Adjective

1) What is the elative? – These are secondary meanings (not primary ones!) of the forms comparative and superlative degrees.

Let is take first the form of the comparative degree, like whiter, more difficult. The primary meaning of this form is that of restricted superiority. E.g. This task is more difficult than that one.

The form of the comparative degree can also express the meaning of unrestricted superiority. It is its secondary meaning and it is called the elative.

The meaning of unrestricted superiority is also expressed by the superlative degree (e.g. the most important, the longest) and this meaning is its principal meaning.

The form of the comparative degree expresses the meaning of the elative (the meaning of unrestricted superiority) when it is used in association with such NEGATIVE PRONOUNS as nobody, no one, nothing, nowhere, never, no.

For example: There is nothing more exciting than climbing rocks. The form ‘ more exciting ’ in association with ‘ nothing ’ expresses its secondary meaning - that of unrestricted superiority. It can be proved by the fact that the same idea can be rendered by the superlative degree form: Climbing rocks is the most exciting thing.

Another example: I know nobody more handsome than John. -> John is the most handsome man I know.

Now let us speak about the elative meaning of the superlative degree form. The primary meaning of this form is that of unrestricted superiority. E.g.: It is the most difficult task.

The elative meaning of this form does not imply comparison. It expresses a high degree of the quality but it does not imply that any comparison has been done. For example:

- Your victory have us the greatest pleasure. (= a very great pleasure)

- That was a severest winter (= a very severe).

2) How many degrees of comparison of adjectives does М.Я. Блох distinguish? – To the three traditional degrees of comparison (positive, comparative and superlative) М.Я. Блох adds two more – the degrees of reverse comparison, they are expressed by the element ‘ less ’. E.g.: white – whiter – the whitest – less white – the least white.

3) How do Хаймович and Роговская explain their rejection of the less -forms as forms of degrees of comparison of adjectives?

Grammarians:

21. either consider combinations more + adjective, most + adjective to be word-combinations;

22. or they consider combinations more + adjective, most + adjective to be words (namely, forms of adjectives expressing degrees if comparison).

In the first case they see no grammatical difference between such combinations as more difficult and more people; most necessary and most

students. Such combinations consist of words (each with its own lexical and grammatical meanings).

In the second case grammarians see no grammatical difference between such combinations as more difficult and longer; most necessary and the longest. Such combinations consist of morphs (morphemes). Grammatically, -er and more are morphemes, expressing restricted superiority. –est and most are also morphemes. They express the meaning of unrestricted superiority.

Хаймович and Роговская stick to the second point of view. According to them the MORPHEMIC status of the element more is supported by its complementary distribution with the morph – er. It means that both more and – er:

23. express the same grammatical meaning – that of RESTRICTED SUPERIORITY

24. have different forms: more and – er

25. cannot replace each other in identical positions (=identical environments). For example: with ‘ difficult ’ – er is impossible. With ‘ white ’ more is impossible. In other words the distribution of – er are one- or two-syllable adjectives. The distribution of more are three-syllable adjectives.

When morphs answer these three criteria, grammarians say that they are ALLOMORPHS and are characterized by complementary distribution.

The MORPHEMIC STATUS of the element most is supported by its complementary distribution with the morph – est. Both most and – est:

26. express the same grammatical meaning – that of UNRESTRICTED SUPERIORITY

27. have different forms: most and – est

28. cannot replace each other in identical positions (=identical environments). For example: with ‘ difficult ’ – est is impossible. With ‘ white ’ most is impossible. In other words the distribution of – est are one- or two-syllable adjectives. The distribution of most are three-syllable adjectives.

When morphs answer these three criteria, grammarians say that they are ALLOMORPHS and are characterized by complementary distribution.

According to Хаймович and Роговская, LESS and LEAST are not morphs, they are WORDS. We cannot say that there are morphs which support the morphemic status of less and least.

Хаймович and Роговская accept more- and most- forms as forms of degrees of comparison of adjectives and they do not accept less - and least -forms forms of degrees of comparison of adjectives. They believe that the elements more and most must be considered the elements of the same status as the elements - er and – est, i.e. both more and most, on the one hand, and the elements - er and – est, on the other hand, are morphemes (not words!).

Both - er and more express one and the same grammatical meaning: that of restricted superiority (the meaning of the comparative degree form).

Both - est and most express one and the same grammatical meaning: that of unrestricted superiority (the meaning of the superlative degree form).

One can notice that - er and more have their own specific environments (distribution). That is:

· - the element – er is taken by one syllable and by two syllable adjectives: red – redder, happy – happier;

· - the element more is taken by adjectives consisting of more than two syllables: difficult - more difficult.

