Compound sentence as a unit of syntax. Structural-semantic model of a complex sentence. relevant scientific sources

A complex sentence is a syntactic unit of a higher order than a simple sentence.

A compound sentence is a combination of two or more predicative parts, functioning as one communication unit. Each of the predicative parts included in it is similar in structure to a simple sentence, however, as part of a complex structure, it loses such features of the sentence as intonational and semantic independence, and interacts with the other part, expressing a detailed message, integral in nature: We again without collusion ran into her: going downstairs, she held the key in her hand (V. Nabokov); Everything that life gave me burned down (L. Alekseeva).

Thus, a complex sentence is a polypredicative communicative unit, characterized by structural and semantic unity, as well as intonation completeness. The most important features of a complex sentence, opposing it to a simple one, are:

• 1) polypredicativity, which determines the presence of a complex mechanism of mutual adaptation of predicative parts and the use of special means for this: The trio is waiting at the porch, in a rush. a fast run will take us away (P. Vyazemsky); Friendship is friendship, and service is service;
• 2) polypropositivity - the presence of two or more event or logical propositions and the combination in the semantic structure of the sentence of nominations of two or more events (situations): Darkness has gone deep in the sky, the dawn has risen (A. Pushkin).

The event proposition is connected with the sphere of being, movement, activity (physical or social); logical proposition - with a reflection of the relations established in the process of mental activity, logical reasoning (relationships of identification, identity, etc.). The sign of polypropositivity is not absolute: in the sphere of a complex sentence, an asymmetry between the number of predicative parts and the number of propositions is possible.

The asymmetry in the relations of predicativity and propositivity is manifested in the existence of simple sentences, which are characterized by polypropositivity. These are sentences complicated by separate definitions, circumstances, applications, which are folded propositions, as well as sentences with names of propositive (event) semantics and sentences with secondary nominal predicates: Person, harmful in force beliefs, can be persuaded. Human harmful on personal malice, can be softened. Only those who harm out of fear are invulnerable and adamant (L. Ginzburg); Arrival the guests woke the dogs, sleeping on the sun(N. Gogol); From that day on, Prince Andrei fiance began to go to the Rostovs (L.N. Tolstoy).

In turn, not all complex sentences are polypropositional. Consider, for example, a complex sentence. It's good that he did it. The subordinate part in it expresses a proposition (reports a certain "state of affairs"), the main part expresses the subjective attitude of the speaker to the reported (i.e. modus). A complex sentence consisting of two predicative parts turns out to be monopropositional. Thus, polypredicativity can also correspond to monopropositivity.

A complex sentence is a multidimensional unit. It is characterized: a) in the structural aspect - by polypredicativity and a detailed set structural elements to connect the combined predicative parts; b) in the semantic aspect - semantic completeness and semantic integrity, as well as often polypropositivity; c) in the communicative aspect - the unity of the communicative task and intonation completeness.

In the structural aspect, a complex sentence is built according to models (schemes), the elements of which are determined by its polypredicative nature: the combination of predicative parts that are different in structure and semantics requires their structural, semantic and intonational adaptation to each other.

The complex sentence model includes a set of basic and additional means of communication. The main means of communication include: a) coordinating and subordinating unions: My tired thoughts flight has become low, and the world of the soul is waterless and poorer (P. Vyazemsky); If a my Russia is over - I'm dying (Z. Gippius); b) allied words, or relatives (in a complex sentence): In the river, what we call life, and we are a mirror stream (P. Vyazemsky); c) correlates (indicative words in the main part of a complex sentence, signaling its incompleteness): What a regret and hello to that who perishes in the color of years? (M. Lermontov); d) supporting words in complex sentences of an undivided structure - words directly distributed by the subordinate clause: You wander in the forest, not thinking that suddenly you will become an eyewitness to some secret (M. Petrov); e) intonation.

Additional means of communication, namely the structural features of predicative parts, due to the need for their connection with others, include:

