highways of cognition of the synchronous principle of evaluation of a particular language system. The fact is that, by definition, it is impossible to recreate the model of an active / dynamic / initial system: the information block interferes, knowledge interferes, it is not possible to reach the frontier of methods and conditions. However, new works, alternative points of view, and opinions are emerging that, one way or another, take place in the general paradigm of scientific reasoning. The author notes that "the relevance of the topic studied in the article is due to the following factors: 1) the problem of determining the syntactic status of one-part sentences in the language system and the structural and semantic differences between their predication and the grammatical basis of two-part sentences; 2) the increasing role of one-part sentences within the Ingush language, as well as the growth of linguistic research in the field of syntax, requires a detailed interpretation of this syntactic unit." I think that the validity of the position is predetermined, the outline is marked, the frames are highlighted. The methodological outline is concretized, there are no contradictions and discrepancies in this part; the comparative model is the most productive for deciphering the question "about the specifics of the grammatical basis of single-part sentences in the Russian and Ingush languages." The nomination of the material was made extremely accurately: "the research material was illustrations from Ingush folklore along with author's examples", "the theoretical basis of the research was scientific works directly or indirectly related to the study of single-component sentences in nominative and ergative languages: A.A. Shakhmatova, A.M. Peshkovsky, Z.G. Abdullaev, V.V. Babaytseva, L.Yu. Maximova, R.A. Magdilova, M.R. Nazarova, V.A. Beloshapkova, N.S. Valgina". The practical and theoretical basis of the research is convincing, transparent, objective and verified; the author tries to bring this level of writing to the proper level with emphasis. Russian Russian syntax is notable for the researcher's ability to compile the variant facets of the designation of the specifics of the issue: for example, "A. A. Shakhmatov was the first in the history of Russian syntax to give a scientific justification for the concept of one-partedness in the work "Syntax of the Russian language". The author introduced the first systematic classification into the use of linguistic research and interpreted the types of single-component sentences in terms of their structural and semantic features. Thus, according to A. A. Shakhmatov, single-component sentences are those "that do not represent the verbal detection of those two terms into which every psychological communication breaks down," or "The second type, which A. A. Shakhmatov identified in his research, are single-component predicate-unsuitable sentences. This type definitely includes personal inappropriate offers (Go faster! ); indefinite-personal inappropriate sentences (Suddenly knocked on the door ); infinitive inappropriate sentences (Take it! ); adjectival inappropriate sentences (Why is sick? ); adverbial inappropriate sentences (It's warm today ); interjection inappropriate sentences (Alas!). In ergative Ingush, syntaxists are not unanimous in distinguishing these types of single-part sentences. For example, in the work "G1alg1ai metta syntax" 'Syntax of the Ingush language' by F.G. Ozdoeva and M.A. Kulbuzheva, indefinite-personal and generalized-personal one-part sentences belong to single-part non-adjacent sentences", "N.Y. Shvedova built a classification based on the structure of the main component of the predicative basis of a single-part sentence. As can be seen from the examples, the author did not single out generically personal and definitely personal proposals in his classification, which is the incompleteness of the concept," etc. I think that during the compilation of opinions there is a so-called moment of the birth of truth, but in some moments there is still dependence on "what has already been said", but it is not Maybe not. For example, "there is a clear boundary between incomplete sentences and single-part sentences. V.V. Babaytseva and L.Y. Maksimov note that in single-part sentences "only the predicate is expressed by the word. The subject of thought (speech) is not named, but it is reflected in consciousness in the form of visual sensory images (perceptions, sensations and representations)." When classifying single-part sentences, V.V. Babaytseva and L.Yu. Maksimov took as a basis a structural and semantic criterion, which provides not only formal features of the predication of a single-part sentence, but also specific shades in the semantics of the main component of the grammatical basis of single-part sentences...", or "Ingusheveds I.A. Ozdoev and R.I. Ozdoev on single-part sentences in the Ingush language they write: "Tskhan ottama propositionesh, veshta ailcha, kertera tskha maje yola propositionesh..." 'Single-part sentences, in other words, sentences having only one main member of the sentence...'. The authors classify single-part sentences in the Ingush language into the following types, based on the morphological representation of predication..." etc. I think there are enough examples illustrating the problematic issue, many of them are alternative, impeccable. Citation variants are introduced into the work taking into account the requirements, no serious edits are required: "when classifying single-part sentences, the author takes into account the semantic and grammatical principle, and indicates the insufficiency of taking into account "only one feature as a basis for dividing into appropriate groups of sentences" [Valgina, 1971, p. 153]. The formal grammatical criterion takes into account only grammatical indicators - ways of representing the main components of the predication of a single-part sentence; semantic classification is based "on such a logical and semantic indicator as certainty-uncertainty, which, being categories of thinking, find their expression in linguistic means." The material can be used in the mode of mastering linguistic disciplines, specialized courses. The final block is prospectively open, which, in my opinion, is positive: "we see prospects for further research of the problem under consideration in a more detailed examination of the problem of determining the predication of single-component sentences in the Russian and Ingush languages, as well as in identifying common and particular structural and semantic features of the predicative center of the syntactic unit under study from the point of view of the typological aspect." The work is completely completed, the author's point of view is objectively expressed, no actual / serious violations have been identified, it is good that the author creates the effect of a possible dialogue with a potentially interested reader in the work. The list of sources is full, but they should be brought to uniformity – "The author ... the name of the work ... the place of publication ... the year of publication ... the total number of pages." The topic of the reviewed work correlates with one of the publication's highways, there are no contradictions and discrepancies in the choice of correction. I recommend the article "On the grammatical basis of single-compound sentences in Russian and Ingush languages" for open publication in the journal "Philology: Scientific Research".
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
