09.12.202127.05.2017

Preference statements as modal utterances in English. The ability to convey the situation of preference in the text in all its multidimensionality. Formation of collocation links with words expressing the categorization of the object of preference.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

MODUS OF PREFERENCE AND ITS EXPRESSION IN THE SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF WORDS AND SENTENCES (BASED ON THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE)

Maksimov A.N.

Statements of preference are considered in linguistics as modal statements, which are based on axiological judgments of comparison and choice. In their structure we find the words “better”, “more useful”, “more beautiful” and so on. They express a situation in which the subject is faced with choosing one of two or more alternatives. This article is devoted to the study of the mode of preference, an invariant logical-semantic structure that determines specific models of preference verbalization in linguistic forms. It should be noted that in all the diversity of preferential contexts, the logical form of preference remains uniform and practically unchanged. Being thus a transparent deep structure, it helps to identify this modality in the general semantics of the text. To the logical form of preference N.D. Arutyunova refers to the expression of value comparison of objects or situations, their comparison and opposition according to certain characteristics and the choice made on the basis of these operations. In the text, the mode of preference can be supplemented by the expression of various shades of the emotional-volitional sphere of the speaker, revealing his attitude to the object of preference, and it can also be included in other connections and relationships - cause-and-effect, conditional, target, and so on. Choice and preference, thus, always turn out to be determined by the ultimate goals and specific conditions of the situation. In our study, we adhere to a broad understanding of preference modality as personalizing semantics, not only presented in ready-made form in the meanings of specific linguistic units, but also generated by their various combinations in the text. In all the variety of lexical and grammatical means of expressing the modality of preference, it is necessary to highlight those units in which the mode of preference is presented in a collapsed form, the so-called logical preference operators. This English verbs prefer, choose, pick, select, favor, adjectives favorite, most suitable, nouns preference, hobby. This also includes syntactic constructions such as it is better, had better, would rather, conjunction rather than and some others. It should be noted that we unite these linguistic units not at the individual content level (the semantic structures of these units are different), but at the functional, modal level, abstracting from their individual differences. In the text, the function of each of these words is to indicate the selection of one object by excluding others. For example:

And the girl was the opposite of any girl she would ever have picked for David. She was plain, mousy and bespectacled.

Her favorite walk, and where she frequently went while the others were calling on Lady Catherine, was along the open grove which edged that side of the park, where there was a nice sheltered path, which no one seemed to value but herself, and where she felt beyond the reach of Lady Catherine's curiosity.

In this sentence, the logical form of preference is supplied additional information about the object of preference, these are various kinds of characteristics - where she frequently went, along the open grove, a nice sheltered path, which no one seemed to value but herself. This kind of descriptive information not only enriches the semantics of preference, but also transforms it, colors it with additional subjective meanings.

The ability to convey a situation of preference in a text in all its multidimensionality characterizes the above lexico-grammatical units and determines the frequency of their use. A feature of these units and their derivatives (preference, choice, favorite) as modalized words is their autonomy, that is, the absence of strict semantic restrictions on compatibility, the free formation of collocation links with words expressing the categorization of the object of preference. This is evidenced by dictionary data. Here are examples of the compatibility of the adjective favorite with nouns from the Macmillan English dictionary for advanced learners and from the Longman dictionary of contemporary English:

1. His favorite pastimes were hunting and golf.

2. What's your favorite food?

3. Stephen King is one of my favorite writers.

4. Who's your favorite actor?

5. I"ll take you to my favorite restaurant tomorrow.

This adjective appears in only one stable expression in American English: favorite son (a politician, sports player, etc. who is popular with people in the area that they come from). As can be seen from the examples given, the words combined with this adjective do not represent general class. Their compatibility with the adjective favorite is due to the fact that each of these words represents in the speaker’s mind a certain thematic area (concept), a set of objects from which a choice is made. Thus, in the examples given, the nouns qualified by the adjective favorite specify an area of preference, rather than denoting a single object.

For example:

My favorite opera singer (concept) is Pavarotti (specific person, performer).

My favorite football player (concept) is Marco van Basten (specific person, player).

In sentences like This is my favorite dress, the noun is also used non-referentially; the structure of this is indicates a specific object of preference. Unlike the adjective favorite, the verb to favor, the participle favored and the noun favoritism can have a connotation of a negative evaluation in a sentence. To favor (in one of the meanings) = to show preference or to give an advantage to smb in an unfair way.

