Complex sentence as a syntactic unit. Complex sentence as an independent semantic-syntactic unit of language Complex sentence as a syntactic unit

DIFFICULT SENTENCE

1. Simple and complex sentence. Their distinctive features.

2. Structure and grammatical nature of a complex sentence.

3. Types of connection in a complex sentence.

4. Means of expressing syntactic connections between parts of a complex sentence.

5. Semantic organization of a complex sentence.

6. Communicative organization of a complex sentence.

1. A complex sentence is a semantic and intonational combination of predicative units based on a syntactic connection, built according to one or another structural scheme and functioning as one communicative unit.

There are several interpretations of the grammatical nature of a complex sentence. According to A.M. Peshkovsky and A.A. Shakhmatov, the term “complex sentence” is unacceptable, since “it calls several sentences one sentence and thereby creates confusion” [Peshkovsky: 455]. Therefore, A.M. Peshkovsky proposed replacing it with the term “complex whole.” A.A. Shakhmatov proposed the term “combination of sentences”.

A different view on the nature of a complex sentence was expressed by V.A. Bogoroditsky, who argued that “in any complex sentence its parts form one coherent whole, so that, taken separately, they can no longer have the completely previous meaning or are even completely impossible, like as morphological parts of a word exist only in the word itself, but not separately from it” [Bogoroditsky 1935: 229].

The thought of V.A. Bogoroditsky was developed in the works of N.S. Pospelov [Pospelov 1950].

Czech grammar most deeply and correctly characterized the grammatical nature of a complex sentence, according to which a complex sentence is a unit of a two-dimensional nature, having two sides of the structure: on the one hand, formal grammatical, on the other, functional. This made it possible to redefine the grammatical nature of the components (parts) of a complex sentence and the entire complex sentence as a whole.

The components of a complex sentence (parts, predicative units) according to their structural and grammatical characteristics (construction scheme, predicativeness) are simple sentences. However, in functional terms, parts of a complex sentence are not sentences, since they do not have the communicative and semantic completeness characteristic of an independent simple sentence. Only a complex sentence as a whole has communicative and semantic completeness, which, like a simple sentence, constitutes one communicative unit with a single intonation and word order characteristic. Therefore, in functional terms, only a complex sentence is a sentence, while its components are only “parts” of a sentence.

This idea was developed in the works of V.A. Beloshapkova [see. Beloshapkova 1967:8-24; Modern Russian language 1989].

A complex sentence can be binomial (consists of two PUs) and polynomial (consists of three or more PUs). The connection between the parts of a complex two-member sentence can be conjunction (coordinating or subordinating) and non-conjunctive, for example: Birch trees whisper quietly over the graves of the cemetery, Yes the wind stirs the grain in the fields(V.G. Korolenko), The sea quietly echoed the beginning of one of the ancient legends, which, perhaps, were created on its banks(M. Gorky), The snowstorm did not subside, the sky did not clear(A.S. Pushkin).

In polynomial complex sentences, a distinction is made between single-type and heterogeneous (contaminated) connections, for example: 1) The forest lawn is all saturated with cold dew, 2) insects are sleeping, 3) many flowers have not yet opened their corollas(M.M. Prishvin), 1) The sun had set, 2) the last rays of sunset were fading in the sky, 3) dusk was deepening, 4) But it was still warm 5) because the day was unusually hot for October.

1. The difference between a simple and complex sentence is based on the structure of syntactic units: a simple sentence is monopredicative (contains one PU, one complex of modality and tense), a complex sentence is polypredicative (contains two or more PU). At the same time, for a simple sentence, predicativity constitutes a grammatical meaning, and in a complex sentence it is an element of structure, since the meaning of a complex sentence as a syntactic unit is made up of semantic relations between its parts (between PU). From the above it follows that a complex sentence is a unit of a higher order, while a simple sentence is a unit of a lower level.

2. A complex sentence, like a simple one, performs a communicative function in language, but, unlike a simple sentence, it reports two or more situations and the relationships between them.

3. In a simple sentence we use only coordinating conjunctions (with homogeneous members), and in a complex sentence - both coordinating and subordinating conjunctions, as well as allied words as a means of communication between the units of a complex sentence.

2. Structure and grammatical nature of a complex sentence

A complex sentence is constructed according to structural schemes, the elements of which are determined by its polypredicative nature: the combination of predicative parts in a complex sentence requires their grammatical, semantic and intonation adaptation to each other. The structural diagram includes a set of features: 1) the potential quantitative composition of a complex sentence, or the openness and closedness of the structure; 2) structural features of parts of a complex sentence; 3) means of connecting parts of a complex sentence; 4) the possibilities of the order of parts, or the flexibility / inflexibility of the structure [Beloshapkova 1967: 44-84].

1) The concept of “potential quantitative composition of parts” is applicable only to the minimal constructions of a complex sentence. In this regard, it is necessary to distinguish between minimal and complicated constructions of a complex sentence. Sentences of minimal construction are built according to one structural scheme, therefore they have one level of division, as a result of which the formative components of a complex sentence are identified - predicative units. The minimal constructions of a complex sentence can consist of an indefinite number of parts, or only two parts. Sentences consisting of an indefinite number of parts are open structures. These are, for example, connecting sentences expressing relations of simultaneity: For hundreds of miles, for hundreds of miles, for hundreds of kilometers, salt lay, feather grass rustled, groves of cedars turned black(Ahm.). Sentences consisting of only two parts are closed structures. These are, for example, sentences with comparative relations: Olentyev and Marchenko began setting up a bivouac, and Dersu and I went hunting(Ars.).

Complex sentences of a complex type combine combinations of predicative units built according to different structural schemes. Therefore, complex sentences have several levels of division. Wed. Sometimes the grass was so thick that the boat could not get through it, and we were forced to make long detours(Ars.). In the above sentence, at the first level of division, two components are distinguished (a complex sentence and a simple sentence), the relationship between which is expressed by the conjunction And. At the second level of division, two components are distinguished within the first component (the main clause and the subordinate clause), which are the building elements of a complex sentence.

2) Features of the structure of parts of a complex sentence. This feature provides for the rules for constructing certain types of complex sentences: modal-temporal design of parts of sentences, syntactic structure of parts, the presence of certain lexical-semantic classes in parts of words, etc. For example, the pattern of organization of explanatory complex sentences is the presence in the main part of a word with the meaning of speech, thought, perception: Blood on the dry grass indicated that the animal was indeed wounded(Ars.)

3) Means of connecting parts of a complex sentence. Such means are conjunctions, allied words, and correlates. Conjunctions can be syntactic and semantic. Syntactic conjunctions are not significant in themselves, they do not introduce any semantics into a complex sentence, but only indicate a syntactic relationship between the parts of a complex sentence (such as, for example, explanatory conjunctions what, how, to). Semantic conjunctions are meaningful, understandable and outside of a complex sentence: in addition to the function of connecting parts, they participate in the expression of the typical semantics of a complex sentence. Wed. If (when, since) the weather turns bad, the beach will be empty. Semantic conjunctions are all adverbial conjunctions, for example, conditional if, if; targeted so that, in order to; concessionary despite the fact that, although.

Conjunctive words are relative pronouns ( who, whose, which) and adverbs ( where, where, where), which, being substitute words for certain words in the main part, are members of the sentence: I saw before me a primitive hunter who had lived all his life in the taiga(Ars.); The next day, at six o’clock in the morning, I, cheerfully whistling and knocking down flower heads with a cane, walked on foot to Tenevo, where on that day there was a patronal feast day and where my friend “Schur”, Pavel Ivanovich, invited me(Ch.).

Correlates are pronominal words that are used in the main part, correlating with a conjunction or allied word in the subordinate part. The role of the actual pronouns are demonstrative, attributive, negative and indefinite pronouns ( that, such, all, everyone, everyone, no one, someone, something):Who accustomed to the cobwebs, mold and gypsy whooping of the count's apartments, that it was strange to look at this everyday, prosaic crowd, disturbing the silence of the dilapidated, abandoned chambers with their everyday chatter(Ch.); I was on the edge something, Why there is no correct name...(Ahm.)

4) Possibilities of the order of parts, or flexibility / inflexibility of the structure. Some complex sentences allow parts to be rearranged. Such sentences are flexible structures, such as sentences with conditional clauses: If you try, you can do well in exams / You can do well in exams if you try. In other complex sentences, rearrangement of parts is not possible. Such sentences have an inflexible structure, such as sentences with subordinate clauses of consequence: We had to walk to the station, so we missed the train.

3. Types of communication in a complex sentence

Complex sentences are divided into allied and non-unionized. The core of conjunctive complex sentences is built on the basis of two types of grammatical connections: coordinating (parataxis), subordinating (hypotaxis). Accordingly, complex and complex sentences are traditionally distinguished among allied structures.