• 1) paradigm complex sentence - the ratio of aspectual-temporal forms and modal plans of predicates. It has more members than the paradigm simple sentence(in a complex sentence, their maximum number reaches 49), which is explained by various combinations of tense and modal plans of predicative parts. In addition to temporal and modal characteristics, the paradigm of a complex sentence also takes into account the specific forms of predicates, since depending on their identity or non-coincidence, various ratios of situations in time (sequence or simultaneity) are transmitted, cf.: When the doctor came (owl appearance), the patient calmed down ( owl view) - sequence of actions; When the doctor examined the patient (non-native view), no one interfered (non-n. view) - simultaneity;
• 2) anaphoric and cataphoric pronouns indicating the incompleteness of one of the parts and its close connection with the other: anaphoric pronominal words refer to the previous predicative part, cataphoric ones to the next: In Russia censored department arose before literature; always felt his fatal perfection (V. Nabokov); The whole city is there such: a fraudster sits on a fraudster and drives a fraudster (V. Gogol);
• 3) structural incompleteness one of the predicative parts, the presence of unsubstituted syntactic positions in it: He is in the hall; next: no one(A. Pushkin);
• 4) grammaticalized lexemes, specific for certain complex sentences: for example, in non-target complex sentences, lexemes are used enough, not enough, too, etc.: Genius enough any crumbs of experience in order to be able to recreate an accurate picture (A. Bitov);
• 5) semantic correlation lexical filling of predicative parts, manifested in the presence of words with common semes or in lexical repetition: clear mind and heart clear, and sea purely, like glass: everything is so hello-safe, it's like that smiling-light(P. Vyazemsky);
• 6) loose/pinned (fixed) order predicative parts ( fixed post position non-fixed post position): Poetry is lying in the grass, underfoot, so you just have to bend down to see it and pick it up from the ground (B. Pasternak);
• 7) parallelism buildings, relevant for some types of compound and non-union complex sentences: I was gloomy - other children are cheerful and talkative (M. Lermontov).

The set of means of communication - the structural elements of a complex sentence - forms its model (scheme), which can be both typical and private. A typical model is a general model by which all complex sentences of the same structural-semantic type are built, private model- a model of a specific complex sentence. It includes the means of predicative links that are inherent in a particular syntactic construction and are relevant for its construction. The complex sentence model is graphically transmitted in the form of a block diagram. For example, the sentence Evil exists in order to fight it (I. Brodsky) is built according to the scheme, (p. what). Models of a complex sentence are divided into free and phraseologized (phrase models). The latter include stably reproduced additional means of connecting predicative parts (particles, special lexemes, repetition of words or their forms): Connections connections, but you also need to have a conscience (E. Schwartz). Let us consider in more detail the sentence of the phraseologized structure. It is worth reading this poem more carefully, as we will understand its full depth. It is built according to a non-free model, which includes, as its constant component, such additional means of communication as the word stands (cost) and the adjoining perfective infinitive in the first part. The general model of complex sentences of this variety has the form:

[worth (cost) + infinitive], (with. how).

Such sentences of a phraseologized structure name two events that are connected by relations of condition and direct consequence, cf.: As soon as we carefully read this poem, we will understand its meaning. If we carefully read this poem, we will understand its meaning. In addition, in sentences built on this phrase model, the presence of a characteristic property in a person or object, which determines the possibility of what is called the second part, is emphasized. As a result, additional causal relationships may arise between the two predicative parts: As soon as he gets sick, everything stops. Thus, this sentence of a phraseologized structure, like many others built on non-free models, is ambiguous. The model of a complex sentence is an indicator of its grammatical meaning; the structural mechanism of a sentence determines its syntactic semantics.

In the semantic aspect, a complex sentence is a unit characterized by semantic integrity. Its meaning is not the sum of the meanings of its constituent predicative parts. "The grammatical meaning of a complex sentence is usually understood as the semantic relations between its parts, and one or another grammatical meaning characteristic not only of one particular proposal, but of all proposals that have the same structure (structure), built according to the same model. "He did not accept offers of gifts, because there was nothing to give back (I. Goncharov); there was no one to bark at (I. Goncharov); One day, Varyusha woke up because Sidor was banging his beak on the glass (K. Paustovsky), despite the difference in specific unions, they are built according to a common model model:, (causal subordinating union). the events of the first and second predicative parts establish a causal connection.Thus, the syntactic meanings of these constructions are the meanings of the cause.

There are general and particular syntactic meanings. General meanings are the meanings inherent in typical models of complex sentences and based mainly on the main means of communication; private syntactic meanings are determined taking into account the lexical content and additional means of communication and characterize the subtypes of complex sentences or their varieties (within the subtype). Let's compare complex sentences: a) The lamps burned brightly, and the disabled samovar sang and sang his simple song (K. Paustovsky); b) It was getting hot, and I hurried home (M. Lermontov); c) The youthful fever of Stolz infected Oblomov, and he burned with a thirst for work. (I. Goncharov). All of them are built according to a common standard model, and, the main means of communication in it is the connecting union and. The common syntactic meaning of these constructions is the meaning of the join. Their lexical content, the features of the paradigm and the order of their parts make it possible to single out particular syntactic meanings: a) enumerative meaning; b) effective value; c) connective-distributive meaning.

The distinction between general and particular meanings is essential for the classification of complex sentences: types complex sentences are distinguished taking into account common values, subtypes and their varieties - taking into account particular syntactic meanings.

A particular meaning can be specified as a result of the use of syntactically specialized elements. These are adverbs, particles (and their combinations), introductory words that perform the functions of concretizers of a certain particular meaning in a complex sentence. Yes, in the proposal Already almost in front of the bunker lay forward arrows, and along the road all equals it was impossible to walk (N. Tikhonov) the words already and still express a concessive meaning. The role of such elements is especially great in compound and non-union complex sentences.