For example:

He was accused of showing favoritism to particular students.

Like modal words and verbs, preference operators prefer, choose, pick, favor, suit serve to convey subjective information, to express the speaker’s point of view, his attitude to the objects of reality around him. The priority properties attributed to objects and phenomena of reality in the modality of preference do not characterize things “in themselves,” that is, they are not ontologically inherent in them. These properties can be called interactive, since they can change depending on the nature of the dialogue between a person and the surrounding world.

They characterize objects and situations in the dynamics of their situational variability, since in different time Different and even opposite sides of things may be preferred. According to M.Ya. Bloch, in the modality of preference, a person’s creative individuality, his psychological characteristics, evaluative models of perception, behavioral stereotypes, goals, and intentions are revealed.

Thus, the modality of preference represents the core of subjective modality, a system of personality-oriented concepts (concepts) through which a person carries out mental and objective-practical activities.

In most of the analyzed cases, the mode of preference is represented in the text by the specific content of the lexical and grammatical units given in the article; it can also consist in the logical form of a preferential statement, revealed on the basis of syntactic (positional) or semantic (substantive) opposition of its parts.

This is achieved through the use of: 1) complex sentences, parts of which are combined at the construction level by the conjunctions or, or else, otherwise, rather than, instead of; 2) comparative constructions with adjectives; 3) various kinds of antonymic constructions that reveal oppositions at the level of lexical meanings.

Here are some examples:

And it was not at all a wish to get Sir Alfred out of the office, although he was a man whose absence was usually preferable to his presence - the use of antonyms, contrast at the level of lexical meanings.

He had started off from his City flat before London was stirring, and instead of taking the direct route to Monksmere through Ipswich, he had struck north at Chelmsford to enter Suffolk at Sudbury - use complex sentence, representing a dilemma, the preferred alternative is highlighted in bold italics, the opposition is at the level of the syntactic structure of the sentence.

You"ve no idea, Garry, old man, how disgustingly and indecently rich that woman is. She lives in Kensington on an income which would do her well in Park Lane. But she steadfastly refuses to part. This example shows that the heroine prefers Kensington contrary common sense a speaker who would prefer Park Lane in her place. The mode of preference is explicated in this sentence solely by the contextual opposition of the names of the two realities Kensington and Park Lane.

Based on textual analysis and analysis of dictionary entries, we came to the conclusion that preference is a content-heterogeneous semantic sphere; it is expressed by various linguistic units and their combinations, which inevitably introduce new modal meanings into the content of a sentence. In this regard, it is difficult to consider the modality of preference “in its pure form,” in isolation from other subjective-modal and emotional meanings. The term “preference” covers such a system of a person’s relationship to the world around him, in which a person’s tastes, hobbies, principles and beliefs, and worldviews are revealed.

Despite this complexity, in this article we tried, based on a generalization of English-language material, to identify the logical-semantic structure of the verbalization of preference, that is, to show general cognitive-linguistic models of expressing preference through various lexical-grammatical and syntactic means of language. It should be noted that preference is realized on the basis of various logical (mental) operations performed by a person at the moment of decision making. This is, first of all, comparison, contrast, inclusion, exclusion of options, consideration of the situation from various angles, forecasting consequences, assessing the benefits of a particular decision, and many others. A problematic situation external to a person is instantly processed in logical forms and verbalized in internal speech. In external speech, the speaker not only expresses a specific preference, but also demonstrates his attitude to the statement, his emotional state, gives arguments in favor of a particular decision, and defends his positions. As can be seen from our reasoning, we adhere to a broad understanding of preference as a modality that covers not only the subjective taste characteristics of an individual, but also situations that require objective and rational resolution.

preference text word language

Literature

1. Arutyunova N.D. Axiology in the mechanisms of language life / Problems of structural linguistics. M., 1984.

2. Blokh M.Ya. Theoretical foundations of grammar. M., 2004.

3. Kubryakova E.S. Nominative aspect speech activity. M., 2007.

4. Austen J. Pride and prejudice.

5. Duncan Lois. Killing Mr. Griffin.

6. James P. D. Death in holy orders.

7. James P. D. Unnatural causes.

8. Longman dictionary of contemporary English.

9. Macmillan English dictionary for advanced learners.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Mode of preference and its expression in the semantic structure of a word and its sentence (based on the material of the English language)