Compound and complex sentences differ in the nature of the connection between the parts.

1. In a complex sentence, conjunctions are used that also function in a simple sentence to connect homogeneous members. This suggests that when composing, components of different syntactic units perform the same syntactic function, being equal. A complex sentence uses means of communication (conjunctions and pronouns) that are not used in a simple sentence. This indicates that during subordination, the components of different syntactic units differ in their syntactic function, being unequal.

2. In a complex sentence, the conjunction is not included in the structure of any part. Therefore, when rearranging parts, the conjunction does not move along with the second part: In the north it is cold in winter, and in the middle zone the climate is mild / In the middle zone the climate is mild, and in the north it is cold in winter. In a complex sentence, the conjunction (and the conjunction word) is included in the structure of the subordinate clause. Therefore, when rearranging parts, it moves along with the subordinate part: Since we had to walk to the station, we were late for the train / We were late for the train, since we had to walk to the station.

In the Russian language, conjunctive complex sentences can also be found outside the traditional opposition composition - subordination. The types of connections expressed in them are now being actively studied. Among them is the neutralization of the traditional opposition composition - submission, as, for example, in the sentence: Dawn had barely begun to break, and we already woke up and went outside(Sol.), where both coordinating and subordinating connections are expressed, represented by the corresponding conjunctions.

Non-union complex sentences are characterized by the absence of allied means of communication and, as a result, the undifferentiation of both the type of connection itself (composition/subordination) and semantic relations.

4. Semantic and syntactic relationships between the parts of a complex sentence are expressed using conjunctions, allied words, correlates (correlative pairs), intonation, and order of parts.

1. Conjunctions connect parts of both complex and complex sentences. When composing, conjunctions serve as the main means of communication (coordinating conjunctions are used). In a complex sentence, conjunctions can be unambiguous (semantic), for example, Although- union of concession, If– conjunction of conditions, because- union of reason, So– union of investigation, etc.; and polysemantic (asemantic, syntactic), for example, conjunction When could express temporary and conditional relationships.

2. Conjunctive words act as a means of communication in a complex sentence and, unlike conjunctions, are members of the sentence and are expressed by relative pronouns and pronominal adverbs. Always allied words are which, which, whose, where, where, from, what in prepositional case forms. The words what, how, where .

3. Correlates or correlative pairs are used in a complex sentence of pronominal-correlative type, for example: 1) Who looking for 2) That will always find. In the main part, a demonstrative pronoun or pronominal adverb is used, the meaning of which is revealed using the subordinate part: then, that, there, there, so, so, so etc. The subordinate part is attached to the main part using relative pronouns and conjunctions: what, who, where, where, what, so that, as if and etc.

4. Intonation is the main means of communication in a non-union complex sentence. In some cases, intonation plays a semantic role and determines the type of sentence. Let's compare: If you read books, you will know everything(enumerative intonation, simple sentence with homogeneous predicates) and If you read books, you will know everything(a non-union complex sentence with conditional-consequential relations expressed in a special intonation).

5. Order of parts. Some types of complex sentences allow only a certain order of parts (rearrangement of parts is not possible), for example: ...This is a rare woman. Cleopatra. Carmen... Indescribable beauty, but it's not even about beauty... Magnetic look. No, and the look is not the same... That's the main thing: there is tremendous strength in her. Such power that it's like she's playing with everyone(B. Akunin). On the other hand, when rearranging parts of a complex sentence, the semantic shades change, let’s compare: I felt sad and I left(the first part is perceived as a cause, the second – as a consequence) and I left and I felt sad(semantic relations change).

5. Semantic organization of a complex sentence.

A complex sentence is intended to express several event propositions corresponding to several situations. At the same time, event-based polypropositivity, focused on several situations, is not a necessary regularity of the semantic organization of complex sentences. The expression of event propositions that correlate with several situations is influenced by a number of factors: the type of complex sentence (complex sentence/complex sentence), structural and semantic types of complex sentences (undivided sentences/complex sentences), semantics of the complex sentence. The tendency to express several event propositions, correlating with several situations, is revealed by complex sentences, complex sentences of dismembered structure, and non-union complex sentences. Here is an example of polypropositive sentences corresponding to several situations: There was darkness in the sky, and only large stars were barely visible through it.(Ars.)

The semantic organization of undivided complex sentences is specific. Many sentences are organized in such a way that one of their parts expresses objective content (to which one event proposition corresponds), and the other part gives a modal-metatextual assessment of this content. These are explanatory sentences and pronominal conjunctive sentences of the containing type: It seemed like we were walking along the bottom of a sea of ​​grass(Ars.); The essence of his life and work was that he organically could not engage in any business, object or thought for more than a minute(I. and P.).

Subsubstantive-defining sentences are also monopropositive, in which the subordinate part, together with the substantive component of the main part, narrows the area of ​​potential referents of the noun phrase: In fanza I saw the same woman who met us on the road.(Ars.) Pronominal correlative identifying sentences have the same semantic organization: And the blessed wind told what Lermontov had hidden(Ahm.); Where the cabbage beds are watered with red water by the sunrise, the little maple tree sucks the green udder of the uterus.(Yesen).

Among complex sentences there are also polypropositive structures that correspond to the same situation. These are compound sentences expressing disjunctive relations of mutual exclusion : Either life becomes more melody, or there are nightingales in every house(Light); Either it was early morning, or it was evening(Fad.).

6. Communicative organization of a complex sentence

The discussion about the grammatical nature of a complex sentence showed the need to distinguish between constructive (formal) and communicative aspects in a complex sentence, namely that a complex sentence, like a simple one, should be considered as a unit of a two-dimensional nature, representing the unity of the constructive and communicative sides. In other words, it was found that a complex sentence is a static structure that is one communicative unit.

According to the traditional point of view, a complex sentence is one communicative unit even in the case when the connected components have different purposes. Recognizing the communicative integrity of a complex sentence, Galina Vasilievna Valimova identifies three functional types in it: narrative, interrogative, narrative-interrogative and motivating-interrogative [Valimova 1967, 58-73 et seq.]. G.V. Valimova emphasizes that “the modality of a complex sentence a sentence is a set of modalities of its parts,” and “the modality of a complex sentence is the modality of the main part,” therefore, in a complex sentence, with different focus of predicative units, the target orientation of the sentence is determined by the grammatically dominant main part.

The study of the purposefulness of a complex sentence is intensified by the development of the theory of speech acts, making it legitimate to raise the question of how many speech acts a complex sentence expresses.

Elena Viktorovna Paducheva holds the idea that a complex sentence as one communicative unit corresponds to one speech act, which, given the difference in the target characteristics of the components connected by the conjunction, has a “complex illocutionary indicator” [Paducheva 1985: 46-47].

From the side of actual division, a complex sentence also reveals commonality with a simple sentence. A complex sentence, like a simple one, represents one communicative unit, characterized by word order patterns common to a simple sentence and associated with the communicative task. At the same time, the communicative task in complex sentences also determines the order of the parts. In complex sentences with an expressively neutral (objective) order of parts, the rheme is the postpositive part: The valley through which the river T flows // local settlers call it “Glass Pad” R(Ars.); Mikhail Nikolaich was playing checkers with the Folding Soul, T // when he was informed about the arrival of Vladimir Sergeich R(T.); When, out of habit, I call my treasured friends’ names, T // Always at this strange roll call, only silence answers me R(Ahm.).

The communicative task is revealed by the following questions: What is special about the valley? What can you say about the valley through which the river flows?? When Mikhail Nikolaich played checkers with the Folding Soul? What happens when, out of habit, I call my friends’ cherished names?

Regularities of actual division can change the usual order of parts in a complex sentence.

Thus, in explanatory sentences, due to the obligatory following of the subordinate clause after the supporting word of the main part, the subordinate clause is in postposition or interposition: He himself insistently demanded that the weddings not be postponed any further.(T.) An explanatory clause introduced by a conjunction occupies a prepositive position with the actual significance of the main part: What worried him most was that he would have to leave. If an explanatory clause is introduced by a conjunctive word, the preposition of the clause is determined by its actualization: Why this inscription ended up here, I could not guess(Paust.).

A complex sentence is one that contains two or more predicative units (structures of simple sentences) that form a semantic, structural and intonation 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. Thus, the sentence Under the blue skies with magnificent carpets, shining in the sun, the snow lies, the transparent forest alone turns black, and the spruce turns green through the frost, and the river glitters under the ice (A. Pushkin) is complex, since it consists of four predicative units (parts) : first - Under the blue skies with magnificent carpets, shining in the sun, the snow lies (the predicative basis is the subject snow and the predicate lies), the second - the transparent forest alone turns black (the predicative basis is the subject forest and the predicate turns black), the third - and the spruce turns green through the frost (the predicative basis is the subject spruce and the predicate turns green), the fourth - and the river under the ice shines (the predicative basis is the subject river and the predicate shines).