Typed lexical elements also play an important role in the implementation of syntactic meanings. These are lexical means that regularly express certain meanings in various types of complex sentences, participating in the formation of the corresponding grammatical meanings.

There are two types of such lexical elements:

1) typological-constructive elements necessary for the implementation of the main syntactic meaning of a complex sentence. So, antonyms express a comparative meaning, the main one for compound and non-union sentences with comparative relations: Young- to the service old- for advice (proverb);

complex sentence grammatical connection

2) private-constructive elements that cause an additional grammatical meaning that does not coincide with the main meaning of the sentence; Thus, the use of modal words in complex sentences with subordinate clauses modifies the main syntactic meaning: Right, a bullet hit him in the shoulder, because suddenly he lowered his hand (M. Lermontov). The subordinate clause expresses not a causal, but an investigative meaning, since its rationale is given in the main part.

In the semantic aspect, a complex sentence acts as a polypropositive unit: it is focused on reporting two or more situations, each of which receives a predicate expression, and may contain several dictum meanings. This feature does not apply, however, to all types of complex sentences. Monopositive are:

• 1) complex sentences with substantive-attributive (defining) clauses, in which the clause is used not to name a separate situation, but to establish the reference of a name: There are words that only seem banal;
• 2) explanatory-objective complex sentences, in which one part may contain a mode of expression (give a modal and / or evaluative interpretation of the message), and the second - a dictum (main message): And it seems to me that all people are wandering around in reality (P. Vyazemsky ); It's good that autumn has already passed;
• 3) complex sentences with pronominal-correlative clauses, in which the subordinate part in combination with the correlate gives a detailed name of a person or object: This is all that I heard (M. Bulgakov) - cf .: everything heard.

The meaning of a complex sentence can also be organized in such a way that the propositions contained in its parts "correlate with the same situation." So, in divisive compound sentences with unions, it’s not the same. not that, or. whether different propositions serve for an inaccurate nomination of the same situation, not clearly identified by the speaker: Either he [Rudin] envied Natalya, or he regretted her (I. Turgenev).

In the communicative aspect, a complex sentence is considered as an integral unit that performs a specific communicative task. The actual articulation of a complex sentence is carried out through intonation and the order of the parts. With a neutral (objective) order of parts, the topic is usually located at the beginning of the statement (the first part); the rheme occupies a postposition, cf.: (Frost). It's cold, // the snow crunches underfoot. Wed: (Frost). The snow crunches underfoot, // it's cold. In the last utterance, a change in the order of the parts actualizes the rheme, the first part is distinguished by intonation (raising the pitch on the stressed word and increasing its duration). The theme-rhematic division of a complex sentence reflects the allocation of less and more significant information for the speaker: the most important information is the rheme of the statement.

The boundaries of syntactic and actual articulation in a complex sentence may not coincide.

Wed: Since classes ended, // I went home (the boundaries of the components of the actual articulation coincide with the boundaries of the predicative parts); The house in which I settled // had interesting story(the subordinate clause, along with the reference word, is part of the topic - and the boundaries of syntactic and actual articulation do not coincide). The peculiarity of the actual division of a complex sentence is that its components usually denote whole events, therefore each of the predicative parts can have its own communicative structure.

When expressing the purpose of an utterance in a complex sentence, not only single-functional, but also multi-functional parts can be combined, for example, narrative and interrogative: He worked all his life, and what did you do? Thus, in comparison with a simple sentence, a complex one is characterized by the possibility of combining different goals, different functional plans. It has not only a modal, temporal, but also a communicative perspective.

The classification of complex sentences is based on the juxtaposition of the means of communication between predicative parts and syntactic meanings. When differentiating complex sentences, quantitative and qualitative criteria for their division are used, related both to their structure and semantics.

• 1) Binomial / polynomial sentences are distinguished by the number of predicative parts: It was raining, and trees were rustling from a strong wind (A. Chekhov); For some time he stood at the window: the sky was curdled; occasionally, in the place where the blind sun floated, opal pits appeared (V. Nabokov);
• 2) by the presence of allied means of communication, allied / non-union complex sentences are opposed: in allied constructions, predicative parts are connected by unions (composing or subordinating) or allied words, non-union sentences are characterized by the absence of allied means of communication: You sing me that song, what old mother sang to us before. Yesenin); There will be, there will be time: the sun will come again. Sluchevsky).

3) according to the nature of the model (scheme), sentences built according to free models and sentences built according to non-free (phraseological) models (sentences of a phraseological structure) are distinguished. Sentences of a phraseologized structure are built according to special non-free models, which are characterized by the presence of additional stably reproduced means of communication (particles, special lexemes, repetitions). Their features are: a) modeling based on the stability of the phrase scheme and its reproducibility; b) especially close connection of predicative parts; c) often a fixed order of parts; d) tendency to idiomatic meaning; e) the presence of a variety of expressive and evaluative meanings: The more flame in my long-experienced, the less ahead of the fire in me tired (I. Severyanin); Be brave, don't be brave, but you won't be braver than the world (N. Leskov).