Statements of preference are considered in linguistics as modal statements, which are based on axiological judgments of comparison and choice. In their structure we find the words “better”, “more useful”, “more beautiful” and so on. They express a situation in which the subject is faced with choosing one of two or more alternatives. This article is devoted to the study of the mode of preference, an invariant logical-semantic structure that determines specific models of preference verbalization in linguistic forms. It should be noted that in all the diversity of preferential contexts, the logical form of preference remains uniform and practically unchanged. Being thus a transparent deep structure, it helps to identify this modality in the general semantics of the text. To the logical form of preference N.D. Arutyunova refers to the expression of value comparison of objects or situations, their comparison and opposition according to certain characteristics and the choice made on the basis of these operations. In the text, the mode of preference can be supplemented by the expression of various shades of the emotional-volitional sphere of the speaker, revealing his attitude to the object of preference, and it can also be included in other connections and relationships - cause-and-effect, conditional, target, and so on. Choice and preference, thus, always turn out to be determined by the ultimate goals and specific conditions of the situation. In our study, we adhere to a broad understanding of preference modality as personalizing semantics, not only presented in ready-made form in the meanings of specific linguistic units, but also generated by their various combinations in the text. In all the variety of lexical and grammatical means of expressing the modality of preference, it is necessary to highlight those units in which the mode of preference is presented in a collapsed form, the so-called logical preference operators. These are the English verbs prefer, choose, pick, select, favor, adjectives favorite, most suitable, nouns preference, hobby. This also includes syntactic constructions such as it is better, had better, would rather, conjunction rather than and some others. It should be noted that we unite these linguistic units not at the individual content level (the semantic structures of these units are different), but at the functional, modal level, abstracting from their individual differences. In the text, the function of each of these words is to indicate the selection of one object by excluding others. For example:

And the girl was the opposite of any girl she would ever have picked for David. She was plain, mousy and bespectacled.

In this sentence, the logical form of preference is supplied with additional information about the object of preference, these are various kinds of characteristics - where she frequently went, along the open grove, a nice sheltered path, which no one seemed to value but herself. This kind of descriptive information not only enriches the semantics of preference, but also transforms it, colors it with additional subjective meanings.

1. His favorite pastimes were hunting and golf.
2. What's your favorite food?
3. Stephen King is one of my favorite writers.
4. Who's your favorite actor?
5. I"ll take you to my favorite restaurant tomorrow.

This adjective appears in only one stable expression in American English: favorite son (a politician, sports player, etc. who is popular with people in the area that they come from). As can be seen from the examples given, the words combined with this adjective do not represent a general class. Their compatibility with the adjective favorite is due to the fact that each of these words represents in the speaker’s mind a certain thematic area (concept), a set of objects from which a choice is made. Thus, in the examples given, the nouns qualified by the adjective favorite specify an area of preference, rather than denoting a single object.

For example:

My favorite opera singer (concept) is Pavarotti (specific person, performer).

My favorite football player (concept) is Marco van Basten (specific person, player).

For example:

He was accused of showing favoritism to particular students.

They characterize objects and situations in the dynamics of their situational variability, since at different times different and even opposite sides of things may be preferred. According to M.Ya. Bloch, in the modality of preference, a person’s creative individuality, his psychological characteristics, evaluative models of perception, behavioral stereotypes, goals, and intentions are revealed.

Here are some examples:

He had started off from his City flat before London was stirring, and instead of taking the direct route to Monksmere through Ipswich, he had struck north at Chelmsford to enter Suffolk at Sudbury - using a complex sentence presenting a dilemma, the preferred alternative is in bold italics , opposition at the level of the syntactic structure of the sentence.

You"ve no idea, Garry, old man, how disgustingly and indecently rich that woman is. She lives in Kensington on an income which would do her well in Park Lane. But she steadfastly refuses to part. This example shows that the heroine prefers Kensington, contrary to the common sense of the speaker, who in her place would prefer Park Lane.The mode of preference is explicated in this sentence solely by the contextual opposition of the names of the two realities Kensington and Park Lane.

preference text word language

Literature

1. Arutyunova N.D. Axiology in the mechanisms of language life / Problems of structural linguistics. M., 1984.
2. Blokh M.Ya. Theoretical foundations of grammar. M., 2004.
3. Kubryakova E.S. Nominative aspect of speech activity. M., 2007.
4. Austen J. Pride and prejudice.
5. Duncan Lois. Killing Mr. Griffin.
6. James P. D. Death in holy orders.
7. James P. D. Unnatural causes.
8. Longman dictionary of contemporary English.
9. Macmillan English dictionary for advanced learners.

