Parts of speech

1) What are the structural signals which help us to understand the part of speech meaning of a word without knowing its lexical meaning?

– the syntactical position (the position in respect to the predicate);

– the grammatical morphemes;

– function words.

What sentences were invented by Charles Carpenter Fries and Лев Владимирович Щерба to illustrate this point? - Uggs… Глокая куздра…

2) What are the test-frames suggested by Charles Carpenter Fries?

– Frame A. The concert was good (always).

– Frame B. The clerk remembered the tax (suddenly).

– Frame C. The team went there.

Fries believed that these sentences could be used when we want to understand to what part of speech we should refer (отнести) this or that word. Fries did not use the term ‘part of speech’; he used the tem ‘ form-class ’. He distinguished 4 form-classes (they are practically the same as nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs).

Fries believed that when we want to understand to what part of speech we should refer (отнести) this or that word, we should not take into account its lexical meaning. We should take into account only the formal signals: the inflections [ флексии = окончания ], the word order (= the syntactical functioning = the syntactical positions) and the functional words (form-words) [ служебные слова – союзы, предлоги, вспомогательные глаголы ].

Fries believed that if a tested word has the same paradigm (=the same forms = the same inflections), the same syntactical functioning, and combine with the same functional word as the words concert, clerk, tax, team in these sentences, they refer to the same form-class – class one.

If a tested word has the same paradigm (=the same forms = the same inflections), the same syntactical functioning, and combine with the same functional word as the words was, remembered, went in these sentences, they refer to the same form-class – class two.

If a tested word has the same paradigm (=the same forms = the same inflections), the same syntactical functioning, and combine with the same functional word as the word good in the first sentence, they refer to the same form-class – class three.

If a tested word has the same paradigm (=the same forms = the same inflections), the same syntactical functioning, and combine with the same functional word as the words always, suddenly, there in these sentences, they refer to the same form-class – class four.

Fries believed that the formal signals give enough information for us when we want to refer a word to this or that part of speech – that we do not need the lexical meaning for it. He tries to prove it with the help of the sentences in which the words have no lexical meaning:

- (1) Woggles ugged diggles; (2) Uggs woggled diggs; (3) Woggs diggled uggles (Ch. C. Fries’s example).

- L. Carrol “Through the Looking-Glass”:

‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves

did gyre and gimble in the wabe;

all mimsy were the borogoves,

and the mome raths outgrabe.

- Глок ая куздр а штек о будланул а бокр а и курдяч ит бокрёнк а. (Л.В. Щерба’s example)

Though the words in these sentences have no lexical meaning, we do understand their part-of-speech meanings (the noun, the verb, the adjective, the adverb) and their syntactical functions (the subject, the predicate, the object, the attribute, the adverbial modifier). The inflections and the positions of the words in the sentence help us do it.For example, we know the typical endings (=inflections) of the verb (-ed in English, - ла in Russian), we know that the verb is the predicate in the sentence, that the word standing before the predicate is the subject, that the word standing after the predicate is the object).

In these examples the components of the sentences (words) are devoid of the lexical meanings, but the structural signals (= the surface structure signals):

– the syntactical position (the position in respect to the predicate);

- the grammatical morphemes;

- function words - express all the grammatical categories of nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs.

Thus, we know that ‘woggles’ in ‘Woggles ugged diggles’ is a noun in the plural form, in the nominative case. ‘Woggles’ is a noun because it occupies the syntactical position typical of the noun – the position of the subject [ подлежащее ]: this is the position before the predicate. It expresses plurality because it has the ending -s. It expresses the meaning of the nominative case because it has not –‘s and because it occupies the syntactical position of the subject

We know that ‘глокая’ is an adjective in the nominative case, feminine gender, singular number, that it is an attribute which modifies the subject. We know that ‘глокая’ is an adjective because it occupies the syntactical position typical of the adjective – the position of the attribute standing before the noun. It has the ending of the feminine gender –ая. The ending –ая also shows that it is the nominative case. The nominative case in the Russian language shows that the word performs the function of the subject: it means that ‘глокая’ performs its own function of the attribute and this attribute is related with the subject.

