Functional stylistic approach in school and university study of syntactical synonymy

The scientific novelty of the present paper is toanalyse the proposed method of syntactic synonymy of complex and compound sentences, which is regarded from the standpoint of thetradition of P.V. Chesnokov of the relationship between logical and semantic forms of thinking. The transformations, preserving theirsense, are used as the tool of research, the so-called synonymic changes. It is important to note that in the process of transformation notonly formal but also sense aspects of the sentence change. A complex sentence with pre-pronominal subordinate clause relates to thecomplex sentence with an indivisible structure. Thus, it can be proved that an attempt to change it into a compound one can touch uponobjective difficulties. First, a complex sentence of pre-pronominal type has its cognitive peculiarities, limiting the abilities of its transformationinto a compound one: the main clause of the complex sentence speaks for its subordinate clause and in such a position (whenone situation is stated by the other) it is strictly forbidden. Second, the attempt to transform a complex sentence into a compound one isaccompanied with great changes in its grammatical meaning. The relations of circumstances, clearly signalled by subordinate means ofcausation in complex sentences can become the relations of consequence, coming out of the lexical-grammatical analysis of the verbalstructure of the predicative parts in compound sentences. 1. There are so many carriages, that it is necessary to crowd. (Chekhov, Onthe wolf fight). There are many carriages and it is necessary to crowd. 2. She liked the garden so much, that shed never part with it.(Chekhov, A Fatherless). She liked the garden and shed never part with it. Thus, the analysis of complex sentences with prepronominalsubordinate clause transformational abilities allows concluding about the absence of their synonymy with compound onesbecause all the attempts of change (transformation) are accompanied with a significant change of grammar meaning, which is alsoproved by cognitive theory. The comparison of the initial syntactical units and their transforms in the aspects of the semantic forms ofthinking, related by them, revealed their divergence in one of the most important aspects - the character of the content thought componentsrange. As the lexical-grammatical analysis showed, compound sentences, in comparison with complex ones, are not capable toenvelop fully the content that is displayed in the hypotactical construction. The difference in the semantic volume of the compared unitstouches upon two significant moments: first, the transforms, denoting undifferentiated semantic relation, have quite a different characterof their grammar meaning; second, non-coincidence of the subject structure is evident between the compared formations.

Keywords

Authors

References