Your application is accepted

Our manager will contact you soon

There was an error sending

Send again

You’d better prepare for the exam instead of watching TV. You would rather study for the exam instead of watching TV. Mike had better take an umbrella if he doesn’t want to get soaked. Mike should have taken an umbrella if he didn't want to get wet. You’d better not ride a motorcycle without a helmet. You better not ride a motorcycle without a helmet. He'd better not tell her what really happened. He shouldn't tell her what really happened.

2. Had better is used to express recommendation or advice. In this sense, this expression is similar to the modal verb should. However, the meaning of had better is stronger and more specific than should, so often advice with had better sounds urgently like a warning to avoid possible troubles.

You'd better watch your language. You should watch your speech. He'd better not travel alone. It's better for him not to travel alone. They'd better pay their debts. They should pay their debts.

Would rather

Would you rather have tea or coffee? Would you prefer tea or coffee? I’d rather stay home and read a book. I would probably stay at home and read a book. We'd rather not go out this evening. We'd probably stay home tonight. Alice would rather not visit her mother-in-law. Alice would prefer not to visit her mother-in-law.

They’d rather drive than travel by train. They would rather travel by car than by train. I’d rather have gone shopping with you than with Mary. I'd rather go to the store with you than with Mary. We’d rather type than write a letter. I would rather type than write a letter by hand. I'd rather had bought a gold ring. I'd rather buy a gold ring.

3. Also, our preference may extend to other people, in which case the structure of the sentence will differ from the previous one:
- if the statement refers to the present or future, the construction is used with

Adverb rather can describe the degree of expression of the adjective or adverb that follows it. In this case rather translated as " enough", "enough". In the same meaning, instead of the adverb rather adverb can be used quite, with the difference that quite may have a positive connotation, and rather– negative. However, both adverbs are interchangeable in most cases.

Use with an adjective:

The film was rather good.
The film was enough not bad.

Use with an adverb:

It happened rather quickly.
It happened enough fast.

note

1. The adverb has the same meaning fairly. However rather has a slightly stronger tint. However, the adverb has an even stronger connotation very.

2. Unlike most other adverbs, rather can also be used with a noun:

It's rather a problem.
This represents some problem.

3. Rather can be used with some verbs:

I rather like it.
This is for me basically (= to some extent) like.

Using rather to express preference

Rather than

In comparative constructions (when comparing two adjectives, adverbs, nouns, verbs, etc.) an adverb rather can be used with conjunction than to express preferences. As a rule, this construction is translated into Russian as " better than…", "better... rather than...".

For example:
Let's take train rather than the bus.
Let's better let's go by train, but not by bus.

Rather you than me!
Better You, how I!

When the first part of a comparative construction is expressed by an infinitive with a particle to, infinitive after rather than usually used without a particle to. Also in such cases it is allowed to use –ing verb forms.

For example:
I decided to write rather than phone/phoning.
I decided better write a letter, but not call.

Would rather

Design would rather translated as " would prefer/would prefer", "would like to", etc., and is synonymous with the construction would prefer to. After construction would rather followed by an infinitive without a particle to.

For example:
I" d(= I would) rather leave now. (=I" d prefer to leave now.)
I would prefer leave now.

Would you rather stay here or go home? (= Would you prefer to stay here or go home?)
You would prefer stay here or go home?

Would rather + subject + past tense verb

Design would rather can be used to express one person's wishes regarding another person's actions. In this case, you need to use the indicated construction with a verb in the past tense form.

For example:
Don't come today, I would rather you came tomorrow. (= I would prefer you to come tomorrow.)
Don't come today, I would prefer so that you come tomorrow.

I would rather you posted this letter. (= I would like you to post this letter.)
I I'd like to for you to send this letter.

To express actions in the past, you can use a verb in the past perfect tense. In Russian, such a difference is not visible.

For example:
I would rather you hadn't done that. (= I wish you hadn't done that.)
I I'd like to so that you don't do this.