2) What is specific about Henry Sweet’s division of parts of speech into three classes? – He distinguished three main classes: nouns, adjectives and verbs. The other parts of speech were distributed [ распределены ] between these three main classes: the basis of this division is the syntactical one – it means that this or that word was referred [ отнесён ] to this or that part on the basis of its combinability [ сочетаемость ].

For example, cardinal [ количественные ] numerals (like one, three) were referred to the class of nouns; in other cases the same numerals were referred to the class of adjectives. The numerals like one, three were referred to the class of nouns in such caseswhen they combined like nouns and when they stood in the positions characteristic of nouns. For example: Three will come later – here ‘three’ occupies the position typical of the noun – before the finite verb – the position of the subject. Another example: Three students will come later – here ‘three’ occupies the position typical of the adjective – before a noun in the position of the attribute [ определение ].

The ordinal [ порядковые ] numerals (like first, third) were referred to the class of adjectives. It was done so because the combinability of the ordinal numerals is like that of adjectives – they combine with nouns and occupy the position typical of the adjective – before a noun = the position of the attribute [ определение ]. For example: the third task.

The same concerns pronouns [местоимения].

Personal [ личные ] pronouns were referred to the class of nouns because they combine like nouns and they stand in the positions characteristic of nouns – the subject (before the finite verb) and the object (after the finite verb). For example: They want water; Ted saw them.

Such negative pronouns as nobody, no one, nothing were also referred to the class of nouns.

Possessive [ притяжательные – your, her, our ], indefinite [ неопределённые – some, any ], negative [ отрицательные - no ], demonstrative [ указательные – this\these; that\those ] pronouns were referred to the class adjectives, because they combine with nouns and occupy the position typical of the adjective – before a noun = the position of the attribute [ определение ]. For example: No woman can help me; Some people think so; I don’t need these books.

Now let us speak about non-finite verbal forms. According to Henry Sweet, these forms can be either referred to the class of verbs or they can be distributed [ распределены ] between nouns and adjectives. In the latter case participle I and participle II were referred to the class adjectives, because they combine with nouns and occupy the position typical of the adjective – before a noun = the position of the attribute [ определение ]. For example: a smiling girl; the broken window. The infinitive and the gerund were referred to the class of nouns because they combine like nouns and they stand in the positions characteristic of nouns – the subject (before the finite verb) and the object (after the finite verb). For example: To smoke is bad for health; I want to go home.

NOUN

1) What are the categories of the noun? – of case, number, gender and determination (according to М.Я. Блох).

2) What is singularia tantum? – These are nouns which have only the singular form. Words of singularia tantum (‘absolute singular’) mostly include (1) the names of abstract notions (selfishness, brilliance, humanity, grief, inflation, friendship, peace, joy); (2) the names of the branches of professional activity (chemistry, architecture, mathematics, linguistics); (3) material nouns (snow, gold, milk, steel), (4) collective nouns (peasantry, soldiery, foliage, fruit, furniture, machinery).

3) What is pluralia tantum? – These are nouns which have only the plural form. The group of pluralia tantum is mostly composed of nouns denoting (1) objects consisting of two or more parts (scissors, trousers, tongs, pincers), (2) ceremonies (nuptials), (3) diseases (measles, hysterics, creeps, mumps) and (4) collective nouns (clothes, goods, sweets, earnings, contents, politics, cattle, poultry).

CASES

1) What is the theory of positional cases?

The very word ‘positional’ shows that in this theory the meaning of this or that case is defined on the basis of the position of the noun on the sentence. The position is described in relation to the verbal predicate (глагол-сказуемое): before the predicate, after the predicate.

Before the predicate stands the subject. The subject in inflectional languages is expressed by a noun in the nominative case. So, this theory also ascribes the meaning of the nominative case to the noun in the position of the subject, that is in the position before the predicate.

The noun denoting the indirect object (the addressee of the action) stands after the predicate and in inflectional languages it has the endings of the dative case. So, the theory of positional cases ascribes the meaning of the dative case to the noun standing after the predicate and denoting the addressee of the action.