Among the most important and regular elements of the structure of a complex sentence are the main means of communication (unions and allied words), the ratio of aspectual-temporal and modal forms of predicates, the relative position of parts, and in complex sentences, in addition, the presence or absence of correlative (indicative) words and the ratio of the subordinate part to the main part (the subordinate part refers to the entire main part or to any word or phrase in it). As already mentioned, quantitatively and qualitatively different combinations of these structural elements form models of complex sentences of various types (of course, taking into account known lexical restrictions), each of which is characterized by its wide grammatical meaning.

Most complex sentences are built on such models, they are the most productive and stylistically neutral. They are called free.

However, there are also complex proposals that are built on more complex models. In addition to the basic elements of the structure mentioned above, they include other, more specific elements that make the connection between the predicative parts especially close and cause more specific and complex grammatical meanings. Complex sentences built according to such models are limited in their use (usually typical for live colloquial speech). Such models are called non-free.

Such, for example, is the complex sentence What else, but there are enough swamps in Meshchera (K. Paustovsky). The structural model of this sentence, in addition to the comparative union a and the present tense (suffices) with a timeless meaning, also includes the pronominal combination of something else, which forms the first part. This also determines the more complex grammatical meaning of this sentence - it expresses not comparative relations, but excretory-comparative ones. According to the same non-free model, such sentences are built: Who else, but he knows; Where else, but in Moscow you will find everything, etc. Cf. free model proposal: There is little arable land in Meshchera, but there are plenty of swamps.

Individual particles are especially often used as additional elements of the structure, but these can also be various morphological forms words and even meaningful words.

So, the negative particle not and the restrictive particle are only used in complex sentences with the union as, expressing the relationship of temporal interdependence, for example:

• 1) Peasant gasp not managed, how a bear settled on him (I. Krylov);
• 2) Only we had time to rest and dine, how heard gun shots (A. Pushkin). The first part in such sentences denotes an action interrupted by another action, which is mentioned in the second part (a sentence with a particle not), or an action that ended just when the action indicated in the second part of the sentence began (a sentence with a particle only). Thus, the difference in meaning between the first and second sentences depends on the use of different particles in these sentences. Both particles are necessary in the organization of such proposals. Without them, such sentences cannot be constructed at all (one cannot say: “We managed to have lunch, how ...”, “I managed to gasp, how ...”, etc.).

In the structure of these complex sentences, the verb managed also takes part, which, in combination with particles, not only directly indicates by its lexical meaning the nature of the relations expressed in the complex sentence (did not have time ... only managed ...).

In sentences with a double union than ... those in which facts interconnected in their development are compared, the forms of the comparative degree of adjectives or qualitative adverbs are an obligatory element of the structure, for example:

• 1) How quicker the fire burned out topics more visible the moonlit night was becoming (A. Chekhov);
• 2) How more he said, topics more blushed (Saltykov-Shchedrin).

In the sentences analyzed above with elements, I did not have time ..., how ...; only managed ..., how ... and in sentences with the union than ... the, in addition to the main elements of the structure, several more private elements, characteristic only for these sentences, are distinguished. This leads to the fact that the connection between the parts of a complex sentence turns out to be so close that it even seems difficult to decide which part is main and which is subordinate. In such cases, we can talk about the subordination of parts of a complex sentence.

Thus, the more elements of the structure are included in the model of a complex sentence, the closer the connection between its parts, the less free it is, and, conversely, the fewer such elements, the less close the connection is, the more free in its structure the complex sentence turns out to be.

• 4) if it is possible to change the order of predicative parts in complex sentences, flexible and inflexible structures are distinguished. Flexible structures allow different options for the order of parts: If you have to choose your fate, I will not be deceived by another (N. Krandievskaya). Inflexible structures are structures in which permutations of predicative parts and the insertion of one of the parts into another are impossible: The train departed at seven o'clock in the evening, so that Mikhail Ivanovich could have time to have dinner ... before departure (L. Tolstoy);
• 5) on the basis of "correspondence / inconsistency of the number of propositions and predicative parts of the sentence", symmetrical and asymmetric constructions are distinguished. In symmetrical constructions, the number of propositions is equal to the number of predicative parts: If you need help, call. In asymmetric constructions, the number of propositions does not correspond to the number of predicative parts, and individual links of the semantic structure of the statement are not expressed using linguistic means (implicit): If you want to buy bread, then the bakery is on the right. In this statement, the two predicative parts correspond to three components of the semantic structure: If you want to buy bread, then (keep in mind, know) (that) the bakery is on the right. The second component is omitted, which causes the asymmetry of the complex sentence.