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 (He who has lived a lot has seen a lot);

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

3. The predicative parts of many complex sentences do not have semantic and intonation 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 there is a rise in tone and only at the end of the last predicative part there is a decrease in tone (end intonation), and secondly, it unites the parts of a complex sentence, expressing various relationships between them, for example: The horses started moving, the bell rang, the carriage flew (intonation is used to express enumerative relationships between parts of a complex sentence). I looked out of the wagon: everything was darkness and whirlwind (A. Pushkin) (intonation expresses explanatory relationships between parts of a complex sentence).

2) conjunctions and allied words. Conjunctions that combine parts of a complex sentence are divided into two types according to their meaning and function:

Composite sentences, with the help of which complex sentences are created (and, yes, a, but, or, or, etc.);

Subordinators involved in the creation of complex sentences (since, because, if, while, etc.).

Conjunctive words (this role is played by pronouns (which, which, 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 in the arrangement of the main and secondary members of the sentence, which is accompanied by the same type of intonation pattern, the same type of highlighting of the communicative center with the help of logical stress: He gets everything easily, but I’m never lucky in anything ;

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

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

5) the ratio of verb-predicate forms. In some sentences, the relationship between aspectual and tense forms of predicate verbs 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, imperfect predicate verbs are used: The old prince was still in the city, and they were waiting for him every minute (L. Tolstoy).

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

Conjunctive sentences, depending on the meaning of the conjunctions with which their parts are connected, are divided into complex sentences, the component parts of which are combined using coordinating conjunctions, and complex sentences, the component parts of which are combined using subordinating conjunctions and allied words.

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

Questions for self-control

1. What are the structural features of a complex sentence?

2. How is the unity of the parts of a complex sentence created?

3. On what basis are complex sentences divided into compound, complex and non-conjunctive?

You can download ready-made answers for the exam, cheat sheets and other educational materials in Word format at

Use the search form

COMPLEX SENTENCE AS A SYNTACTIC UNIT

relevant scientific sources:

• | Answers for the test/exam| 2015 | Russia | docx | 0.15 MB

• Answers on basic Russian grammar

  | Answers for the test/exam| 2015 | Russia | docx | 0.17 MB

  1. Language as a system. The concept of modern Russian literary language. 2. Standard of literary language. Changing language norms. Violation of language norms. 3. Standards of literary language and modern

• Answers to the exam on Russian language syntax

  | Answers for the test/exam| 2017 | Russia | docx | 0.06 MB

  1. Impersonal sentences and their varieties 2. Non-union complex sentences, punctuation marks in them. (24) 3. Introductory and plug-in constructions, punctuation marks in them. 4. Types of detached members

• Answers to the exam in the discipline Syntax of the modern Russian language

  | Answers for the test/exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.2 MB

  Syntax as a section of grammar. Subject of syntax. Connections between syntax and vocabulary, phonetics, and word formation. Modern trends in the study of syntax. Basic units of syntax. Specifics

• Answers to the exam in modern Russian language

  | Answers for the test/exam| 2016 | Russia | docx | 0.09 MB

  1. The meaning of the word and its compatibility. The concept of valence 2. Semantic valency and grammatical compatibility predicative unit 4. Sloform, phrase, sentence, complex

1.1. The concept of a complex sentence

1.2. Complex sentence and simple sentence: contrast and convergence

1.3. General classification of complex sentences

1.4. Means of expressing syntactic relationships between parts of a complex sentence

Literature

1. Beloshapkova, V. A. Modern Russian language: Syntax / V. A. Beloshapkova, V. N. Belousov, E. A. Bryzgunova. – M.: Azbukovnik, 2002. ‑ 295 p.

2. Valgina N.S. Syntax of the modern Russian language: [Textbook. for universities for special purposes “Journalism”] / N.S. Valgina. – M.: Higher School, 1991. – 431 p.

3. Vostokov A.Kh. Russian grammar / A.Kh. Vostokov. – St. Petersburg: Printing house of I. Glazunov, 1831. – 408 p.

4. Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. – 8th ed. – M.: Editorial URSS, 2001. – P. 427 – 443.

5. Pospelov N.S. Complex sentence and its structural types / N.S. Pospelov // Questions of linguistics. – 1959. ‑ No. 2. – pp. 19-27

1.1. THE CONCEPT OF A COMPLEX SENTENCE

A sentence containing two or more predicative units that form a semantic, structural and intonational unity is called complex . A complex sentence is a complete syntactic structure that acts as one communicative unit 1. A complex sentence, like a simple one, performs a communicative function in language, but, unlike a simple sentence, it reports two or more situations and the relationships between them

It is important to note that a complex sentence as a special syntactic unit was recognized by scientists relatively recently, already in the 20th century. In the most significant syntactic descriptions of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it is not represented as a syntactic unit. Intensive study of complex sentences began in the second half of the 20th century, primarily in the works of V.V. Vinogradova, N.S. Pospelov, then in the works of L.Yu. Maksimova, V.A. Beloshapkova, M.I. Cheremisina and other researchers, whose works we will refer to in the course of presenting this topic. A complex sentence as a syntactic unit is opposed to a simple one, however, the definitions of a complex sentence, even the most modern ones, contain the traditional contradiction. It lies in the fact that the entire complex formation and its components are called a sentence. Let's look at these definitions. In “Russian Grammar” of 1980 we read: “A complex sentence is a combination of two or more simple sentences, grammatically formatted.” In the school textbook: “A complex sentence is a sentence consisting of two or more simple sentences.” Similar definitions can be continued. The contradiction inherent in such definitions can be eliminated by establishing the syntactic aspect to which the unit refers. This was first noticed by V.A. Beloshapkova. A complex sentence is contrasted with a simple one in syntactic structure, that is, in the formal-grammatical (constructive) aspect. The most important feature of a simple sentence is predicativity, and a complex sentence consists of two or more predicative units. Hence, a complex sentence is contrasted with a simple sentence as a polypredicative unit to a monopredicative unit. Thus, a complex sentence is a syntactic unit, the components of which are predicative units, united by syntactic connections and syntactic relations.

1.2. Complex sentence and simple sentence: contrast and convergence

The difference between a simple and complex sentence is thus based on the structure of syntactic units: a simple sentence is monopredicative, a complex sentence is polypredicative, i.e. a structurally complex sentence differs from a simple one primarily by the presence of two or more predicative centers, while in a simple sentence there is always only one predicative center. In addition, if a simple sentence is included in a complex one, becoming part of it, it can change its structure. Most often this is due to a change in the structure of the part that becomes dependent: 1) Buratino could not solve the problem proposed by Malvina. He's never been to school. – Buratino could not solve the problem proposed by Malvina, since he had never been to school(the dependent clause has become an incomplete sentence). 2) Malvina decided to settle in a house lost in a deep forest. She no longer wanted to play in the Barabas Theater. ‑ Malvina decided to settle in a house lost in a deep forest so as not to play in the Barabas Theater anymore.(the dependent part has become a one-part impersonal sentence). There are also types of complex sentences in which the order of the parts is strictly defined, and when entering such SPs (complex sentences), individual sentences obey this rule. Pinocchio couldn't eat. He didn't have a penny in his pocket. - Buratino didn’t have a penny in his pocket, so he couldn’t eat.

Parts of a complex sentence do not have intonation completeness, unlike a separate simple sentence. Recognition of a complex sentence as “an integral syntactic expression of a single complex thought” 1 leads to the identification of its grammatical specificity - the absence of a mechanical combination of simple sentences.

A simple and complex sentence also differ in their basic grammatical meaning: in a simple sentence it is predicativity, in a complex sentence it is the semantic-syntactic relations between its parts, based on the interaction of modal-temporal plans of these individual parts. To characterize a complex sentence and determine its typology, it is necessary to take into account the following aspects of its semantic-structural organization: the syntactic connection between the parts and the means of its expression; potential number of components, since this is determined by the semantic-structural nature of a complex sentence; the order of arrangement of parts - strictly fixed or relatively free; some features of the lexical filling of parts.

A simple and complex sentence, on the one hand, are contrasted as monopredicative and polypredicative units. But, on the other hand, there are linguistic facts that can be interpreted in different ways, since they combine the features of a simple and complex sentence.