The elements of the text are determined by the lack of a direct syntactic connection between them, which violates the sequence of presentation in the text. At the lexical level, the correlation of statements is preserved due to the degree of comparison of the adjective schön, which is indicated by the suffix er and the particle noch, which enhances the impact of the comparison. The derivational morpheme -er, as a constituent of the field of “comparativeness,” presupposes the presence of an “object of comparison” and “a member of the comparison with which one compares.” Consequently, the comparison form of the adjective schн signals not only the need for comparison, but also indicates the presence of a certain object (person) and its properties in the previous text, i.e. it performs the function of anaphoric deixis in the implementation of the retrospective orientation of the continuum of the text. Consequently, we can talk about the potential of the constituents of the field of “comparativeness” to mark discontinuity.

Thus, along with categories whose participation in marking discontinuity is mediated by the main categorical meaning (temporality, taxis, certainty/indeterminacy), it is possible to determine the significance for updating the inconsistent nature of the text of the category of comparativeness, despite the secondary meaning of “precedence/following” for the subject under consideration. phenomena. This allowed

allows not only to expand the range of linguistic means that have the potential to act as anaphoric and/or cataphoric deixis, but also to differentiate linguistic categories from the point of view of their role in the actualization of the discontinuum into dominant and secondary ones.

Bibliography

1. Galperin I. R Text as an object of linguistic research. - M.: Nauka, 1981. - 140 p.

2. Gulyga E.V. Shendels E.I. Grammatical and lexical fields in modern German. -M.: Education, 1969. - 184 p.

3. Solganik G.Ya. Syntactic stylistics (complex syntactic whole): Textbook. manual for university students on special topics. "Rus. language or T.". -M.: graduate School, 1991. - 182 p.

4. Shevchenko N.V. Fundamentals of text linguistics: Textbook. allowance. - M.: “Prior-izdat”, 2003. - 160 p.

5. Eichendorff J. von. Das Marmorbild: Erzählung. -Kehl: SWAN Buch-vertrieb GmbH, 1993. - S. 17-66.

6. Mann T. Tonio Kröger. - M.: Raduga - Verlag, 2002. - S. 74-171.

7. Nowotny J. Abschiedsdisko: Jugenderzählung. - Berlin: Kinderbuchverlag "Edition Holz", 1981. - 95 s.

8. Zeplin R. Schattenriss eines Liebhabers: Erzählung. - Leipzig: Aufbau-Verlag, 1991. - 120 s.

9. Ziergiebel H. Zeit der Sternschnupfen: Roman. - M.: Menedjer, 2001. - 384 s.

A.N. Maksimov

MODALITY OF PREFERENCE AND ITS EXPRESSION IN MODERN ENGLISH LANGUAGE

The modern approach to the study of syntactic semantics assumes that the meaning of utterances and individual linguistic forms cannot be adequately analyzed without taking into account the pragmatic context and the communicative intention of the speaker. These terms mean, respectively, the extralinguistic situation in which the message is realized and the immediate intent of the utterance. By observing language in action, i.e. behind statements in real communication, one can discover ways of forming new syntactic structures, as well as differentiate them according to semantic-pragmatic criteria. Thus, in the total mass

of sentences expressing comparison, we can distinguish a group of sentences expressing a preference relation. These proposals contain a fundamentally new content, which is not limited to the designation of comparative relations. They contain the value-selective attitude of the subject to the world around him. It is this semantics that underlies all types of preferential statements. In this article we offer an analysis of the semantics of preference as a type of meaning of subjective modality based on the material of statements of modern English. In addition, we will try to analyze the main means of expressing preference in English.

Preference can be defined as the volitional choice of the optimal alternative from a number of possibilities. The choice of an object of preference can be determined by the utility of the object itself, its necessity for this moment or subjective preferences of a person. Since preference implies choosing one of many, preferring something, the subject is not limited to evaluating only one object, but perceives it in comparison with others, and then makes a decision.

The modality of preference is expressed mainly in two ways: 1) as an act of preference, in other words, an individual’s mental action aimed at choosing an optimal situation from several alternative ones; 2) as a state of preference, in other words, a stable system of tastes. In the first case, preference is a performative act, since the individual does not describe his tastes, but performs an action (for example, makes a decision, expresses a desire). In this regard, this type can be conditionally called a performative preference. For example:

“Would you like to go with the inspector, Mr. Poirot? asked the chief constable, “or would you prefer to examine the study?” Poirot chose the latter alternative (A. Christie, “The Murder of Roger Ackroyd”, p. 61).

