Курсовая работа: Comparison of nouns in English and Russian languages
In some cases usage fluctuates, and the two
forms are interchangeable, e. g. brain or brains: he has no brains or little
brains; victuals are more common than victual; oats than oat; similarly: His
wages were high. How much wages does he get? That is a fair wage. They could
not take too much pain.
The dual
nature of collective nouns is shown linguistically in various ways: by the
number of the verb or by the pronoun referring to it, as for instance, my
family are early risers, they are already here.. My family is not large.
It is
important to observe that the choice between singular and plural depends on the
meaning attached to the noun. Compare also: We have much fruit this year and the
rich fruits of the heroic labour of Soviet people are visible from all the
corners of the earth.
Similarly: The
football team is playing very well. Cf. The football team are having bath and
are coming back here for tea.
A word should
be said about stylistic transpositions of singular nouns in cases like the
following: trees in leaf, to have a keen eye, blue of eye, strong of muscle.
Patterns of this kind will exemplify synecdoche — the simplest case of metonymy in
grammar ("pars pro toto").
The Germans
won the victories. By God they were soldiers. The Old Hun was a soldier. But
they were cooked too. They were all cooked... The Hun would come down through
the Trentino, and cut the railway at the Vicenza and then where would the
Italians be? [6, p.65]
The chap was
so big now that he was there nearly all his time, like some immovable,
sardonic, humorous eye nothing to decline of men and things. [9, p.84]
Cf. Держи вухо востро. Держи ухо остро. У него наметанный глаз. И
слышно было до рассвета, как ликовал француз. [10, p.106]
Other
"universals" in expressing plurality will be found in what may be
called "augmentative" plurals, i. e. when the plural forms of
material nouns are used to denote large amounts of substance, or a high degree
of something. This is often the case when we see the matter as it exists in
nature. Such plural forms are often used for stylistic purposes in literary
prose and poetry, e. g.:
the blue waters
of the Mediterranean, the sands of the Sahara Desert, the snows of Kilimanjaro.
Similarly in Russian: синие воды Средиземного моря, пески Сахары, снега Арктики.
Еще в полях
белеет снег,
А воды уж весной
шумят. [12, p.96]
Люблю ее степей
алмазные снега. [13, p.159]
Ukrainian: Сині води Середземного моря, піски Сахари, сніги Арктики.
Attention must
also be drawn to the emotive use of plural forms of abstract verbal nouns in
pictorial language:
...it was a
thousand pities he had run off with that foreign girl — a governess too! [3, p.69]
The look on
her face, such as he had never seen there before, such as she had always hidden
from him was full of secret resentments, and longings, and fears.
[5, p.75]
The peculiar
look came into Bosinney's face which marked all his enthusiasms.
[3, p.67]
Her face was
white and strained but her eyes were steady and sweet and full of pity and
unbelief. There was a luminous serenity in them and the innocence in the soft
brown depths struck him like a blow in the face, clearing some of the alcohol
out of his brain, halting his mad, careering words in mod-flight. [5, p.91]
He stood for a
moment looking down at the plain, heart-shaped face with its long window's peak
and serious dark eyes. Such an unwordly face, a face with no defenses against
life. [5, p.96]
Oh! Wilfrid
has emotions, hates, pities, wants; at least, sometimes; when he does, his
stuff is jolly good. Otherwise, he just makes a song about nothing — like the rest. [3, p.86]
Plural forms
of abstract nouns used for stylistic purposes may be traced in language after
language:
Russian: Повсюду страсти роковые
И от судеб защиты
нет.[11, p.326]
Отрады. Знаю я
сладких четыре отрады. [9, p.267]
It should be noted, in passing, that the plural form is
sometimes used not only for emphasis in pictorial language but to intensify the
aspective meaning of the verb, the iterative character of the action, in
particular, e. g.:
Oh, this was
just the kind of trouble she had feared would come upon them. All the work of
this last year would go for nothing. All her struggles and fears and labours in
rain and cold had been wasted. [5, p.102]