According to the function (the nature of the goal setting), the functional types of the complex sentence are distinguished. At the same time, they differ:

• 1) functionally homogeneous sentences - sentences, all the predicative parts of which coincide in goal setting: a) narrative: I walked slowly: I was sad (M. Lermontov); b) interrogative: Why ... others can do everything, but I can’t? (L. Tolstoy); c) incentive: Give everything earthly to the earth, and, like blue smoke, ascend to us in blue, pure and unharmed (F. Sologub).
• 2) syncretic, uniting functionally heterogeneous parts: a) narrative-interrogative: Without a doubt, he was in a pitiful position, but what was to be done? (L. Tolstoy); b) narrative-motivating: ... You won’t find better: turn a gentle look, girls, to the infantry (A. Tvardovsky); c) motivating-interrogative: Yes, run to the police officer - why is he chilling there? (A. Chekhov); d) incentive-narrative: Understand: lack of freedom from lies leads to atrocities (V Kornilov).

Syncretic functional types are represented mainly in the sphere of complex and non-union complex sentences, the predicative parts of which are characterized by a greater degree of independence than in a complex sentence.

It is traditional to divide sentences into exclamatory and non-exclamatory sentences. These types of sentences differ in the presence / absence of emotional coloring in the syntactic construction and, thus, are associated with the reflection of the position of the speaker (the author of the statement), with the transfer of his emotions and assessments. The means of expressing emotions is primarily exclamatory intonation, as well as particles, interjections and expressive vocabulary: How vividly unpretentious pictures of marching movements arise in my head, and what modest charm they acquire in memories! (A. Kuprin). Non-exclamatory and exclamatory sentences are unevenly distributed in the system complex structures. Non-exclamatory sentences predominate, while exclamatory sentences are used, as a rule, in the field of binary constructions, and they are closely related to functional types sentences: it is the question or prompt that often expresses the emotions of the speaker.

With all the variety of structural, semantic and functional characteristics in modern Russian studies, there are three main features that serve as the basis for a consistent multi-level classification of complex sentences:

• 1) the presence / absence of means of communication that combine the predicative parts. On this basis, the classes of allied and non-union proposals are distinguished;
• 2) contrasting the composition / subordination of predicative parts in the field of allied constructions: allied sentences are divided into compound and complex;
• 3) the assignment of one predicative part to one word of another part or to the entire part as a whole (non-segmentation/segmentation). The last division applies only to complex sentences. As a result, a rather harmonious classification arises: each division in it makes it possible to reveal the semantic originality of a distinguished class or subclass of sentences, due to the structural features underlying the classification.

So, non-union sentences differ from allied ones by the diffuseness of semantics, the non-differentiation of relations between parts. Compound and complex sentences differ in the degree of autonomy of the parts and the nature of the expressed relations between them.

The division of complex sentences into undivided and dissected corresponds not only to a set of structural features that delimit them, but also to significant differences in the nature of the relationship between the parts, which is reflected in the establishment of an analogy with the phrase for the first, for the second (dissected) - with a simple sentence with an adverbial determinant .

The further division of compound and non-union sentences is predominantly traditional: compound sentences are differentiated depending on the type of the coordinating union, and then divided into subtypes according to the nature of the syntactic meaning, non-union complex sentences are classified depending on the relationship between the predicative parts (taking into account additional means of communication) .

Thus, the general classification of complex sentences is generally heterogeneous. Let us turn to the consideration of their main classes.

Composition and subordination as the main ways of grammatical connection of predicative parts in a complex sentence

Predicative units that are components of a complex sentence can be connected by a coordinating, subordinating or undifferentiated connection.

The most important stage in the development of the doctrine of the types of communication in a complex sentence was the discussion on the issue of composition and subordination in the 20s of our century. It was opened by M.N. Peterson, who convincingly showed the indefiniteness and fragility of the concept of dependence - the independence of the parts of a complex sentence, and with great sharpness and categoricalness expressed the idea that "objective criteria ... do not make it possible to distinguish the main sentence from the subordinate clause and the essay from subordination" and that, therefore, in the concepts of composition and subordination have no linguistic content.

The most interesting response to this criticism of the doctrine of composition and subordination was the article by A.M. Peshkovsky "Does the composition and subordination of sentences exist in the Russian language?". Defending composition and subordination as syntactic concepts, behind which there is a certain linguistic content, Peshkovsky pointed out a number of formal features that distinguish complex sentences from complex ones. He finds these features in allied complex sentences. Peshkovsky considers the most important formal difference between composition and subordination to be the difference between the coordinating and subordinating unions, which consists in the fact that when subordinating, the indicator of the relation is located only in one of the connected parts - in the subordinate clause, and the subordinating union "does not rhythmically only adjoin its sentence, but constitutes it organic formal affiliation"; when composing, "the indicators of the relationship stand either with each of the correlatives (in some cases of connective and divisive composition), or between the correlatives, without internally merging with any of them." Therefore, a coordinating union, expressing the relationship between parts of a complex sentence, cannot stand before its first part (except when the union is repeated in open structures).