Linguists say that if two morphs (1) express the same meaning, (2) differ in form and (3) cannot substitute each other in the environments of each other, they are characterized by complementary distribution. Such morphs are called allomorphs and they refer to the same morpheme (they represent the same morpheme, they belong to the same morpheme). The elements - er and more (1) express the same meaning (that of restricted superiority ), (2) differ in form and (3) cannot substitute each other in the environments of each other. So, the conclusion is that they are characterized by complementary distribution and thus they refer to the same morpheme.

We can add more explanation: the element – er is, no doubt, a morph (a smallest meaningful part of a word). As the element more is characterized by complementary distribution with the element – er, more is also a morph, because complementary distribution can characterize only units of the same level, that is of the level of morphs. It cannot relate units of different levels, for example morphs and words. Thus, if – er is a morph and more is in complementary distribution with – er, the element more has to be also a morph (not a word!). So, both whit er and more difficult are forms of adjectives (though some grammarians say that whit er is a form, and more difficult is a phrase). Хаймович and Роговская prove that whit er and more difficult are both forms: whit er is a synthetic form, more difficult is an analytical form. The conclusion: in the form of the comparative degree of comparison the element more is a morph, not a word, because its morphemic status is supported by its complementary distribution with the morph – er.

Now let us regard the elements - est and most. Both of them express one and the same grammatical meaning: that of unrestricted superiority (the meaning of the superlative degree form).

Linguists say that if two morphs (1) express the same meaning, (2) differ in form and (3) cannot substitute each other in the environments of each other, they are characterized by complementary distribution. Such morphs are called allomorphs and they refer to the same morpheme(they represent the same morpheme, they belong to the same morpheme). The elements - est and most (1) express the same meaning (that of unrestricted superiority ), (2) differ in form and (3) cannot substitute each other in the environments of each other. So, the conclusion is that - est and most are characterized by complementary distribution and thus they refer to the same morpheme.

We can add more explanation: the element – est is, no doubt, a morph (a smallest meaningful part of a word). As the element more is characterized by complementary distribution with the element – est, most is also a morph, because complementary distribution can characterize only units of the same level, that is of the level of morphs. It cannot relate units of different levels, for example morphs and words. Thus, if – est is a morph and most is in complementary distribution with – est, the element most has to be also a morph (not a word!). So, both whit er and more difficult are forms of adjectives (though some grammarians say that whit er is a form, and more difficult is a phrase).

Хаймович and Роговская prove that whit est and the most difficult are both forms: whit est is a synthetic form, the most difficult is an analytical form. The conclusion: in the form of the superlative degree of comparison the element most is a morph, not a word, because its morphemic status is supported by its complementary distribution with the morph – est.

The morphemic statuses of the elements of the elements less and least are not supported by anything, because less and least are not found in complementary distribution with any morph (unlike more and most!)

ADVERB

1) What are fluctuant conversives? - These are adverbs which are homonymous to adjectives, prepositions or conjunctions (daily, monthly, weekly, flat (lie flat on the stomach), high (fly high in the sky), deep (thrust the hands deep into the pockets), hard (to study hard, to rain hard), quick (Come here quick!); since (I have not seen him since), before (Have we met before?); around (He is hanging around).

These adverbs (= fluctuant conversives) were built from adjectives, prepositions or conjunctions – by conversion (= by zero-affixation).

2) What adverbs are called phrasal? - at least, at most, to and fro, upside down, on purpose, by chance, at last, by day, on horseback, at night, in advance, in front, in public, by hand, by heart, to death, in full, in particular, in vain. They look like a phrase [ словосочетание ]: they consist of two components written separately. The first component is a preposition. The second is the steam of the notional [ знаменательное ] word (the stem of the noun or the adjective). The whole combination is of stable, idiomatic character – it’s a set-expression.

3) What is an adverbid? – It is a substantivized adverb [ субстантивированное наречие ] which combines with a preposition. For example: from outside, from above, for later, till now, before then, by now.

GERUND

1) What are the syntactical functions (=syntactical position) of the gerund?

1. the SUBJECT. E.g. Smoking may ruin your health.

2. the OBJECT. E.g.: I detest lying.

3. the PREDICATE (secondary predicate – in constructions of secondary predication). E.g.: Tom’s sharing the expenses helped a lot.

4. the PREDICATIVE (after link-verbs). E.g.: My hobby is skating.

5. the ATTRIBUTE:

a. prepositive attribute: E.g.: walking shoes, swimming pool, bathing suit, reading hall

b. postpositive attribute (in this case the gerund (= the postpositive attribute) is related to the modified noun through a preposition): E.g.: The problem of preserving the nature in this region.