Relentless and
stealthy, the butler pursued his labours taking things from the various
compartments of the sideboard. [3, p.81]
The small moon
had soon dropped down, and May night had failed soft and warm, enwrapping with
its grape-bloom colour and its scents the billion caprices, intrigues,
passions, longings, and regrets of men and women. [3, p.34]
The emotive
use of proper nouns in plural is also an effective means of expressive
connotation, e. g.:
Fleur, leaning
out of her window, heard the hall clock's muffled chime of twelve, the tiny
splash of a fish, the sudden shaking of an aspen's leaves in the puffs of
breeze that rose along the river, the distant rumble of a night train, and time
and again the sounds which none can put a name to in the darkness, soft obscure
expressions of uncatalogued emotions from man and beast, bird and machine, or,
may be, from departed Forsytes, Darties, Cardigans, taking night strolls back
into a world which had once suited their embodied spirits. [3, p.168]
Expressive
connotation is particularly strong in the metaphoric use of the plural of nouns
denoting things to be considered unique, e. g.: Ahead of them was a tunnel of
fire where buildings were blazing on either side of the short, narrow street
that led down to the railroad tracks. They plunged into it. A glare brighter
than a dozen suns dazzled their eyes, scorching heat seared their skins and the
roaring, crackling and crashing beat upon ears in painful waves. [5, p.92]
Very often the
plural form, besides its specific meaning may also retain the exact meaning of
the singular, which results in homonymy.
1) custom = habit, customs = 1) plural of habit
2) duties
2) colour = tint, colours = 1) plural of tint
2) flag
3) effect = result, effects = 1) results
2) goods and chattels
4) manner = mode or way, manners = 1) modes, ways
2) behaviour
5) number = a total amount of units, numbers = 1) in counting
2) poetry
6) pain = suffering, pains = 1) plural of suffering
2) effort
7) premise = a statement or proposition, premises = 1) propositions
2) surrounding
to a house
8) quarter = a fourth part, quarters = 1) fourth parts
2) lodgings
There are also
double plurals used with some difference of meanings:
1) brother 1) brothers (sons of one mother)
2) brethren (members of one
community)
2) genius 1) geniuses (men of genius)
2) genii (spirits)
3) cloth 1) cloths (kinds of cloth)
2) clothes (articles of
dress)
Cf. Russian:
зуб — 1) зубы (во рту), 2) зубья (пилы)
муж — 1) мужья, 2) мужи ("ученые мужи")
тон — 1)тона
(оттенки), 2) тоны (звуки)
лист — 1) листья (дерева), 2) листы (бумаги, железа)[24]
Mention should be made in this
connection of nouns which have two parallel variants in the plural exactly
alike in function but different in their stylistic sphere of application, e.
g.:
Cow — cows and kine (arch., now chiefly
poetic)
Foe — foes and fone (arch.)
Shoe — shoes and shoen (arch.)
Unproductive
archaic elements are sometimes used to create the atmosphere of elevated
speech. This may also be traced in other languages. Compare the Russian:
сын — 1) сыновья,
сыновей;
2) сыны, сынов (e. g.: сыны отечества).
For all the
details concerning the grammatical organisation of nouns and their patterning
in different kind of structures students are referred to the text-books on
English grammar. Two things should be noted here.
It is
important to observe that in certain contexts nouns can weaken their meaning of
"substance" and approach adjectives thus making the idea of qualities
of the given substance predominant in the speaker's mind. Nouns functioning in this position are
generally modified by adverbials of degree, e. g.:
"You were
always more of a realist than Jon; and never so innocent". [3, 57]
"We're
all fond of you", he
said, "If you'd only" —he was going to say, "behave yourself", but changed it to — "if you'd only be more of a wife to
him". [3,98]
"Why had
he ever been fool enough to see her again". [3, 198]
"Not much
of an animal is it?" groaned Rhett. "Looks like he'll die. But he is
the best I could find in the shafts". [3, 32]
The use of a
noun rather than an adjective is very often preferred as a more forcible
expressive means to intensify the given quality. Compare the following
synonymic forms of expression:
He was quite a
success. — He was quite successful.