The noun denoting the direct object stands after the predicate and in inflectional languages it has the endings of the accusative case. So, the theory of positional cases ascribes the meaning of the accusative case to the noun standing after the predicate and denoting an object onto which action is passed.

It is clear that the theory of positional cases defines the case meanings as if the English language were inflectional – like, for example, Latin or Russian. It is the continuation of the influence of the Latin grammar on the English grammar. This influence started long ago - in the 16-17^th century when the first grammars of English began to be compiled.

The theory of positional cases ascribes the meanings of the dative and accusative cases to the nouns though there are no special inflections to express these meanings. For example, the noun ‘cat’ has one and the same form in the sentences:

(1) Henry gave the cat some meat (the meaning of the dative case is expressed because ‘cat’ denotes the addressee of the action);

(2) Henry gave the cat to his sister (the meaning of the accusative case is expressed because ‘cat’ denotes the direct object of the action).

The theory of positional cases shows how closely the morphological category of case is connected with the syntactical category of the parts of the sentence (= syntactical roles = syntactical functions) - the syntactical function shows the case:

- the syntactical role of the subject coincides with the meaning of the nominative case;

- the syntactical role of the indirect object coincides with the meaning of the dative case;

- the syntactical role of the indirect object coincides with the meaning of the accusative case.

Only the meaning of the genitive case is shown by a special morpheme -‘s.

In the English language the word order in the sentence is fixed. It means that the syntactical meanings of words (the subject, the object, the attribute) are shown not by the inflections (as in the Russian language: доск- а – is the subject (the nominative case), доск- у – is the direct object (the accusative case), but by the position according to the verbal predicate: the subject precedes the predicate, the object follows the predicate.

2) What is the difference between MORPHOLOGICAL cases and POSITIONAL cases? – There are two different understandings of the essence [ суть ] of the grammatical category of case [ категория падежа ]: morphological and positional.

What is the meaning of the grammatical category of case? - The grammatical category of case shows the relations between nouns. But as nouns denote things, the grammatical category of case shows how things are related to each other. For example: письмо Джон а and письмо Джон у. ‘ Джон а ’ is related to ‘ письмо ’ as the author of it. ‘ Джон у ’ is related to ‘ письмо ’ as the addressee of it.

What is the form of the grammatical category of case? - Some grammarians understand the category of case in the traditional way: as such grammatical meaning which is expressed morphologically – that is, by a special inflection (=grammatical morpheme) – like in the Russian language: доск- а, доск- и, доск- е, доск- у, доск- ой, доск- е. As the number of inflection is scarce [ мало ] in English, the find only two morphological cases in the English language: the common case and the possessive (=genitive) case. For example: boy:: boy ’s. ‘ Boy ’ is the unmarked member. ‘ Boy ’s ’ is the marked member (the mark is –‘s).

Some grammarians even say that there is no category of case in the English language because it lacks special case forms. They think that –‘s cannot be considered a mark of case because case inflections cannot combine with phrases. Yet, –‘s can combine with phrases: Mark an Ted ’s room, the man I saw yesterday ’s son [ сын человека, которого я видел вчера ].

Other grammarians think that the meanings of English cases are shown not morphologically but syntactically - by the position which the noun occupies in the sentence in relation to the predicate:

- the noun expresses the meaning of the nominative case if it stands before the predicate in the position of the subject;

- the noun expresses the meaning of the dative case if it stands after the predicate and denotes the addressee of the action;

- the noun expresses the meaning of the accusative case if it stands after the predicate and denotes the passive object\ passive recipient of the action.

3) What is the difference between morphological cases and deep cases?

The meanings of the morphological cases are expressed morphologically, that is through morphemes, namely grammatical morphemes (endings). It is especially evident in the inflectional languages, such as Russian. For example, the endings of the case forms of nouns of the feminine gender: -a, -ы\-и, –е, -у, -ой, -е (доск- а, доск- и, доск- е, доск- у, доск- ой, доск- е).