First of all, this sentences with two or more predicates and one subject. Let's compare two sentences: 1) He was very worried and could not sleep for a long time. 2) He was so worried that he could not sleep for a long time. In traditional grammar, these sentences are interpreted differently: the first - as simple with homogeneous predicates, the second - as complex. In other words, it turns out that a coordinating connection is a sign of a simple sentence, and a subordinating connection is a sign of a complex one. At the same time, from the point of view of relation to predicativeness, these sentences are the same: in both cases there are two predicates and one subject.

A different point of view is adopted in “Russian Grammar”: sentences with several predicates and one subject are considered complex both in subordinating and coordinating connections - on the basis of their polypredicativity. An explanation of such structures is given by M.I. Cheremisina: she considers them as a special polypredicative construction in conditions of mono-subjectivity (abbreviated as mono-subjective construction).

There are a number of constructions that show signs of a simple and complex sentence.

Monosubjective sentences with the conjunction “to.” For example: I came to talk to you. Such sentences have both a complex feature (polypredicativity) and a simple feature (mono-subjectivity and the connection of the infinitive with the verb of motion, which is preserved even without a conjunction: I came to talk to you).

Offers with comparative turnover. For example: The youthful fun has disappeared, like a dream, like the morning fog. The comparative phrase does not contain a verbalized predicate, but can be considered as an incomplete sentence with a non-repeating (missing) predicate “disappeared” (Young fun has disappeared, like a dream disappears...).

1.3. GENERAL CLASSIFICATION OF COMPLEX SENTENCES

The classification of complex sentences can be based on different features.

1. Presence/absence of a union means: union - non-union.

2. Type of syntactic connection: composition - subordination.

3. The nature of the components between which there is a connection: dismemberment - non-division.

4. The number of PEs, the nature of the connection and relationships between them.

1. Parts of a complex sentence can be combined: 1) with the help of unions and allied words, 2) without unions and allied words, using only intonation and the relationship of the forms of the predicates. In this regard, complex sentences are divided into two large groups: allied complex sentences and non-union complex sentences. For example: 1) The girl's blue eyes opened wide with fear, and a tear sparkled in them.(Cor.); Morozka understood What the conversation is over(Fad.); 2) You'll believe it by sight- you measure crookedly(M. G); It was five o'clock in the afternoon, the owners were not at home(Past.); The lower stones turned out to be wet: a puddle of clean water flowed to the bottom of the pool(Paust.).

2. Conjunctive sentences, in turn, are divided into two groups depending on the type of conjunctions and conjunctive words: sentences compound - with coordinating conjunctions; offers complex - with subordinating conjunctions and allied (or relative) words.

At essay parts of a complex sentence are combined as syntactically equal, when subordination - one of the parts (or several) is syntactically subordinate to the other, depends on it. Wed: The sun is at its zenith, and all the shadows are burned by it(M.G.).- ...She knew well where her son's heart beats(M.G.); Rivers are easy to cross for those born and raised on the seashore(M.G.). In the first sentence, the parts are connected as equals; they retain their relative independence, although lexically the second part is influenced by the first: the form of the pronoun them in the second part indicates the subject Sun in the first part. In the second and third sentences the dependent parts where the son's heart beats And who was born and raised by the sea completely deprived of the ability to function independently; they are completely subordinate to the first parts. In addition, the first parts of these sentences are not independent enough, that is, they cannot exist without dependent parts: in a sentence She knew well a clear semantic insufficiency is revealed, since the verb knew requires explanation; offer Rivers are easy to cross also turns out to be incomplete, since the indication that needs specification. This semantic and grammatical deficiency of the first parts of the sentence is compensated by the dependent parts in the complex sentence. Thus, we can talk not only about the dependence of one of the parts of a complex sentence, but also about the interdependence of its constituent parts.

Composition and subordination are not always clearly distinguished, and therefore there are transitional types conjunctional complex sentence. This transitivity is manifested in the fact that in a number of complex sentences subordinating conjunctions are used, but the semantic relations between the parts clearly resemble the relationships in a complex sentence, and the role of the subordinating conjunction turns out to be so formal that it is not assigned to a specific part of the sentence, but can be equally included in one part, then to the other. This is typical, for example, of complex sentences with comparative parts in which there are conjunctions while, meanwhile; if...then, than...then and etc.: The closer to old age, the more often Levitan’s thoughts stopped at autumn(Paust.); If Yashvili was all in external centrifugal manifestation, Titian Tabidze was directed inward(Past.) - pass That in the second part.

The dual nature of the syntactic connection can also be seen in sentences in which the connection between parts is expressed not so much by conjunctions and allied words, but by other structural means, in particular the forms of verb moods and the order of parts. Such structurally related, non-free syntactic constructions are characteristic of the conversational style. The connection in them is expressed only morphologically or by morphological means in combination with conjunctions that have lost their subordinate character. For example: Before we had time to calm down from such an event, or rather, from such a turn of events, Nyushka appeared on our doorstep(Sol.); Before the volcano’s lava had even cooled down, petroleum scientists rushed to the scene(gas.); As soon as you turned your head, the bizarre sensation would disappear without a trace.(Green); If Mitrash came here hungry and without a basket, what would he do here?(Priv.). The transition type is formed by such related structures as: If you came to me as if you were good, I would give you both lard and bread(Chuk.); Boy don't get there on time- no one would have known that the auto shop was already here(Aitm.); And look from the outside- We have hundreds of qualified sociologists(gas.). In all these sentences, the main constructive role is played by the verb form, and if a conjunction appears, it clearly loses its subordinating meaning, especially since it is located in the conventionally called main part.

Structurally related to vaguely expressed syntactic relationships are also sentences with the phrase as for... then: As for Tolik and me, we ourselves did not do important things. We made boxes for these things(War.). Such designs can be represented by even more reduced stylistic options: As for Alexey Kuzmich, he’s just great and you owe him a lot(Efr.); As for the protective role of fat, it does not need to be proven(magazine).

The dual nature of the syntactic connection is also distinguished by sentences with double conjunctions of the type: true...but, although...but, let...but, no matter how...but (however) and others, in which the first part has a subordinating conjunction, and the second - a coordinating conjunction. These are sentences with a generalized concessive meaning: Even though you have new skin, your heart is still the same(Kr.); True, his dinner consisted of two or three dishes prepared by a retired soldier, but the champagne flowed like a river.(P.). Closer to complex sentences are sentences with the same meaning, but without the subordinating part of the conjunction, the place of which is taken by the conjunction-particle And, For example: And it’s a pity daddy, but take him to the churchyard(last); And bad luck, but she is forgetful(last). Wed: Although it’s a pity for the dad, let’s take him to the churchyard.

3. Dismemberment - non-division. This feature is characteristic of complex sentences (SPP) and semantically similar non-conjunctive complex sentences (CSP). Undivided sentences are those in which the subordinate part has a supporting component inside the main part in the form of a verb, noun, pronoun, adjective, comparative or adverb: 1. [ There will be People], (who will understand me): People (which ones?), which… . The subordinate clause refers to the noun “people”, which is defined by this subordinate clause, the attribute of which the subordinate clause denotes (cf.: There will be people who understand me. There will be people who understand me).

2. I don't I doubt that he is a decent person. The subordinate clause relates to the word “I doubt”, making up for its informative deficiency (cf.: I don't doubt his integrity).

Dissected sentences include sentences in which the subordinate part does not have the position of a member of the sentence in the main part and distributes the content of the entire main part as a whole: The house was empty until they came from the city- two situations are correlated as a whole, the second relates to the first as its time reference, the limit up to which the first situation existed.

4. Complex sentences can consist of two predicative parts - these are typical constructions: The kick is short and the ball is in the goal. They are called elementary. At the same time, there are designs consisting of three or more PEs. Complex sentences consisting of more than two predicative units are distinguished by the nature of the syntactic connection between the parts: sentences with the same type of syntactic connection are usually called polynomial complex sentences, sentences with different types of syntactic connections - complex syntactic structures.

And the steering wheel fidgets, / and the trim cracks, / and the canvas is taken into the reefs. This polynomial compound sentence is an open chain of three absolutely identical predicative units.

Depending on various combinations of connection types between parts, the following types of complex syntactic constructions are possible:

1) with composition and submission: Lopatin began to feel sleepy, and he was glad when the driver appeared at the door and reported that the car was ready(Sim.);

2) with an essay and non-union connection: My direction is to another unit, but I’m behind the train: let me, I think, look at my platoon and my lieutenant(Cossack.);

3) with subordination and non-union connection: While walking in the forest, sometimes, thinking about my work, I am overcome with philosophical delight: it seems as if you are deciding the conceivable fate of all humanity(Priv.);

4) with composition, subordination and non-union connection: But the river majestically carries its water, and what does it care about these bindweeds: spinning, they float along with the water, just as the ice floes floated recently(Priv.).