5. the ADVERBIAL MODIFIER: E.g.: It happened due to Tom’s being sick. (the adverbial modifier of reason\ cause). We shall clean the kitchen after washing up. (the adverbial modifier of time)

PARTICIPLE ONE (The Present Participle)

1. What grammatical categories does participle one express?

Partciciple I expresses THREE grammatical categories:

1) the category of retrospective coordination

2) the category of development

3) the category of voice

The category of retrospective coordination is represented by TWO forms. For example: taking:: hav ing tak en. These two forms make up a privative binary opposition. This opposition is binary, because it consists of TWO members. This opposition is privative, because one member of the opposition is marked (hav ing tak en), the other is unmarked (taking). The marked member is marked by the presence of the discontinuous morpheme {have…en}, which expresses the grammatical meaning of priority [ предшествование ]. Compare:

Swimming to the shore, John saw a shark. – Плывя к берегу, Джон увидел акулу.

Having swum to the shore, John saw a shark. – Подплыв к берегу, Джон увидел акулу.

The category of development is also represented by TWO forms. For example: running:: be ing runn ing. These two forms also make up a privative binary opposition. This opposition is binary, because it consists of TWO members. This opposition is privative, because one member of the opposition is marked (be ing runn ing), the other is unmarked (running). The marked member is marked by the presence of the discontinuous morpheme {be…ing}, which expresses the grammatical meaning of development. In other words, the form be ing runn ing emphasizes the meaning of continuity; it stresses that the action is represented as developing and taking some time. Compare:

Running to the barn, Ted stumbled and fell.

Being running to the barn, Ted stumbled and fell.

The category of voice is also represented by TWO forms. For example: taking:: be ing tak en. These two forms also make up a privative binary opposition. This opposition is binary, because it consists of TWO members. This opposition is privative, because one member of the opposition is marked (be ing tak en), the other is unmarked (taking). The marked member is marked by the presence of the discontinuous morpheme {be…en}, which expresses the grammatical meaning of the PASSIVE voice. The unmarked member expresses the meaning of the ACTIVE voice. Compare:

Taking the goods from the shelf, be careful.

The boy was crying bitterly being taken to the doctor by his mother.

The ACTIVE voice form shows that the action was performed by the subject itself.

The PASSIVE voice form shows that the subject was NOT the doer of the action: it was the recipient of the action.

2) What are the syntactical functions (=syntactical position) of Participle One?

1) Participle I can be a PREDICATIVE ATTRIBUTE in a sentence (it stands after a link-verb):

The matter seems frightening. [In this case frightening can be considered also an adjective].

2) Participle I can be a PREPOSITIVE ATTRIBUTE in a sentence (it stands before a noun):

He looked at the crying girl and sighed.

3) Participle I can be a POSTPOSITIVE ATTRIBUTE in a sentence (it stands after a noun and has dependent words):

He looked at the girl running across the street.

4) Participle I can be a SECONDARY PREDICATE (in construction of secondary predication):

I saw her smiling.

The yacht sailing too slowly, everybody on deck felt annoyed and irritated.

5) Participle I can be an ADVERBIAL MODIFIER.

Being lazy, John failed his exams. [an adverbial modifier of CAUSE\ REASON]

She walked limping. [an adverbial modifier of MANNER]

Having written the test she sighed with relief. [an adverbial modifier of TIME]

ADVERB

1) What are fluctuant conversives?

These are adverbs which are homonymous to adjectives, prepositions or conjunctions (daily, monthly, weekly, flat (lie flat on the stomach), high (fly high in the sky), deep (thrust the hands deep into the pockets), hard (to study hard, to rain hard), quick (Come here quick!); since (I have not seen him since), before (Have we met before?); around (He is hanging around).

These adverbs (= fluctuant conversives) were built from adjectives, prepositions or conjunctions - by conversion (= by zero-affixation).

2) What adverbs are called phrasal? - at least, at most, to and fro, upside down, on purpose, by chance, at last, by day, on horseback, at night, in advance, in front, in public, by hand, by heart, to death, in full, in particular, in vain. They look like a phrase [словосочетание]: they consist of two components written separately. The first component is a preposition. The second is the steam of the notional [знаменательное] word (the stem of the noun or the adjective). The whole combination is of stable, idiomatic character - it's a set-expression.

3) What is an adverbid? - It is a substantivized adverb [субстантивированное наречие] which combines with a preposition. For example: from outside, from above, for later, till now, before then, by now.