Morphological cases are two: the COMMON case and the POSSESSIVE case. The meaning of the POSSESSIVE case is expressed by ‘s. The meaning of the COMMON case is expressed by the absence of ‘s. E.g.: cat:: cat’ s.

These two forms make a privative binary opposition.

The marked member is ‘cat’ s ’. It is marked by the presence of the morph /s/. The morph /s/ expresses the meaning of the POSSESSIVE case

‘Cat’ is the unmarked member. The absence of the morph /s/ expresses the meaning of the COMMON case.

In the English language the number of case endings is extremely scarce. Some grammarians say that they have disappeared. Others consider -‘s to be the only case ending. -‘s expresses the meaning of the genitive (=possessive) case. It is opposed to the meaning expressed by the zero morpheme – the meaning of the common case. Thus the category of case in the English language consists of two meanings and two forms.

The meanings of deep cases are not shown morphologically. We know these meanings when we analyze the syntactical position of the noun and its lexical meaning. The knowledge of the syntactical position of the noun gives us the initial information about the role performed by the object designated by this noun (the subject, the addressee of the action, the direct object, the adverbial modifier). The knowledge of the lexical meaning of the noun shows what exactly is designated by this noun and helps to make the final conclusion about the role (= the meaning of the deep case).

For example: Ted gave Sam sweets. The nouns Ted and Sam have no morphological signals of the case meanings. But their syntactical positions do give some information about the roles which are performed by the objects designated by the nouns Ted and Sam: Ted stands before the predicate, so it is the subject – the subject denotes the doer of the action. Sam stands after the predicate, so it is the object – which kind of object: direct or indirect? We don’t know yet. Let us analyze further.

If we have two objects, one of them is DIRECT, the other – INDIRECT. The noun which denotes the ADDRESSEE of the action is considered to express the meaning of the INDIRECT object. The noun which denotes the PASSIVE RECIPIENT is considered to express the meaning of the DIRECT object.

The DIRECT object can change its position after the predicate but in any position it is NOT preceded by a pronoun: ‘ Ted gave Sam sweets ’ = ‘ Ted gave sweets to Sam ’.

The INDIRECT object can change its position after the predicate:

- it has NO PREPOSITION if it immediately follows the predicate: ‘ Ted gave Sam sweets ’

- it is preceded by the preposition ‘ to ’ if the INDIRECT object follows the DIRECT object: ‘ Ted gave sweets to Sam ’

4) What do deep cases show? – They show the roles performed by the objects denoted by the nouns. These roles are: the agentive, the instrument, the beneficiant\ beneficiary, the experiencer, the patient, the locative, etc. These roles are called ‘cases’ because, like morphological cases, they show the relations between the objects denoted by the nouns. But unlike morphological cases the meanings of the deep cases are understood from the LEXICAL meaning of the noun. For example: in the next two sentences the noun ‘boy’ occupies the same position in the sentence - before the predicate (the position of the subject):

- The boy entered the room.

- The boy liked the room.

From the point of view of the POSITIONAL cases, in both sentences the noun ‘boy’ expresses the meaning of same case – nominative.

In both sentences the noun ‘boy’ has no ending: so, from the point of view of the MORPHOLOGICAL cases in both sentences the noun ‘boy’ expresses the meaning of the common case.

But from the point of view of the DEEP cases, the noun ‘boy’ expresses the meaning of the agentive in the first sentence, and the meaning of experiencer in the second sentence. The difference in the deep case meanings of the noun ‘boy’ depends on the different lexical meanings of the verbs ‘enter’ and ‘like’. ‘Enter’ denotes an action: that’s why the boy here is the agentive. ‘Like’ denotes a feeling: that’s why the boy here is the experiencer.

5) Why did Ch. Fillmore used the word ‘case’ for his theory of deep cases?

The word ‘case’ means ‘a grammatical meaning expressed by such noun’s forms as стол, стол-а, стол-у, стол, стол-ом, стол-е ’. We see here six forms – each with its own case meaning. So, the Russian noun is characterized by six cases: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental, prepositional.