1.4. MEANS OF EXPRESSING SYNTACTIC RELATIONS BETWEEN PARTS OF A COMPLEX SENTENCE

Let us recall that the constructive basis of a simple sentence is the predicative nucleus , represented by a block diagram. The components of the structural diagram are word forms. For example: N1 – Vf, Inf – N1, Vf 3pl, etc. The components of a complex sentence are predicative units (PU). But the mere presence of two or more predicative units does not indicate that this is a complex sentence. In order to form a complex sentence, it is necessary syntactic connection expressed by a special indicator or a set of formal indicators(conjunctions, allied words, etc.). Let's give examples. Evening came,But it was still warm. Block diagram: PE – But PE. I'll come back,When I'll finish work:PE – When PE. I don'tI remember , When It was: specific means of communication - the informatively insufficient verb “remember” in the main part, requiring mandatory distribution, and the allied word (K-word) in the subordinate part. Thus, exactly formal indicators of syntactic connection are the main structural elements of a complex sentence, its constructive basis .

Semantic and syntactic relationships between parts of a complex sentence are expressed using conjunctions, allied words, correlates, intonation and order of parts, morphological and lexical means..

1. Unions connect parts of complex and complex sentences. In a complex sentence, conjunctions serve as the main means of communication, for example: There was no light in the room And everything outside the windows merged into one green mess(Quiet); That Cold, That very hot, That the sun will hide That shines too bright(Kr.); The old woman lay down on the stove, A Daria, a young widow, went to visit the kids(N.).

Subordinating conjunctions connect parts of a complex sentence, for example: Morozka understood What the conversation is over(Fad.); Must go, If he advises(Gonch.); The deck of the Hispaniola was lower than the embankment, So it was possible to descend onto it without a gangplank(Green).

2. The role of a connecting element in a complex sentence can be played by relative (conjunctive) word, which is a member of the proposal: The shepherd looked at the sky where it was drizzling(Ch.); Dibich guessed in the impenetrable darkness, to whom belong to the voices(Fed.). Allied words are always lexemes which, which, whose, how many, where, where, from, what in prepositional case forms. Lexemes act as conjunctions and allied words what, how, when.

3. Correlates, or correlative pairs, are used in a complex sentence of pronominal-correlative type, for example: 1) Who looking for, 2) That will always find(V.I. Lebedev-Kumach). The main part uses a demonstrative pronoun or pronominal adverb then, that, there, there, so, so, so etc., the meaning of which is revealed using the subordinate clause.

4. A way of expressing relationships between parts of a complex sentence is also order of parts . In sentences It became stuffy, I left the room And I left the room: it became stuffy The sequence of cause-and-effect relationships is expressed differently. Many complex sentences have a specific arrangement of parts. There are structures with a strictly fixed order of parts. Others, although they allow variations in the arrangement of parts, however change the semantic-syntactic relationships between them, for example: Since in The forest was already dark, we decided to abandon our search.- We decided to abandon our search, because it was already dark in the forest- the cause-and-effect relationship in the first sentence is transformed into a relationship of causal justification in the second. The semantic differences that are created here by the order of the parts are characteristic of this sentence as a specific structure and are not related to the context 1. The order of words within parts of a complex sentence, especially in the dependent part, is by no means an arbitrary phenomenon, but is determined by the structure of the entire sentence as an integral unit.

5.Intonation in a complex sentence is a means of combining parts into one whole. A separate part of a complex sentence does not have intonation completeness. End intonation is characteristic only of the final part of a complex sentence. The role of intonation in a non-union complex sentence is especially important, since here it is precisely it that is an indicator of the semantic relationships between the parts, for example: The morning will come, let's go to the field- enumerative intonation; The morning will come- let's go to the field- intonation of conditionality, conveying conditional-temporal meanings.

6. Morphological means.

A) The formal elements of the structure of a complex sentence can be words related to a specific part of speech: a noun, a comparative. For example: I arrived in city where I spent my childhood(the second, subordinate part of the sentence refers to the noun); He turned out to be better what we thought about him(for the structure of this sentence, a comparative is necessary: ​​it is its meaning that is extended by the subordinate part).

B) Relationships between morphological forms. For example: Vf perfective in the past tense in relation to the same forms in other components of the complex Bell rang, kibitka flew (A. Pushkin). Vf in the form of the imperative mood in relation to Vf in the form of the subjunctive mood creates conditional-consequence relationships: Find yourself there's a friend nearby, troubles wouldn't have happened.

C) The use of certain verb forms with certain conjunctions: “to” + Inf, “to” + Vf with the suffix “l”: I came to talk, I'll come early so we can talk.

7. Lexical means:

A) Semantic function: correlation of situations. The lexical content of the components of a complex sentence predetermines certain syntactic relationships of these components.

B) Constructive function:

Synsemantic words: words with the meaning of speech-mental activity, perception, expression of will ( I know, I understand, it is known, it is clear, it is clear, it is surprising, I see, I hear, it seemed, I ask, I demand and many others) are formal indicators of the structure of complex explanatory sentences. For example: I know that you are my friend, It’s amazing how you guessed it, Father demanded that I go with him;

Lexical relationships: The relationships between the lexical meanings of individual words can be a means of expressing syntactic relationships between the components of a complex sentence. For example, antonym words (including contextual ones) participate in the expression of opposition: You are rich - I am very poor, you are a prose writer - I am a poet, you are as ruddy as a poppy - I am like death, and skinny and pale;

Phrase schemes with the participation of significant vocabulary: “it’s worth - how”, “didn’t have time - how”, “enough - so”. For example: It was worth it open his mouthHow everyone started laughing. The phraseological scheme “cost - how” expresses temporary relationships: the second situation arises simultaneously with the first. Oftenenough it was nothingto Chaliapin became furious. The phraseological scheme “enough - so that” expresses the conditioning relationship: the second situation is a consequence of a condition that should not lead to a similar consequence

SELF-TEST QUESTIONS

1. What contradiction is contained in the definitions of a complex sentence, even the most modern ones?

2. What is the essence of contrasting a simple sentence with a complex one? What are the similarities and differences between simple and complex sentences?

3. What is the constructive basis of a simple sentence? What about the complicated one?

4. Can a predicative unit, acting as part of a complex sentence, change its structure? Give examples.

5. Name four criteria by which complex sentences are classified.

6. Name seven indicators of formal syntactic connection in a complex sentence.

7. How do conjunctions differ from allied words?

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

A complex 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 construction, it loses such features of a sentence as intonation and semantic independence, and interacts with the other part, expressing a detailed message, holistic in nature: We again without collusion collided with her: while going down, 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 integrity. The most important features of a complex sentence, contrasting it with a simple one, are:

• 1) polypredicativity, which determines the presence of a complex mechanism for the mutual adaptation of predicative parts and the use of special means for this: The troika is waiting at the porch, with an impulse. A quick run will rush 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 unification in the semantic structure of a sentence of nominations of two or more events (situations): There was deep darkness in the sky, the dawn has risen (A. Pushkin).

An event proposition is associated with the sphere of being, movement, activity (physical or social); logical proposition - reflecting the relationships 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 is possible between the number of predicative parts and the number of propositions.

The asymmetry in the relationship between predicativeness and propositionality is manifested in the existence of simple sentences that are characterized by polypropositivity. These are sentences complicated by isolated definitions, circumstances, applications, which are collapsed propositions, as well as sentences with names of positive (event) semantics and sentences with secondary nominal predicates: Person, harmful V force beliefs, you can convince. human harmful By personal anger, can be softened. Only those who harm out of fear are invulnerable and adamant (L. Ginzburg); Arrival the guest was woken up by the little dog, sleeping on Sun(N. Gogol); From this day on, Prince Andrei groom began to go to the Rostovs (L.N. Tolstoy).

In turn, not all complex sentences are polypropositive. Consider, for example, the 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 what is being communicated (i.e., mode). A complex sentence consisting of two predicative parts turns out to be monopropositive. Thus, polypredicativity can also correspond to monopropositivity.

A complex sentence is a multidimensional unit. It is characterized by: a) in the structural aspect - polypredicativeness and a detailed set of structural elements for connecting 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, different in structure and semantics, requires their structural, semantic and intonation 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 conjunctions: The flight of my tired thoughts has become low, And the world of the soul is more waterless and poorer (P. Vyazemsky); If my Russia is over - I’m dying (Z. Gippius); b) allied words, or relata (in a complex sentence): In the river, What we call life, and we are a mirror stream (P. Vyazemsky); c) correlates (indicative words as part of the main part of a complex sentence, signaling its incompleteness): That's sorry and hello that who dies in their prime? (M. Lermontov); d) supporting words in complex sentences of an undivided structure - words directly extended by the subordinate clause: You’re wandering in the forest, Not thinking that suddenly you will become an eyewitness to a certain secret (M. Petrov); d) intonation.