The second case comes down to a statement of tastes within the framework of a general characterization of a person. This type, accordingly, can be conditionally called a constative preference. For example:

As I came to know later this secrecy was characteristic of him (Poirot). He would throw out hints and suggestions, but beyond that he would not go (A. Christie, p. 116).

The phenomenon of two plans of preference is considered by N.D. Arutyunova as “operational” (1) and “non-operational” (2) preferences. The first type expresses a conscious choice (preferential choice), eliminating alternatives and programming actions. The sign of deliberation (weighing all the pros and cons) is contrasted with a decision by drawing lots and choosing at random. The second type is considered as a certain psychological state, a tendency of nature.

However, we cannot talk about a complete distinction between these two plans for expressing preference, since a specific act is preferred

in most cases is associated with a stable system of individual tastes, an integral part general characteristics personality.

When studying the modality of preference, one cannot help but note the complexity of its specificity among other phenomena of subjective modality. This relationship, like no other, is characterized by a very subtle mechanism of actualization in the text. Indeed, when considering one or another preference construction, one can note its complex modal essence. It represents a kind of semantic alloy of optative modality, expression of will and comparison. It is these meanings that are in most cases used to explain the phenomenon of preference; they are also integral semantic components of the discourse of preference. Thus, the content of the modality of preference is at least tripartite and is not described within the framework of one type of relationship. In addition, it should be noted that the modality of preference is not implemented in the text using a single lexical or grammatical exponent. At the level of deep structure, it represents a systemic relationship of a set of arguments. Thus, to update the modal preference function P, the following arguments are required: 1) S (subject); 2) O (preferred object); 3) Oi (alternative objects from which a choice is made); 4) R (reasoning - justification for preference); 5) Ev (evaluation - emotional description of all the advantages of O). Textual analysis shows that all the highlighted arguments function as a thematically organized unity, despite the fact that some arguments can receive both explicit and implicit expression.

Having determined the range of meanings that form the semantic sphere of the modality of preference and having identified the main types of preferential statements, it seems possible to move on to considering the means of its expression in modern English. First of all, it should be noted that any semantics ultimately receives expression at the level of a dicteme, a thematizing and style-forming unit of an oral or written text. However, the means of its expression can be the most diverse linguistic elements, from simple to more complex. Thus, the meaning of modality of preference in English is given by lec-

semes: prefer, choose, favor, taste, their nominal and adjective derivatives; analytical combinations would rather, had better; certain types of comparative constructions; and also, standing apart, constructions with the operator better.

Let us focus on the main methods of lexico-grammatical indication and, first of all, consider the English verbs prefer and choose. These verbs are easily interchangeable in contexts reflecting the situation of choice, which indicates their functional and semantic commonality. This allows, in most conditions, to use one or the other verb without any violation of the meaning. At the same time, in the system of linguistic (lexical) meanings, prefer and choose differ from each other. Thus, for the verb choose, it is completely optional to express subjective preference or pleasure received from a particular state of affairs. Choose expresses only the “mechanics” of choice, the will of the speaker. In contrast, prefer can be characterized by additional shades of meaning.

Prefer, being the core of the modal semantics of preference, “pulls” around itself lexical and grammatical units of the language that can act in the same contextual meaning, at the same time, these units inevitably introduce part of their own semantics into the meaning.

Consequently, we are talking about the pragmatic generality and interchangeability of the verbs prefer and choose, meaning their semantic neutralization when any of them is able to position itself in the function of its correlate. This interchangeability is often confirmed by the presence in the context of both words used to name the same phenomenon. For example:

He sat and Mary Dove sat opposite him. She chose, he noticed, to face the light. An unusual preference for a woman. Still more unusual if a woman had anything to hide. But perhaps Mary Dove had nothing to hide (A. Christie, “A Pocket Full Of Rye”, p. 22).

In the function of expressing preference, prefer can also be combined with other modalized verbs, for example: love, like. The latter express preference only in combination with the “better” operator, which introduces a value comparison into their semantics (prefer = love or like better). In autonomous use, love and like do not express preferences, but convey a wider range of feelings associated with love,

pleasure, desire, approval, various kinds of positive emotions. The noted difference between verbs is clearly demonstrated by examples of the contrasting use of love and prefer. For example: “I love walking,” she said. She might have added that she preferred to do it on a day when the wind was not blowing so keenly from the East (PG. Wodehouse, “Jill The Reckless”, p. 109).