It was good
fun. — It was funny.
And here are
illustrative examples of nouns weakening their meaning of "substance"
and approaching adverbs.
Such adverbial
use shows great diversity. Deep-rooted in English grammar, this use is most
idiosyncratic in its nature. We find here patterns of different structural
meaning:
a) adverbial
relations of time, as in: life long, week long, age long, etc.;
b) adverbial relations of comparison:
straw yellow, silver grey, ash blond, ice cold, snow white, iron hard, sky
blue, dog tired, paper white, pencil thin, ruler straight, primrose yellow,
brick red, blade sharp;
c) different degree of quality:
mountains high, a bit longer, a trifle easier, a shade darker, ankle deep.
Patterns of
this kind are generally used metaphorically and function as expedients to express
intensity and emphasis, e. g.: "I'll send Pork to Macon to-morrow to buy
more seed. Now the Yankies won't burn it and our troops won't need it. Good
Lord, cotton ought to go sky high this fall". [5, p.234]
Further
examples are:
He is world
too modest. That was lots better. This was heaps better. He was stone deaf to
our request. Waves went mountains high. The mud was ankle deep.
Adverbial use
of nouns will also be found in such premodification structures as: bone tired,
dog tired, mustard coloured, horror struck, etc.
In the grammar
of nouns there have also developed interjectional uses which seem to convert
nouns into special kind of "intensifiers", e. g.: What the dickens do
you want? What the mischief do you want?
Further
examples are:
The hell you
say = you don't say so.
Like hell I
wish \
I will like
hell /I will not
Where in the
hell you are going?
How the devil
should I know?
Adverbs of
affirmation and negation yes and no are intensified in emphasis by the
proximity of a bald bawling hell, e. g.: Hell, yes! Hell, no!
English
plurals end in -s. In Russian, there are more endings to make plurals. They are: masculine ending in a hard
consonant; feminine ending in –a(ending for plural-ы); any
nouns ending in -ь, -й, -я(-и); neuter ending in –e(-я); neuter ending in –o(-a); masculine and feminine ending in -k, -г, -x, -ч, -щ, -ж, -ш(-и). Examples: стол – столы, двeрь – двери, нога – ноги, мoре – моря, окно – окнa. [24]
Some nouns are
always singular. These are nouns that designate substances (oxygen, copper),
products (cheese, fish), a block of objects (furniture), some actions (hunting,
clearing up), feelings (love, health), some vegetables and berries (potato,
carrots).
2.2 The
category of case of Nouns in English and in Russian languages
Grammarians
seem to be divided in their opinion as to the case-system of English nouns.
Open to thought and questioning, this problem has always been much debated. The
most common view on the subject is that nouns have only two cases: a common
case and a genitive or possessive case.[21, p 69] The common case is
characterised by a zero suffix (child, boy, girl, student), the possessive case
by the inflection [-z] and its phonetic variants [-s], [-iz], in spelling -'s.
The uses of the genitive are known to be specific, those of the common case
general. In terms of modern linguistics, we can therefore say that both
formally and functionally, (he common case is unmarked and the genitive marked.
There are
grammarians, O.
Curme and M. Deutschbein, for
instance, who recognise four cases making reference to nominative, genitive,
dative and accusative: the genitive can be expressed by the -'s-inflection and
by the of-phrase, the dative by the preposition to and by word-order, and the
accusative by word order alone. E. Sonnensсhein insists that English has
a vocative case since we may propose an interjection oh before a name. [3p. 35]
It is to be
noted that the choice between the two opposite viewpoints as to the category of
case in English remains a matter of linguistic approach. From the viewpoint of
inflectional morphology the inadequacy of "prepositional declension"
is obvious. Using Latin categories which have no relevance for English involves
inventing distinctions for English and ignoring the distinctions that English
makes.