With the properties of coordinating and subordinating unions, Peshkovsky connects the difference in the arrangement of parts of a complex sentence during composition and subordination: the subordinate part, to which the indicator of the relationship is "soldered" - the subordinating union, can stand before or after the main part or be included in it; in a compound sentence, the parts cannot be included one into the other, since the indicator of the relationship - the composing union - does not organically merge with any of them.

As for non-union proposals, Peshkovsky believes that "here everything depends on how the meaning of this or that intonation is identical with the meaning of this or that group of unions." He distinguishes three types of intonation, which, in his opinion, functionally fully correspond to three groups of conjunctions (causal, explanatory, connecting), and refers the sentences of these intonation types to subordination (the first two) and composition (third). Sentences in which there is an intonation that is not specific to any particular type of semantic relationship, Peshkovsky refers to undifferentiated complex sentences. Thus, Peshkovsky was the first to suggest that the correlative categories of composition and subordination do not cover all complex sentences.

The named article by Peshkovsky, on the basis of which the chapter on composition and subordination was later written in the book "Russian syntax in scientific coverage", was, in essence, the first attempt in Russian science to show the linguistic essence of composition and subordination in a complex sentence. Prior to this, for almost a hundred years, the concepts of composition and subordination were used without revealing them and without showing what linguistic facts underlie their opposition. The strength of Peshkovsky's work was his observation of the formal differences between composing and subordination, and the very striving to look for differences precisely in structure, in form, without breaking away from linguistic matter.

Behind the traditional concepts of composition and subordination is the intuitive establishment of isomorphism between the connections of parts in a complex sentence and the connections between the forms of words in a phrase and a simple sentence. But are there formal grounds for establishing such an isomorphism? Apparently, they can be found only in the sphere of the allied complex sentence, relying on differences in the nature of the allied means.

Peshkovsky's idea that intonations are identical to certain groups of unions in non-union complex sentences is erroneous: intonation is a phenomenon of a completely different nature than unions, and can in no way be considered as a language tool that has the same purpose as unions. According to the observations of researchers, there is no complete correspondence between intonational structures and types of non-union complex sentences. The same non-union structure with the same meaning in different speech conditions can have different intonation design, and therefore, in the language system there is no mandatory assignment of certain intonational structures to the corresponding structures of the non-union complex sentence.

In accordance with what has been said, there are grounds for accepting the following definitions of a syntactic connection in a complex sentence. The compositional connection between the components of a complex sentence is similar to the connection between the forms of words in open and closed compositional phrases. It is characterized by the fact that the components it connects (word forms in a phrase and predicative units in a complex sentence) perform the same syntactic function relative to each other and the whole they form. The main means of expressing a coordinating connection are coordinating unions. In complex sentences with a coordinative connection, there are no differences in the function of the part introduced by the union and the part that does not contain the union, and none of the connected predicative units occupies a syntactic Place of the word form in the other part.

The subordinating relationship between the components of a complex sentence is similar different types subordinating connection in a phrase and a simple sentence. It may also have no analogues in syntactic relations in a phrase and a simple sentence, but it is always characterized by the fact that the elements it combines differ in their syntactic function and each of them has its place in a complex sentence. The means of expressing a subordinating relationship between the components of a complex sentence are specific: the main expressors of relations are subordinating conjunctions and acquiring the function of a union relative pronouns(joining words).

The coordinating and subordinating connection is clearly differentiated in complex allied-type sentences. In non-union complex sentences, there is no opposition between the coordinating and the subordinating connection. Thus, the connection in non-union complex sentences must be qualified as undifferentiated. The exception is non-union complex sentences of an open structure: The stove is heating, the lamp is burning brightly, knocking antique clock. In them, the potential quantitative composition itself characterizes the connection as a coordinating one, since the subordinating connection is a relationship necessarily between two components.

The coordinative connection between the components of a complex sentence can be open and closed (cf. also in coordinative phrases).

Question about sentences with several predicates with one subject

A compound sentence, like other classes of complex sentences, is opposed to a simple one on the basis of the sign of polypredicativity. However, there are syntactic constructions, the classification of which is controversial. These are sentences with homogeneous predicates. The solution of the question of the boundaries of complex (and union-free complex) sentences depends on the solution of questions about their status.

Composed units with predicates, expressed verbal word forms, are considered ambiguously in syntactic science. Some scientists consistently characterize these sentences as compound ones (A.M. Peshkovsky, F. Travnichek, V.A. Beloshapkova, etc.), others interpret them as transitional constructions (E.N. Shiryaev), others, under certain conditions, consider them as simple complicated sentences, in others - as complex (L.V. Shcherba, V.V. Babaitseva).