A very, very small group of linguistic units expressing preference consists of had better, would rather, would sooner. These grammatical adjuncts function as one word and are the syntactic analogue of prefer. It's hard to talk about here separate meaning had or would for the reason that these constructions do not use other forms. The grammaticality of these combinations is also indicated by the fact that the first elements are reduced to the formal ’d in economical and fast speech. These are the simplest and most frequently used blanks, expressing preferences for all occasions. In terms of semantics, had better, would rather, would sooner express a certain initial situation that does not suit the subject, and to which he prefers a new state of affairs. When these constructions are used with the first person, they indicate the speaker's preference; when used with the second and third persons, they express the speaker's advice, request or warning. For example:

“Ogden, darling,” said Mrs. Pett, “I think you had better go to your room and undress to go to bed.” A little nice sleep might do you all the good in the world.” (PG. Wodehouse “Piccadilly Jim”, p. 158).

The combination of had better, would rather, would sooner with a simple infinitive (as in the previous example) denotes preference or advice relating to the future from the point of view of the moment of speech. These constructions are used extremely rarely with the perfect infinitive. However, when used in this way they express an unrealized preference in the past, i.e. a situation in which the subject acted contrary to himself. For example:

Elisabeth had never been more at a loss to make her feelings appear what they were not. It was necessary to laugh, when she would rather have cried (J. Austen).

Speaking about comparative constructions, it must be said that their modeling is based on the morphological category of degrees of comparison.

adjectives. In our opinion, it is adjectives in the comparative and superlative forms that provide the grammatical expression of the modality of preference. Adjectives in these forms are usually used in comparative constructions of various types to indicate the disparity of objects on a certain basis. In this regard, in the comparison construction, one object is always interpreted as having a large amount of a characteristic, and the second as having a smaller amount. In complex comparative constructions, objects can be correlated on the basis of a variety of differential features: say, A is inferior to B in one quality, while having superiority over it in another quality. As is known, in many languages comparative constructions are built on the principle of semantic gradation, in which a qualitative feature is implemented in two directions - increasing and decreasing. A separate type of comparative statements are statements about the identity or similarity of objects based on a common feature. In this regard, we can say that the modality of preference is a particular aspect of comparative relations, since it is realized through the comparative semantics of the corresponding words and structures. It is important to note that preference is not actualized in comparison in any case, but only when the feature underlying the comparison is a priority, i.e. meaningful to the speaker. For example:

“There are simpler points,” said Poirot, “arising out of your report, points, that I prefer” (A. Christie, “Elephants Can Remember,” p. 127).

In this case, the simplicity of the arguments seems to the speaker useful property Accordingly, he prefers to be content with them, without taking into account serious circumstances.

Adjectives in the comparative degree can express the modality of preference independently, without the help of the main means - the verb prefer. By emphasizing the priority property of an object, they imply a subjective choice. Thus, the utterance this is a sharper knife implies the speaker’s preference to use this particular knife in a situation, since it is sharper than the one with which it is compared, and the utterance this is a shorter walk implies the speaker’s choice to take a shortcut due to

various kinds of circumstances. It is advisable to use these sentences as action companions or pointers. In a similar sense, many sentences with the modality of preference can be considered not only as messages about the speaker’s preferences or his own interests, but also as a means of pushing the interlocutor to a certain action, or as a means of imposing one’s point of view on the addressee. For example:

She seems a very pleasant young woman.

Oh! Dear, yes; - but you must own she is very plain. Lady Lucas herself has often said so, and envied my Jane’s beauty. I do not want to boast of my own child, but to be sure, Jane - one does not often see anyone better looking. It is what everyone says. I do not trust my own partiality (J. Austen “Pride and Prejudice”, p. 45).

Among adjectives, the main exponent of the modality of preference is the comparative better. Indeed, any comparative adjective expresses preference to the extent that it includes the semantics of the word better. “Better” performs two main functions in speech: firstly, it expresses subjective modality, since logically one can always ask for whom exactly something seems better, and on what basis, and secondly, it functions directly in the structure of the sentence , reflecting comparative relationships between designated referents. The first function, modal, is the main one, since the comparison is carried out on the basis of the subjective perception of real objects.