Almost every Russian noun take the forms of these six cases and the grammatical meanings of the cases are expressed by almost every noun, that is by almost every member of the class. Such grammatical meanings which characterize the whole class (= the whole part of speech) are called categorical grammatical meanings, or grammatical categories.

We see that these meanings are expressed morphologically, that is through the change of the form of the noun – in other words, through the addition of this or that grammatical morph (or grammatical morpheme) to the stem of the noun. That’s why this case can be called the “ morphological case ” – to differentiate it from the deep case which is not morphological.

In the Russian language almost every noun can take the form of one of the six cases: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental, prepositional. The meaning of each case is expressed by its own form. All the case forms together make up the paradigm of the noun: стол, стол-а, стол-у, стол, стол-ом, стол-е.

The forms of the morphological cases express different case meanings, namely they show how the things denoted by the nouns relate to each other. Let us compare, for example, the following two word-combinations: письмо Джон а и письмо Джон у. These two word-combinations consist of the same lexemes: ‘ письмо ’ and ‘ Джон ’. The personal noun ‘ Джон ’, through the change of its form (Джон а and Джон у) shows different relations between ‘ письмо ’ and ‘ Джон ’. ‘ Письмо Джон а ’: Джон is the author of the letter. ‘ Письмо Джон у ’: Джон is the addressee of the letter.

The category of morphological case is a morphological category because its meanings are expressed morphologically, that is through the change of the form of the noun – in other words, through the addition of this or that grammatical morph (or grammatical morpheme) to the stem of the noun: стол, стол-а, стол-у, стол, стол-ом, стол-е.

But there is a very interesting feature here. The fact is that the relations between the things as components of a described situation are expressed by another grammatical category – by the category of parts of the sentence [ категория членов предложения ]. This a syntactical – functional – category. The category of parts of the sentence is syntactical because the parts of the sentence are such grammatical meanings which are expressed by a word only in the sentence, that is in combination with other words: you cannot define the syntactical function of the word (the subject, direct object, indirect object, prepositional object, the attribute, the adverbial modifier, the predicate, the predicative). Syntax is that part of grammar which describes how we must combine words in speech.

Let us prove that the morphological category of case is close in meaning with the syntactical category of parts of the sentence.

The meaning and the form of the nominative case (in the Russian language, for example) is expressed together with the syntactical meaning of the subject [ подлежащее ]: Стол стоит в центре..

The meaning and the form of the accusative case is expressed together with the syntactical meaning of the direct object [ прямое дополнение ]: Джим сломал стол.

The meaning and the form of the dative case is expressed together with the syntactical meaning of the indirect object [ косвенное дополнение ]: Джим послал другу письмо.

So, the relations between things denoted by nouns are expressed both morphologically (by the meanings and forms of morphological cases) and syntactically (by the meanings and positions of the parts of the sentence: the position of the subject is before the predicate; the position of the object is after the predicate).

Here we must note that in the Russian language the meanings of morphological cases and the meanings of the parts of the sentence are more closely connected than in the English language. I mean that a case form of a Russian noun taken out of the sentence gives more information about its syntactical function than an English noun taken out of the sentence. For example, the form стол corresponds either to the syntactical function (=position) of the subject or direct object: Стол стоит в центре; Джим сломал стол. ‘ Стол ’ cannot be an indirect object or an attribute or an adverbial modifier.

The English noun ‘ table ’ (taken out of a sentence) only shows that it is not the genitive case form (because the genitive case form is ‘ table ’s ’). We cannot say whether it the nominative case or the accusative case or the dative case – because the English nouns have lost their grammatical inflections of cases, their case forms have disappeared during the process of the development of the English language.

That is why English grammarians define the meanings of the noun’s cases through the positions of the noun in the sentence – they have no alternative: there are no other signals of the meanings of cases in the English language (the English nouns have lost their grammatical inflections of cases). And that is why this theory of English cases is called positional.

This fact again shows how closely the category of the noun’s cases is connected with the syntactical category of parts of the sentence: the meaning of a case cannot be understood without the knowledge of the syntactical function (= position) of a noun. That is why the theory of English cases which distinguishes four cases (nominative, genitive, dative, accusative) is called positional.