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

• 1) paradigm complex sentence - the relationship between aspectual and temporal forms and modal plans of the predicates. It has a larger number of members than the simple sentence paradigm (in a complex sentence their maximum number reaches 49), which is explained by different combinations of temporal 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 the predicates, since depending on their identity or discrepancy, various relationships of situations in time are conveyed (sequence or simultaneity), cf: When the doctor came (Soviet aspect), the patient calmed down ( owl species) - sequence of actions; When the doctor examined the patient (non-natural type), no one interfered (non-natural type) - 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 subsequent one: In Russia censored department arose before literature; always felt his fatal perfection (V. Nabokov); The whole city is there such: a swindler sits on a swindler and drives the swindler (V. Gogol);
• 3) structural incompleteness one of the predicative parts, the presence in it of unsubstituted syntactic positions: 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 the 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: When clear mind and heart It's clear, and sea purely, like glass: everything is so welcoming and safe, it's like that smilingly bright(P. Vyazemsky);
• 6) loose/fixed (fixed) order predicative parts ( fixed postpositionunfixed postposition): Poetry is lying in the grass, under your feet, 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 complex and non-conjunctive 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 either standard or particular. A typical model is a general model according to which all complex sentences of the same structural-semantic type are built, a particular model is a model of a specific complex sentence. It includes means of predicative connections that are inherent in a specific syntactic structure and are relevant for its construction. The model of a complex sentence is graphically conveyed in the form of a structural diagram. For example, the sentence Evil exists in order to fight it (I. Brodsky) is built according to the scheme, (p. that). Complex sentence models are divided into free and phraseologized (phraseomodels). The latter include stably reproducible additional means of communication of predicative parts (particles, special lexemes, repetition of words or their forms): Connections connections, but you also need to have a conscience (E. Schwartz). Let's take a closer look at the sentence of the phraseological structure. Once we read this poem more carefully, 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 worth (worth) and the adjoining perfective infinitive in the first part. The general model of complex sentences of this variety looks like:

[worth (worth) + infinitive], (v. how).

Such sentences of phraseological structure name two events that are connected by the relations of condition and immediate consequence, cf.: As soon as we carefully read this poem, we will understand its meaning. If we read this poem carefully, we will understand its meaning. In addition, in sentences constructed according to this phrase model, the presence of a characteristic property in a person or object is emphasized, which determines the possibility of what is called the second part. As a result, additional cause-and-effect relationships may arise between the two predicative parts: As soon as he gets sick, everything stops. Thus, this sentence of phraseological structure, like many others built on non-free models, is polysemantic. 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 relationships between its parts, and one or another grammatical meaning is characteristic not only of one specific sentence, but of all sentences that have the same structure (structure), built according to the same model.” He did not accept offers of gifts because he had nothing to give (I. Goncharov); The dogs climbed far into their kennels, fortunately there was no one to bark at (I. Goncharov); One day Varyusha woke up because Sidor. knocked on the glass with his beak (K. Paustovsky), despite the differences in specific conjunctions, they are built according to a general standard model: , (causal subordinating conjunction). A causal connection is established between the events of the first and second predicative parts. Thus, the syntactic meanings of these constructions are the meanings of reason.

There are general and private syntactic meanings. General meanings are meanings inherent in typical models of complex sentences and based primarily on basic means of communication; private syntactic meanings are determined taking into account lexical content and additional means of communication and characterize subtypes of complex sentences or their varieties (within the subtype). Let's compare complex sentences: a) The lamps were burning brightly, and the disabled samovar (K. Paustovsky) sang and sang his simple song; b) It was getting hot, and I hurried home (M. Lermontov); c) Stoltz’s youthful heat 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 general syntactic meaning of these constructions is the meaning of connection. Their lexical content, the peculiarities of the paradigm and the order of their parts make it possible to identify particular syntactic meanings: a) enumerative meaning; b) effective meaning; c) connecting-extensive meaning.

The distinction between general and particular meanings is essential for the classification of complex sentences: types complex sentences are highlighted taking into account general meanings, subtypes and their varieties - taking into account private 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 function of specifying a certain particular meaning in a complex sentence. Yes, in a sentence Already almost in front of the pillbox lay the advanced riflemen, and along the road All equals it was impossible to walk (N. Tikhonov) the words already and still express a concessionary meaning. The role of such elements is especially great in complex and non-union complex sentences.

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

There are two types of such lexical elements:

1) typological and constructive elements necessary to realize the basic syntactic meaning of a complex sentence. Thus, antonyms express a comparative meaning, which is basic for complex and non-union sentences with comparative relations: Young- for service, old- for advice (proverb);

complex sentence grammatical connection

2) partial constructive elements that cause 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 basic syntactic meaning: Right, the bullet hit him in the shoulder, because he suddenly lowered his hand (M. Lermontov). The subordinate clause expresses not a causal, but an investigative meaning, since its logical justification 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. Monopropositive are:

• 1) complex sentences with substantive-attributive (attributive) subordinate clauses, in which the subordinate clause is used not to name a separate situation, but to establish the reference of the name: There are words that only seem banal;
• 2) explanatory-objective complex sentences, in which one part may contain a mode of utterance (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 more and more extravagantly (P. Vyazemsky ); It’s good that autumn has already passed;
• 3) complex sentences with pronominal-correlative clauses, in which the clause in combination with the correlate gives a detailed name of a person or object: This is all that I heard (M. Bulgakov) - cf.: everything that was heard.

The meaning of a complex sentence can also be organized in such a way that the propositions contained in its parts “correspond to the same situation.” So, in disjunctive compound sentences with conjunctions it is not the same. neither this nor that. or different propositions serve to imprecisely nominate the same situation, not clearly identified by the speaker: Either he [Rudin] was jealous of 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 division of a complex sentence is carried out through intonation and the order of parts. With a neutral (objective) order of parts, the topic is usually located at the beginning of the statement (first part); the rhema 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 highlighted by intonation (raising the pitch of the stressed word and increasing its duration). Theme-rhematic division of a complex sentence reflects the selection of less and more significant information for the speaker: the most important information represents the rheme of the statement.

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

Wed: Since classes were over, // I went home (the boundaries of the components of the actual division coincide with the boundaries of the predicative parts); The house in which I settled // had an interesting history (the subordinate clause, along with the supporting word, is part of the theme - and the boundaries of syntactic and actual division do not coincide). The uniqueness 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 a statement 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, compared to a simple proposal, a complex one is characterized by the possibility of combining different goal settings and different functional plans. It has not only a modal, temporal, but also a communicative perspective.

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

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

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

The most important and regular elements of the structure of a complex sentence include the basic means of communication (conjunctions and allied words), the relationship between aspectual and modal forms of predicates, the relative position of parts, and in complex sentences, in addition, the presence or absence of correlative (demonstrative) words and the relationship of the subordinate part with the main part (the subordinate part relates 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 different types (of course, taking into account known lexical restrictions), each of which is characterized by its own broad grammatical meaning.

Most complex sentences are constructed using such models; they are the most productive and stylistically neutral. They are called free.

However, there are also complex sentences that are built according to more complex models. They include, in addition to the basic structural elements indicated above, other, more specific elements that make the connection between the predicative parts especially close and determine more specific and complex grammatical meanings. Complex sentences constructed according to such models are limited in their use (usually typical for lively conversational speech). Such models are called non-free.

This, for example, is the complex sentence of Something else, but there are plenty of swamps in Meshchera (K. Paustovsky). The structural model of this sentence, in addition to the comparative conjunction a and the present tense form (enough) with a timeless meaning, also includes a pronominal combination of something else, forming the first part. This also determines the more complex grammatical meaning of this sentence - it expresses not comparative relations, but singular-contrastive ones. Based on the same unfree model, the following sentences are constructed: Who is the other, but he knows; Where else, but in Moscow you will find everything, etc. Wed. a sentence based on a free model: There is little arable land in Meshchera, but there are plenty of swamps.

Individual particles especially often act as additional structural elements, but these can also be various morphological forms of words and even fully significant words.

Thus, the negative particle not and the restrictive particle are only used in complex sentences with the conjunction as, expressing relations of temporary interdependence, for example:

• 1) The peasant gasp Not managed, How a bear sat on him (I. Krylov);
• 2) Only We managed to relax and have lunch, How heard gun shots (A. Pushkin). The first part in such sentences denotes an action that was interrupted by another action, which is mentioned in the second part (a sentence with the particle not), or an action that ended just when the action indicated in the second part of the sentence began (a sentence with the 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 organizing such proposals. Without them, such sentences cannot be constructed at all (you cannot say: “We had time to have lunch when…”; “I managed to gasp when…”, etc.).