In preference constructions, the word better is capable of replacing the specific meanings of other adjectives in the comparative degree. This is possible due to the fact that the proper meaning of the word is very broad and vague, because it is a categorical form of the word good. The fact is that with each specific use of this word, the speaker indicates a priority feature without naming it. Thus, the sign of the word better refers to the priority properties of objects and situations that could be expressed differently, namely through other qualitative adjectives. Therefore, when they say: this house is better than that one, they may mean this house is larger, or more

fashionable, or better-located in relation to the centre, or is located in an area with fresher air, etc. Better marks preference as an explicitly expressed subjective modality, and the comparative forms of adjectives at the same time imply the attribute underlying the preference. In this sense, the operator better is close to the verb prefer, which also, while expressing preference, does not contain its justification. Unlike “prefer” and “better,” comparative forms of adjectives do double duty: they denote a subjective preference and express with their semantics the attribute on the basis of which the speaker prefers something. In logical theory, the feature underlying the comparison is called tertium comparationis.

To summarize, it should be noted that the semantics of preference occupies a special place in the sphere of subjective-modal meanings that characterize individual perception and assessment of reality. The content of this modality is the value-selective attitude of the subject to objects and phenomena environment. As the analysis of linguistic material shows, preference itself is a complex of modal meanings, and in one context or another it is characterized by shades of will, desirability, and predisposition to a certain order of things. Preference in a broad sense can be called as

situational choice, as well as the mental inclination of nature towards a certain type of activity. In the first case, the subject’s decision is supported by rational justifications and largely depends on the conditions; in the second case, the subject is mainly guided by his sympathies. The scope of expressing preference in English is quite wide. It includes both individual lexemes and grammatical constructions that actualize this meaning in a statement.

Bibliography

1. Arutyunova N.D. Axiology in the mechanisms of language life // Problems of structural linguistics. - M., 1984.

2. Blokh M.Ya. Theoretical foundations of grammar. - M., 2004.

3. Vinogradov V.V. On the category of modality in the Russian language // Proceedings of the Russian Institute. language. - M., 1950.

4. Wolf E.M. Estimated value and ratio of attributes “good” / “bad” // V.Ya. -1986. - No.>5.

5. Ivin AA. Foundations of the logic of assessments. - M., 1970.

6. Sapir E. Graduation: semantic research // NZL. Vol. XVI. - M., 1985.

7. Tulina T.A. On the methods of explicit and implicit expression of comparison in the Russian language // Philological Sciences. - 1973. - .№1.

7. Wright S.N. von. The logic of preference. -Edinburgh, 1963.

E.N. Morozova

OPPOSITIONAL SUBSTITUTION BY TIME CATEGORY

(present-future)

The concept of opposition is one of the main ones in the doctrine of the grammatical category of words. The transmission of categorical meanings is based on direct paradigmatic correlations of grammatical forms and is revealed in the form of categorical grammatical oppositions, or oppositions. Elements are united in opposition according to their “common” characteristics and at the same time necessarily contain “differential” characteristics (hereinafter referred to as DP), which directly distinguish the function expressed by the opposition.

The theory of oppositions was first formulated by N.S. Trubetskoy in the field of phonology. In his works, the scientist defines phonological opposition, gives its characteristics, and also describes various types of oppositions. Based on the nature of the relationship between the DP of phonemes, such types of oppositions as privative, gradual, and equipollent were identified. According to the number of opposed members - binary, ternary, quaternary, etc. For us, the greatest interest is N. S. Trubetskoy’s division of oppositions according to the volume of their semantic-distinguishing power or effectiveness in various positions on a constant basis.

The structures had better and would rather express advice. Would rather, had better, would prefer - constructions for expressing preference: use, difference Affirmative sentences with the verb prefer

Preference statements as modal utterances in English. The ability to convey the situation of preference in the text in all its multidimensionality. Formation of collocation links with words expressing the categorization of the object of preference.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents

Mode of preference and its expression in the semantic structure of a word and its sentence (based on the material of the English language)

Would rather

Using rather to express preference

Preference statements as modal utterances in English. The ability to convey the situation of preference in the text in all its multidimensionality. Formation of collocation links with words expressing the categorization of the object of preference.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents

Mode of preference and its expression in the semantic structure of a word and its sentence (based on the material of the English language)

Would rather

Using rather to express preference

Fortune telling on coffee beans: methods and rules for conducting Fortune telling on coffee beans interpretation yes no

Zodiac sign Leo what month Horoscope Leo for the last months of the year

Gorgeous Lenten pie with berries “Fireworks of taste”