The meaning of the nominative case is expressed by the noun if it stands before the predicate, that is in the position of the subject. The meaning of the dative case is expressed by the noun if it stands after the predicate and expresses the addressee of the action. The meaning of the accusative case is expressed by the noun if it stands after the predicate and expresses the passive object of the action. The meaning of the genitive case is not expressed positionally: it is expressed by the morph (or the particle) –‘s. Such theory of the noun’s case cannot be called the theory of morphological cases because cases in this theory are not expressed morphologically, that is through the change of the form of the noun – in other words, through the addition of this or that grammatical morph (or grammatical morpheme) to the stem of the noun.

Not all grammarians agree that the cases can be expressed positionally: for two thousand years the cases have been described as morphological (in inflectional languages – Latin, Greek, Russian, etc). They say that if nouns have lost their inflections, they have lost their case forms. Such grammarians say that the English noun is characterized by only two cases: common and possessive (genitive). The meaning of the possessive (genitive) case is expressed by a special mark -‘s (it the marked member of the privative opposition). The meaning of the common case is expressed by the absence of any mark (it the unmarked member of the privative opposition).

Now, why did Ch. Fillmore used the word ‘case’ for his theory of deep cases? Because deep cases, like morphological and especially positional cases, also show the relations between the things in the situation which is described by the sentence. In other words, deep cases show the roles performed by the things in the situation which is described by the sentence:

- the agent(ive): Sam opened the door.

- the instrument: This key will not open the door

- the beneficiant/beneficiary: The mother bought her son present.

- the patient: Sam opened the door.

- the experiencer: Sam loves Mary.

6) What do deep cases mean? – The term ‘deep cases’ was invented by Charles Fillmore to denote the roles which the objects perform in the situation: the agent, the intrument, the beneficiary, the experiencer, the patient.

The agent is an animate doer of the action (Ted knows all).

The experiencer is an animate being which passively experiences an emotion (Pete loved Mary).

The intrument is an inanimate object with the help of which the action was performed (This key will open this door).

The beneficiary is an animate addressee doer of the action (Fred bought me flowers).

The patient is an object which passively experiences an action (This key will open this door).

GENDER

1) What are the signals of genders in those theories which consider gender to be a grammatical category? – These signals are personal pronouns [ личные местоимения ]. These are very peculiar signals.

Grammatical categories of parts of speech are morphological categories. The word ‘morphological’ means that the meanings of these categories are expressed morphologically, that is through the change of the form of the word – in other words, the meanings of these categories are expressed by special morphemes. These grammatical morphemes are taken by every member of the class. For example, every Russian noun of the masculine gender and of the singular number takes in the form of the dative case the ending – у: столу, коту, мальчику.

Members of the same part of speech take the same forms (the set of such forms makes up the paradigm of this part of speech). For example, these are the case forms of the singular number of the Russian noun of the masculine gender: стол, стол-а, стол-у, стол, стол-ом, стол-е. The same forms are taken by other nouns of the masculine gender: ствол, стул, волк etc. Every noun in the given form expresses the same grammatical meaning: e.g. чему? – столу, коту, мальчику – they all express the meaning of the dative case.

You see that the meanings of the category of case are expressed by morphemes which are added to the stems of the words. Such type of connection between language units is called the syntagmatic relation. The syntagmaticrelation is such type of relation which connects language units in a chain, a sequence [последовательность], a word, a phrase, a sentence. Syntagmatically connected units follow each other.

All the traditional morphological categories of parts of speech are expressed in such a way: a morph is added to the stem. The morph and the stem are related syntagmatically.

Now let us look at the category of gender. In the Russian language, gender is expressed in this traditional way - a morph is added to the stem: красн-ый, красн-ая, красн-ое.

Can we consider the expression of gender in the English language to be a grammatical (morphological) category? Let us see.

To be considered a grammatical (morphological) category, the meaning must be expressed by every member of the class. It means that every member of the class must contain the grammatical morpheme showing the meaning of the category. For example: красн-ый, красн-ая, красн-ое (the endings – ый, -ая, -ое show the meanings of the masculine, feminine and neuter genders) or стол, стол-а, стол-у, стол, стол-ом, стол-е (the endings show the meanings of cases: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental, prepositional).