The verb "managed" also takes part in the structure of these complex sentences, which, in combination with particles, not only directly indicates with its lexical meaning the nature of the relationships expressed in the complex sentence (didn't have time... just managed...).

In sentences with a double conjunction than... those, in which facts interrelated in their development are compared, a mandatory element of the structure is the forms of the comparative degree of adjectives or qualitative adverbs, for example:

• 1) How quicker the fire was burning out, those know better it was becoming a moonlit night (A. Chekhov);
• 2) How more he said, those more blushed (Saltykov-Shchedrin).

In the sentences analyzed above with the elements I didn’t have time..., how...; just had time..., as... and in sentences with the conjunction than... then, in addition to the basic elements of the structure, several more particular elements are distinguished, characteristic only of these sentences. 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 the main part and which is the subordinate one. In such cases, we can talk about the mutual subordination of parts of a complex sentence.

Thus, the more structural elements 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 the complex sentence is in its structure.

• 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 I have to choose a destiny, I will not delude myself with another (N. Krandievskaya). Inflexible structures are structures in which rearrangement of predicative parts and insertion of one part into another is impossible: The train left at seven o'clock in the evening, so Mikhail Ivanovich could have dinner ... before leaving (L. Tolstoy);
• 5) on the basis of “conformity/discrepancy in the number of propositions and predicative parts of a sentence”, symmetrical and asymmetrical 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 utterance turn out to be not expressed using linguistic means (implicit): If you want to buy bread, then the bakery is to 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 to the right. The second component is omitted, which causes an asymmetry in the complex sentence.

Based on function (nature of goal setting), functional types of complex sentences are distinguished. In this case, they differ:

• 1) functional homogeneous sentences - sentences, all predicative parts of which coincide in purpose: 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, rise to us in the blue, clean and unharmed (F. Sologub).
• 2) syncretic, combining functionally heterogeneous parts: a) narrative-interrogative: Without a doubt, he was in a pitiful position, but what could be done? (L. Tolstoy); b) narrative-motivating: ...You won’t find anything better: turn your tender gaze, girls, to the infantry (A. Tvardovsky); c) incentive-interrogative: Yes, run to the policeman - why is he chilling there? (A. Chekhov); d) motivating-narrative: Understand: lack of freedom from lies leads to atrocity (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 ones. These types of sentences differ in the presence/absence of emotional coloring in the syntactic structure and, thus, are associated with reflecting the position of the speaker (the author of the statement), with the transmission of his emotions and assessments. The means of expressing emotions is primarily exclamatory intonation, as well as particles, interjections and expressive vocabulary: How lively simple pictures of marching movements appear in my head, and which one modest lovely they gain in memories! (A. Kuprin). Non-exclamatory and exclamatory sentences are unevenly distributed in the system of complex structures. Non-exclamatory sentences predominate, while exclamatory sentences are used, as a rule, in the field of binomial constructions, and they are closely related to functional types of sentences: it is the question or impulse that often expresses the emotions of the speaker.

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

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

Thus, non-union sentences differ from allied sentences in the diffuseness of semantics and the undifferentiated relationships between parts. Complex and complex sentences differ in the degree of autonomy of the parts and the nature of the expressed relationships between them.

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

The further division of compound and non-conjunct sentences is predominantly traditional in nature: compound sentences are differentiated depending on the type of coordinating conjunction, and then divided into subtypes according to the nature of the syntactic meaning; non-conjunctive 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 a consideration of their main classes.

Composition and subordination as the main methods 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 types of connections in a complex sentence was the discussion on the issue of composition and subordination in the 20s of our century. It was discovered by M.N. Peterson, who convincingly showed the uncertainty and instability of the concept of dependence - the independence of the parts of a complex sentence and with great acuity and categoricality expressed the idea that “objective criteria do not make it possible to distinguish the main sentence from the subordinate clause and the composition from the subordination” and that, therefore, in There is no linguistic content in the concepts of composition and subordination.

The most interesting response to this criticism of the doctrine of composition and submission was the article by A.M. Peshkovsky "Does 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 to a number of formal features that distinguish complex sentences from complex sentences. He finds these features in conjunctional complex sentences. Peshkovsky considers the most important formal difference between composition and subordination to be the difference between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions, which consists in the fact that with subordination, the relation indicator is found only in one of the connected parts - in the subordinate clause, and the subordinating conjunction “not only rhythmically adjoins its sentence, but constitutes it organic formal belonging"; when composing, “relational indicators stand either with each of the correlating ones (in some cases of connecting and dividing composing), or between the correlating ones, without internally merging with any of them.” Therefore, a coordinating conjunction expressing the relationship between the parts of a complex sentence cannot appear before its first part (except in cases of repetition of the conjunction in open structures).

Peshkovsky associates the properties of coordinating and subordinating conjunctions with the difference in the arrangement of parts of a complex sentence during composition and subordination: the subordinate part, to which the relation indicator is “soldered” - the subordinating conjunction, can stand before or after the main part or be included in it; in a complex sentence, the parts cannot be included in one another, since the indicator of the relationship - the coordinating conjunction - does not organically merge with any of them.

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

The named article by Peshkovsky, on the basis of which a 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. Before 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 observations of formal differences in composition and subordination and his very desire to look for differences precisely in structure, in form, without breaking away from the 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 isomorphism? Apparently, they can be found only in the sphere of a conjunctive complex sentence, based on differences in the nature of the conjunctive means.

Peshkovsky’s idea that in non-union complex sentences certain groups of conjunctions are identical to intonation is erroneous: intonation is a phenomenon of a completely different nature than conjunctions, and cannot in any way be considered as a linguistic means that has the same purpose as conjunctions. As the observations of researchers indicate, there is no complete correspondence between intonation structures and types of non-conjunctive complex sentences. The same non-conjunctive 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 intonation structures to the corresponding structures of a non-conjunctive complex sentence.

In accordance with the above, there is reason to accept the following definitions of syntactic connection in a complex sentence. The coordinating connection between the components of a complex sentence is similar to the connection between word forms in open and closed coordinating phrases. It is characterized by the fact that the components it connects (forms of words 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 coordinating connections are coordinating conjunctions. In complex sentences with a coordinating connection, there is no difference in the function of the part introduced by the conjunction and the part not containing the conjunction, and none of the predicative units being connected occupies the syntactic place of the word form within the other part.

The subordinating connection between the components of a complex sentence is similar to the different types of subordinating connections in a phrase and a simple sentence. It may also have no analogues in syntactic connections in a phrase and a simple sentence, but 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 the subordinating relationship between the components of a complex sentence are specific: the main exponents of the relationship are subordinating conjunctions and relative pronouns (conjunctive words) that acquire the function of a conjunction.

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

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

Question about sentences with several predicates and one subject

A complex sentence, like other classes of complex sentences, is contrasted with a simple one based on the property of polypredicativity. However, there are syntactic structures, the classification of which is controversial. These are sentences with homogeneous predicates. The solution to the question of the boundaries of complex (and non-union complex) sentences depends on the solution of questions about their status.

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

The consideration of composed unities with predicates, expressed verbal word forms, as polypredicative constructions is based on the recognition of the constitutive role of the predicate in a sentence (it is the predicate that is the bearer of predicative categories - categories of time and modality) and on the interpretation of sentences with homogeneous predicates as messages about several situations - or simultaneous ones, or replacing each other. So, from this point of view, the sentence Orshev said goodbye to the infantrymen and warrant officers and jumped to the ground (O. Ermakov) displays two situations that are closely related to each other, but succeed 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.

Mono-subjective compound sentences are polypredicative constructions that represent messages about several situations characterized by the unity of the subject: I accepted your challenge, and I can’t go back (S. Soloviev); Princess. I looked again at the roofs and turrets of Krutoyar, at the river emerging with blue, blue water from under the fog, and went back into the sleepy, warm light (A.N. Tolstoy).