The consideration of composed units with predicates, expressed verbal word forms, as polypredicative constructions is based on the recognition of the constitutive role of the predicate in the sentence (it is the predicate that is the bearer of predicative categories - the categories of time and modality) and on the interpretation of sentences with homogeneous predicates as messages about several situations - or simultaneous, or replacing each other. So, from this point of view, in the sentence Orshev said goodbye to the infantrymen and ensigns and jumped to the ground (O. Yermakov), two situations are displayed that are closely related to each other, but replacing each other in time. This approach is adopted, for example, in "Russian Grammar" (1980). Taking it into account, monosubjective and polysubjective compound sentences are distinguished.

Monosubjective compound sentences are polypredicative constructions, which are messages about several situations characterized by the unity of the subject: I accepted your challenge, and I can’t go back (S. Solovyov); Princess. she looked once more at the roofs and turrets of Krutoyar, at the river, showing blue-blue water from under the fog, and went back into the sleepy, warm room (A.N. Tolstoy).

Polysubject compound sentences are polypredicative constructions, parts of which correspond to different subjects: Here comes Yermil. and the horse stares at him. (I. Turgenev); She comprehended all sciences, and Leonardo was her ideal (S. Solovyov).

An intermediate place between simple and compound sentences of a monosubjective type is occupied by sentences in which predicates have different grammatical arrangements, and are also combined with a large number distributors, and are characterized by a separate adverbial design: She rode boldly, deftly and in her long blue Amazon with a black hat on her head was beautiful (T. Passek); Here I will rest - on the sunny threshold of someone else's hut, and I will go again in the mossy twilight of the forest road to collect my mushrooms and songs (L. Alekseeva).

The proximity to monosubjective complex sentences is especially pronounced:

• 1) with a difference: a) modal plans of predicates: He himself would certainly come to you, but he was afraid to disturb (I. Turgenev); b) modality indicators: modal verbs, predicatives (necessary, necessary, etc.): He wanted to get up from the sofa - and could not, he wanted to pronounce the word - and the tongue did not obey. Goncharov); I can’t carry - and I carry my burden (V. Mayakovsky);
• 2) when the species-temporal plans of the predicates do not match: I froze in a long slumber and meet the early darkness. Akhmatova);
• 3) in the presence of lexical concretizers (adverbs, introductory words, particles) with one of the components of the series, clarifying the particular syntactic meaning: I stole a bunch of keys from her a month ago and, thus, got the opportunity to go to the common balcony (M. Bulgakov) .

However, not all constructions, including a number of verbal word forms, belong to monosubjective complex sentences. Simple sentences are:

• 1) sentences with repetition of lexically identical verbal forms of different types: Sit and sit; Read and read;
• 2) sentences with repeating (lexically identical) predicates in the same grammatical form: Autumn leaves rustle, rustle, rustle (V. Bryusov); The summer evening goes out, the summer evening goes out (A. Solodovnikov);
• 3) sentences that include converse predicates: Some people enter and leave; He sells and buys furniture. "Conversives serve to express differences that are of a semantic nature, these differences are associated exclusively with the way the speaker comprehends a certain situation; the situation itself remains unchanged";
• 4) sentences, including combinations of verbal predicates, which denote different phases of one action, dissected in time: He got up and stands;
• 5) sentences in which a number of verbal predicates have a modal or phase modifier common to them (an auxiliary part of the predicate with a modal meaning or the meaning of the beginning, end and continuation of the action): And people began to settle in this land, build houses, grow bread; She wanted to scream, to call someone for help;
• 6) sentences with composed unities, which are an inseparable combination: I took it and jumped out of the window;
• 7) sentences in which one verbal predicate is syntactically functional and indicates the position of the person at the moment of action, and the other indicates his action, state or the appearance of any sign: She sits and cries; They stand and laugh; He lies and is silent. These combinations are characterized by a strictly fixed sequence of the components of the series. So, combinations are impossible, for example: * The child cries and lies; *She thinks and sits;
• 8) sentences in which verbs-predicates have common semes form a synonymous chain, clarify, concretize each other: Marta and her husband moved past him, left (V. Nabokov);
• 9) sentences in which one of the predicates completely repeats the seme composition of the other: She cried and sobbed. The verb to cry means `to shed tears, usually making mournful inarticulate vocal sounds, crying', the verb to sob - `to cry loudly, convulsively'; thus, the last verb-predicate has semes in common with the first; in addition, it includes hyposemes of the intensification of the process `loudly, convulsively.'
• 10) sentences in which nominal components are combined by a coordinative link with one bundle: He was reddish-Russian, bearded and so taller than ordinary people that he could be shown. (I. Bunin).

