XXIV. Functional parts of speech. Preposition

The prepositions express the relations between words in a sentence. They don’t have their own lexical meaning or independent function in the sentence, but they are a most important element of the structure. In English they are one of the main means of expressing relations between nouns and other part of the sentence. Prepositions of place even express extralingustic relations, like notional parts of speech – on the table-under the table -.

The preposition connects words in such patterns as: “noun+preposition+noun”, “adjective+preposition+noun”, “verb+preposition+noun”. What predicts the use of this or that preposition? Sometimes it is the preceding word: depend on, interested in. In these cases the connection between the preposition and the preceding word is stronger than the connection with the following word, and usually this noun is an object, but if the connection with the following word is stronger – is under the table, rises in the morning – the noun is the adverbial modifier.

The preposition express various relations – place, time, cause etc. and are the only means of expressing those relations, as there are no case inflections of nouns:

The roof of the house – showed the letter to the manager – the letter was signed by the manager – he cut the apple with a knife.

The form of the prepositions can be simple, (on, in, with), composite (without, upon) and group prepositions, or word-combinations serving as prepositions: according to, instead of, in spite of. Some prepositions are derived from participles and have the same form: concerning, regarding.

Some prepositions have the same form, as adverbs, but they are different in function: We spoke about health. – Children were running about. Across the road – put it across. Down the stairs – looked down (up, down, after, by, in, on, about, across, above).

Conjunctions

Conjunctions serve to connect words and phrases and clauses. Though they are functional words, some of them, like the prepositions, have their own lexical meaning: “He came because it was late.” And “He came though it was late.” The causal and the concessive connection between the events exist in extralinguistic reality, outside the language. As there is no difference in the grammatical structure of the two sentences, the difference lies only in the meaning of the two conjunctions.

Unlike prepositions, the use of conjunctions is never predicted by any preceding word.

There are co-ordinating (and, or, but, as well as, both…and, not only…but also, either…or, neither…nor, also, furthermore, moreover, similarly, besides) and subordinating conjunctions, classified according to the clauses they introduce: object: that, if, whether; time – after, as, as long as, as soon as, since, until (till), while, when; cause: as, because, for; condition: if, on condition, provided/providing, supposing, unless; purpose: lest, in order that; manner: as, as if, as though, so…that, such…that; comparison: as …as, not so…as, than; result: so that, therefore, thus, hence, so; concession: in spite of the fact that, despite, though, although, however, nevertheless.

On the phrase level conjunctions connect words and phrases: “Both the children and the adults enjoyed the celebration.” (co-ordinating)

On the sentence level conjunctions connect clauses of different kind (both co-ordinating and subordinating) “Hurry up or you will miss the train.” After the plane took off the hostess served the drinks.”

Sometimes subordinating conjunctions look exactly the same as prepositions or adverbs: He always comes before (after) I do. – before – conjunction; I’ll go there before dinner – preposition; I have seen this before – adverb.

The difference is in the syntactical function, and some linguists consider that this difference is not enough to classify them as different parts of speech, they offer to classify them as one class of connectives. The fact that one of them connects clauses, another expresses relations between the verb-predicate and the object, and the third functions the modifier of time of the action can be explained by different functions of the same word. But there is more logic in speaking of them as grammatical homonyms, as the most of the members of their classes are different words: During her illness – preposition, while she was ill – conjunction, I asked him, when she was ill – adverb, because it is a part of the sentence.

Particles

Particles are functional words of specifying and limiting meaning. They show subjective attitude. They refer to the word (or phrase) immediately following and give special prominence to the notion expressed by this word, or single it out in some other way, depending on the meaning of the particle. One just does what is reasonable. She could feel anger, even at this late date.

It can stand apart from the word it refers to – I have only met him twice. It is a specific part of the sentence, because without it the meaning of it changes.

The particle not deserves special treatment. It may stand outside the predicate – Not till we landed did we realize that we are alive. Or in short answers: Certainly not. Perhaps not. Of course not. (with modal words). It appears to be the main part of the sentence. Another use is within the predicate, as part of the verb: I am not, he is not, she does not. Here the particle is an auxiliary element within the morphology of the verb, and it has no syntactic function of its own. Its becoming a morpheme within the verb form is seen in the contracted forms isn’t, wouldn’t.

Sometimes the word almost causes doubts whether it is an adverb or a particle: The boat almost overturned. – whether it shows the subjective attitude (it was in danger of overturning) or it denotes the manner in which the action was conducted. It can be felt in the translation – чуть не перевернулась – particle, почти перевернулась – adverb.

Interjection

It is doubtful whether they are involuntary outcries, provoked by feelings of pain, joy, surprise, not restricted to any given language but common to all human beings as biological phenomena are.

But this only accounts for the etymology of interjections, which appeared from involuntary outcries, but now they belong to the word stock of the language as much as other types of words do. Interjections belonging to a certain language may contain sounds foreign to other languages. Thus, the English interjection alas contains the vowel phoneme [ ], which is not found either in Russian or in German language; the Russian interjection ах contains the consonant phoneme [x], which is not found in English.

The interjections, as different from nouns, verbs, prepositions, are not names of anything, but expressions of emotions. Thus, the emotion expressed by the interjection alas may be named despair, but can’t be named alas.

Some of the interjections express quite definite meanings (alas can never express joy), others express feeling in general (oh – surprise, joy, disappointment, fear).

On the phrase level the problem is whether an interjection can be part of any phrase and what types of words can be connected with it. Usually interjections are syntactically isolated, but sometimes it can be connected with a group “preposition+noun”, naming the person or thing which causes the feeling expressed by the interjection: Alas for my friends!

The interjection oh can be followed by the adjective dear to form a phrase which itself is equivalent to an interjection: Oh dear! It can only be the first component of a phrase.

On the sentence level we have to consider interjections a part of the sentence, loosely connected with the rest of it, and approaching a parenthesis in its character. Oh, she used awful grammar, but she was trying so hard to be elegant. They can form a sentence by themselves: “Oh!” said Scarlet, her hopes dashed. Some phrases are equivalent to interjections: dear me! Goodness gracious!

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14