Do English nouns contain such grammatical morphemes showing the meanings of gender? No, they do not.

You may say that some of English nouns contain morphemes showing the meanings of gender, for example: lion ess, steward ess, actr ess, waitr ess, widow er, hero ine, he -goat, she -goat, Tom -cat, Pussy -cat, jenny -ass, jack -ass, pea- hen, pea- cock, bride groom, duch ess, emper or – empr ess, godd ess, host ess, usher ette. Yet, such morphemes cannot be considered grammatical – they are lexico-grammatical (derivational): they make up new words (not forms of the same word).

Why can’t we consider such morphemes to be grammatical? The same set of grammatical morphemes is taken by all the members of the class. For example, the endings – ый, -ая, -ое are taken by all Russian adjectives. That’s why we don’t say that красн-ый, красн-ая, красн-ое are three different words: they are the three forms of the adjective ‘красный’.

If every English noun could take the morpheme – ess to express the feminine gender we could speak about the category of gender as of the grammatical (morphological) one. In this case we could speak about a binary privative opposition like ‘god:: goddess’, in which the member expressing the masculine gender would be unmarked and the member expressing the feminine gender would be marked.

Yet, we cannot name a morpheme (or morphemes) which is\are regularly taken by all the members of the class of the nouns. So, we cannot speak about the grammatical (morphological) category of gender for the English noun.

However, М.Я. Блох does think that the English noun is characterized by the grammatical (morphological) category of gender. What does he take as the grammatical mark (or marks) expressing the meanings of this category? - He takes the personal pronouns. They perform the same function as the inflections (=endings) of adjectives – ый, -ая, -ое or the endings of the Russian verb in the past tense (шё л, шл а, шл о): they show the grammatical meaning of gender.

But there is difference between the expression of gender in the Russian language and the expression of gender in the English language. In the Russian language the meanings of the category of gender (masculine, feminine, neuter) are expressed through the syntagmatic connection with a morpheme: красн-ый, красн-ая, красн-ое or шё л, шл а, шл о (like in other traditional morphological categories: доск- а, доск- и, доск- е, доск- у, доск- ой, доск- е). These endings are taken by every member of the class (by every adjective or by every verb).

In the English language the meanings of the category of gender (masculine, feminine, neuter, dual, common) are expressed through the paradigmatic associations with the personal pronouns he, she, it.

The term ‘ paradigmatic associations’ means that the mark [ показатель ] of the gender meaning is not added to the stem of the noun: the mark of the gender and the stem do not make up a syntagmatic connection. But the connection exists – otherwise we couldn’t speak of the grammatical (morphological) category. This is the connection of a different type – the paradigmatic connection. It means that those, who speak English, associate [ ассоциируют, связывают, соотносят ], in their minds [ в уме, мысленно ] almost every noun:

- either with ‘ he ’ (such noun expresses the meaning of the masculine gender);

- or with ‘ she ’ (such noun expresses the meaning of the feminine gender);

- or with ‘ it ’ (such noun expresses the meaning of the neuter gender);

- or with both ‘ he ’ and ‘ she ’ (such noun expresses the meaning of the dual gender – teacher, doctor, reader, swimmer);

- or with ‘ he ’, ‘ she ’ and ‘ it ’ (such noun expresses the meaning of the common gender – ‘baby’).

3) What are the lexico-grammatcial moprhemes expressing the meaning of gender?

Lion ess, steward ess, actr ess, waitr ess, widow er, hero ine, he -goat, she -goat, duch ess, emper or – empr ess, godd ess, host ess, usher ette.

4) To what type of morphemes do the following morphemes refer (they express gender): Tom -cat, Pussy -cat, jenny -ass, jack -ass, pea- hen, pea- cock, bride groom?

Lexical morphemes – these are such morphemes which are homonymous to words: Tom, Pussy, Jenny, Jack, hen, cock, groom.