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

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

The closeness to mono-subject complex sentences is especially clearly manifested:

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

However, not all constructions that include a number of verbal word forms belong to mono-subject complex sentences. Simple suggestions are:

• 1) sentences with repetition of lexically identical verb forms of different types: Sat and sit; Read and read;
• 2) sentences with repeated (lexically identical) predicates in the same grammatical form: Autumn leaves rustle, rustle, rustle (V. Bryusov); The summer evening is fading, fading (A. Solodovnikov);
• 3) sentences including predicate-convertives: Some people enter and exit; He sells and buys furniture. “Conversives serve to express differences that have a semantic nature; these differences are associated exclusively with the speaker’s way of understanding a certain situation; the situation itself remains unchanged”;
• 4) sentences that include combinations of verbal predicates that denote different phases of one action, dissected in time: He got up and is standing;
• 5) sentences in which a number of verbal predicates have a common modal or phase modifier (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 this land, build houses, grow bread; She wanted to scream, to call someone for help;
• 6) sentences with composed unities that represent an indivisible combination: He jumped out of the window;
• 7) sentences in which one verbal predicate is syntactically auxiliary and indicates the position of the person at the moment of action, and the other denotes 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 order of the components of the series. So, for example, the following combinations are impossible: *The child is crying and lying down; *She thinks and sits;
• 8) sentences in which predicate verbs have common semes, form a synonymous chain, clarify, concretize each other: Martha and her husband moved past him and went out (V. Nabokov);
• 9) sentences in which one of the predicates completely repeats the semantic composition of the other: She cried and sobbed. The verb to cry means “to shed tears, usually making plaintive inarticulate vocal sounds, crying”, the verb to sob is “to cry loudly, convulsively”; thus, the last predicate verb has common semes with the first; in addition, it includes hyposemes for the intensification of the process “loudly, frantically.” The semantic community of predicate verbs can be accompanied by complications with their emotionally expressive connotations (connotations): All his life he lies and deceives;
• 10) sentences in which a coordinating connection combines nominal components with one connective: He was reddish-blond, bearded and so much taller, larger than ordinary people that he could be shown off. (I. Bunin).

Basic literature for the electronic version of the lecture course

• 1. Kryuchkov S.E. and Maksimov L.Yu. Modern Russian language. Syntax of a complex sentence. Textbook manual for pedagogical students. Institute... - M.: Education, 1977. - 191 p.
• 2. Modern Russian language: Theory. Analysis of linguistic units: Textbook. for students higher textbook institutions: In 2 hours - Part 2: Morphology, Syntax / Ed. E.I. Dibrova. - M.: Publishing center "Academy", 2001. - 704 p.
• 3. Modern Russian language: Textbook. for philol. specialist. higher educational institutions / Edited by V.A. Beloshapkova. - M.: Azbukovnik, 1999. - 928 p.
• 4. Modern Russian language: Textbook / Under the general editorship of L.A. Novikova. - St. Petersburg: Lan publishing house, 2001. - 864 p.

A complex sentence is a sentence consisting of two or more grammatical bases (predicative units), which constitute a semantic, structural and intonation unity.

A complex sentence functions in language as one communicative unit and is characterized by formal grammatical and semantic features, among which the most important are: a) polypredicativeness; b) a special structural diagram; c) intonation completeness, semantic and structural integrity; d) it reports several situations and the relationship between them.

The polypredicative nature of a complex sentence is found in the presence of two or more predicative units that have the structure of a simple sentence, combined into one. Parts of a complex sentence only

conditionally can be called simple sentences. Having a syntactic structure similar to simple sentences, they do not have: a) meaningful completeness, because only in combination they express a complex thought, versatile connections between objects and environmental phenomena; b) intonation completeness, because only the entire complex sentence is characterized by the intonation of the end; c) communicative significance, since they are not independent units of communication.

A complex sentence consisting of two predicative units is called binary, or two-component: Therefore, let us be honest and frank in matters great and simple, so that from birth to death we will answer for everything(V. Krischenko); Not only people make mistakes, even saints make mistakes(V. Simonenko).

A complex sentence consisting of three or more predicative units is called richly articulated or multicomponent: Children's trust "I have in the teacher is a drop of pure dew on a rose flower, you need to pick the flower so as not to shake off this drop(V. Sukhomlinsky); I don’t have happiness and I don’t see it in my dreams, that’s why I carry other dreams in my heart; when at times I suffer and cry, then I don’t ask fate for happiness (Lesya Ukrainka).

A complex sentence is not a mechanical combination of simple sentences; it is constructed according to a certain unique pattern. During construction, certain structural varieties of a simple sentence are used, which are modified in accordance with the characteristics of a complex sentence.

So, parts of complex sentences do not act as a separate communicative unit and do not have semantic and intonation completeness. Only the entire complex sentence as a whole can be considered as an independent structural and communicative unit, which is a means of forming and transmitting information.

MEANS OF CONNECTING PARTS OF A COMPLEX SENTENCE

The main means of combining predicative units of a complex sentence are conjunctions, connecting words and intonation.

Intonation plays an important role in any sentence (simple and complex). Any complex sentence is characterized by intonation completeness and has the intonation of the end. In certain complex constructions, intonation is the only means of expressing semantic and syntactic relationships between the predicative units of a complex sentence.

The following types of intonation are distinguished:

1) list intonation: Leaves nada, nada, the earth is cold, cranes are already flying over the garden to warmer lands(A. Kaminchuk);

2) intonation of opposition or comparison: It is not the kindergarten that has blossomed here, nor the garden bed - there are boys and girls near the school (G. Prigara);

3) intonation of explanation: I dreamed: red roses were burning in golden rays (Lesya Ukrainka).

One of the most common means of connecting predicative units is conjunctions and connecting words, which are indicators of coordinating or contractual communication. From a semantic point of view, in many cases they express certain semantic relationships without the help of context.

Unions of severity(paratactic) combine equal parts of a complex sentence into one whole and express connecting, comparable-adversative and dividing relationships: A thunderstorm has passed, and the night has flown by, and again the day is noisy all around (V. Sosyura); Years of love, childhood, like spring waters, have disappeared, but the sound of spring waters will never be forgotten(Lesya Ukrainka); It was not because of the sun that the harvest ripened, but the song about happiness hardened in the grain (S. Letyuk); then the dark night comes, then the cheerful day roars(L. Glebov). Severity conjunctions only connect the predicative parts of a complex sentence and do not relate to any of these parts.

Contract unions(hypotactic) connect parts of complex sentences and express temporary, conditional, causal, essential and other relationships. They always refer to the contract part, subordinating it to the main one: Spring flies in the flowers, the pike cranes and does not know that they are opening gates for her everywhere with their whistles(Alexander Oles); Don’t be afraid of insights, for they are like medicine (L. Kostenko).

Connecting words, connecting together parts of a folding sentence, act as members of the contract part of the sentence. Significant parts of speech act as connecting words: relative pronouns (who, what, which, whose) and pronominal adverbs (how, when, where, where): Avoid people who, seeing your vices and shortcomings, justify them or even approve of them(G. Skovoroda); Look, I laugh when my heart weeps...(Lesya Ukrainka).

Connecting words can have correlative demonstrative words in the main part. The role of correlative words are demonstrative and attributive pronouns (such, that, each, all), as well as pronominal adverbs (then, here, there, there, so): My soul will never forget the gift that spring gave... ( Lesya Ukrainka); Here, where every stone was poured with blood in battle, take it with respect and love, “stop, friend, you (V. Luchuk).

One of the means of combining predicative units of a complex sentence into one whole is the ratio of aspectual and modal forms of verb adjectives, which are appropriately coordinated. Thus, in sentences with simultaneity of actions, adverbial verbs are expressed in the form of one tense, and in sentences with a temporal sequence - in different tense forms: Any nightingale sings in the grove, I listen to the gentle chanting, the pure, beautiful Ukrainian thing I hear in that twitter(A. Krymsky); The day, ripe and heavy, rolled down like a round, red-sided apple, and the night, with a slow wave of the hand, writes broad black shadows with charcoal.(G. Rylsky).

Lexical elements can also determine the nature of syntactic relationships and connect parts of a complex sentence. Lexical means of communication in a broad sense include connecting and correlative words. Such elements can be pronouns, which are used instead of nouns and indicate the connection between predicative units: The sunny path is pouring, and on it you and I, and all around in flowers, my Ukraine(V. Sosyura). A lexical element can also be a common minor member (or several members): At that time, hot summers abounded over Kiev, June was coming, and heavy dark clouds gathered in the sky almost every evening (V. Sobko).

The order of placement of parts of a complex sentence can be free and fixed, constant.

For a free order, predicative parts can change their place in the sentence: Leaves will grow from a leaf, a shirt will be woven from a thread (M. Singaevsky). If you change the arrangement of the parts of a complex sentence, the content of the sentence and the relationship between the parts will not change. Those complex sentences in which the relation of simultaneity is established have a free order of parts.

If there is a time sequence, a cause-and-effect relationship and zymatic relationships between the parts of a complex sentence, then the order of placement of the predicative parts is constant, fixed: They crucified us for hundreds of years and did not overcome us, therefore Ukraine did not die and will never die(D. Pavlychko); Popular wisdom says: December ends the year and opens the doors to real winter (M. Tkachenko).