Basic literature for the electronic version of the lecture course

• 1. Kryuchkov S.E. and Maksimov L.Yu. Modern Russian language. The syntax of a complex sentence. Proc. allowance for students ped. in-tov ... - M .: Education, 1977. - 191 p.
• 2. Modern Russian: Theory. Analysis of language units: Proc. for stud. higher textbook institutions: At 2 hours - Part 2: Morphology, Syntax / Ed. E.I. Dibrova. - M.: Publishing center "Academy", 2001. - 704 p.
• 3. Modern Russian language: Proc. for philology. specialist. higher educational institutions / Under the editorship of V.A. Beloshapkova. - M.: Azbukovnik, 1999. - 928 p.
• 4. Modern Russian: Textbook / Under the general editorship of L.A. Novikov. - St. Petersburg: publishing house "Lan", 2001. - 864 p.

complex is a proposal that contains two or more predicative units(structures of simple sentences), forming a semantic, structural and intonational unity. In speech, a complex sentence acts as one communicative unit, despite the complexity and volume of its structure.

A complex sentence is characterized by a number of structural and semantic features that significantly distinguish it from a simple sentence:

1. A simple sentence is built from words and phrases and represents one predicative unit, while the structural components of a complex sentence are predicative units. Yes, proposal Under the blue skies, magnificent carpets, shining in the sun, the snow lies, the transparent forest alone turns black, and the spruce turns green through the hoarfrost, and the river glistens under the ice.(A. Pushkin) is complex, as it consists of four predicative units (parts): the first - Under the blue skies, magnificent carpets, shining in the sun, the snow lies(the predicative basis is the subject snow and predicate lies), the second transparent forest alone turns black forest and predicate turns black), the third - and the spruce turns green through the hoarfrost(the predicative basis is the subject spruce and predicate turns green), the fourth - and the river under the ice glitters(the predicative basis is the subject river and predicate glitters) 1 .

2. In the predicative parts of some complex sentences, there are such structural components that are not characteristic of a simple sentence:

a) pronominal-correlative words in the main part of a complex sentence, to which the subordinate part belongs ( Who lived a lot, he saw a lot);

b) subordinating conjunctions and allied words in a complex sentence ( when, if, because, which, whose, who and etc.) .

3. The predicative parts of many complex sentences do not have semantic and intonational completeness.

These features are inherent in a complex sentence as a whole.

The unity and integrity of a complex sentence is created by the following means:

1) intonation, which, firstly, determines the boundaries of a complex sentence in the flow of speech: at the end of each predicative part, an increase in tone is observed and only at the end of the last predicative part - its decrease (end intonation), and secondly, it combines parts of a complex sentence, expressing various relationships between them, for example: The horses set off, the bell rang, the wagon flew(with the help of intonation, enumerative relations between parts of a complex sentence are expressed). I looked out of the wagon: everything was darkness and whirlwind(A. Pushkin) (explanatory relations between parts of a complex sentence are expressed intonation).

2) conjunctions and allied words. Unions, which combine parts of a complex sentence, are divided into two types by meaning and function:

- writing, with the help of which compound sentences are created ( and, yes, but, or, or and etc.);

- subordinating involved in the creation of complex sentences ( because, because, if, while and etc.).

allied words(in this role are the pronouns ( which, what, whose etc.) and pronominal adverbs ( where when etc.)) not only combine parts of a complex sentence, but are also members of the sentence.

3) syntactic structure of predicative parts:

a) structural parallelism of parts, that is, the same type of syntactic construction - the similarity of the location of the main and secondary members of the sentence, which is accompanied by the same type of intonation pattern, the same type of allocation of the communicative center with the help of logical stress: Everything is easy for him, but I'm never lucky in anything.;

b) incompleteness of one of the parts: The cat sat motionless on the mattress and pretended to sleep(A. Chekhov). The first part is incomplete in meaning, therefore, it needs to be distributed with the help of the second, in which, in turn, the subject is omitted cat to avoid unnecessary repetition.

4) order of parts. Most complex sentences have a flexible structure, a free order of the predicative parts. However, some types of complex sentences have an inflexible structure - they allow only one specific order of the parts: In a word, there were losses that were considered in the order of things.(K. Simonov).

5) correlation of forms of verbs-predicates. In some sentences, the ratio of the aspectual-temporal forms of verbs-predicates or mood forms in parts of a complex sentence is important, for example, when describing simultaneously occurring events in all parts of a complex sentence, verbs-predicates of an imperfect form are used: The old prince was still in the city, and they were waiting for him every minute(L. Tolstoy).

Complex sentences heterogeneous in their structure and meaning. Depending on the grammatical means of combining parts, all complex sentences are divided into allied (parts of them are combined into a single whole with the help of unions and allied words) and unionless (parts of them are combined into a single whole without the help of unions and allied words).

Allied proposals depending on the meaning of the unions, with the help of which their parts are connected, they are divided into compound , whose constituent parts are combined with the help of coordinating unions, and complex subordinate , the components of which are combined with the help of subordinating conjunctions and allied words.

In general, the types of complex sentences can be represented in the following scheme:

Complex sentences

unionless

compound