The meaning of
"accusative" in a two-term system nominative — accusative, for instance, is
different from the meaning of "accusative" in a four- or five-term
system. The term "common case" seems therefore more justified than
"the accusative". If we call him an "accusative" in expressions
like I obey him, I am like him,
It was on him, the term "accusative" may actually hinder when we
translate into another language which has an accusative along with several
other cases and in which the word for obey takes the dative, the word for like
the genitive and the word on ablative, as they do in Latin.
"Of
course, the morphological opposition nominative — accusative must be expressed by something in English. But this
"something" is not a morphological opposition, for there is no
morphological differentiation between the nominative and the accusative of
nouns". [3, 86]
We must not,
of course, look at English through the lattice of categories set up in Latin
grammar. The extent to which one can remain unconvinced that English has a
grammar like Latin is probably the basis of the faulty viewpoint that English
has no grammar at all.
Latin
distinguishes subject, direct object, indirect object by case-differences
(differences in the inflexion of the word) and arrangement is not very
important. English also distinguishes subject, direct object, and indirect
object, but it does so largely by arrangement, e. g.:
The pupil
handed the teacher his exercise.
He bought his
little girl many nice toys. [3,89]
With all this,
it can hardly be denied that there exist in Modern English prepositional
structures denoting exactly the same grammatical relation as, say, the
possessive case inflection or word order distinguishing the accusative from the
dative. These are the so-called "of-phrase" and "to-phrase", in which the prepositions of and to
function as grammatical indicators of purely abstract syntactic relations
identical with those expressed by cases. The grammatical analysis of such
phrases for their frequency, variety and adaptation must, surely, go parallel
with the study of the morphological category of case which in present-day
English is known to have developed quite a specific character.
The analytical
character of some prepositional phrases in Russian is described by V. V. Vіnоgradоv: "В русском
литературном языке с XVII—XVIII вв. протекает медленный, но глубокий процесс
синтаксических изменений в системе падежных отношений. Функции многих падежей
осложняются и дифференцируются сочетаниями с предлогами. Все ярче
обнаруживается внутреннее расслоение в семантической системе предлогов. В то время
как одни простые предлоги: для, до, перед, при, под, кроме, сквозь, через,
между, а тем более предлоги наречного типа: близ, среди, мимо и т. п. — почти
целиком сохраняют свои реальные лексические значения, другие предлоги: а, за,
из, в, на, отчасти, над, от, по, про, с, у — в отдельных сферах своего
употребления, иные в меньшей степени, иные вплоть до полного превращения в
падежные префиксы, ослабляют свои лексические значения, а иногда почти совсем
теряют их" [16, pp. 695—700]
It is
important to remember that the grammatical content of the possessive case is
rather complex. Besides implying possession in the strict sense of the term, it
is widely current in other functions.
Compare such
patterns, as:
a) my sister's
room (genitive of → the room of my sister possession)
b) my sister's
arrival (subjective → the
arrival of my sister genitive)
c) the
criminal's arrest (objective → the arrest of the criminal genitive)
d) a child's
language (qualitative → the
childish language a woman's college genitive) → a college for women
e) a month's
rent (genitive of → a monthly rent
f)three hours'
delay / measure) → a delay for three hours
The same is
true of such uses as wife's duty, child's psychology, lawyer's life, man's
duty, etc. The genitive of measure or extent is easily recognised as fairly
common in expressions of a certain pattern, e. g.: a moment's silence, a day's work, a minute's
reflection, to a hair's breadth, etc.
There is no
formal difference between subjective and objective genitive, between genitives
denoting possession and qualitative genitives, but this kind of ambiguity is
usually well clarified by linguistic or situational context. Thus, mother's
care may mean "Любов матери" —with reference to some individual,
and "материнська
любов" in
its general qualitative sense. The meaning of the phrase may vary with the
context.
The genitive
inflection is also used with certain words which otherwise do not conform to
noun patterning, as in yesterday's rain, to-day's match, to-morrow's
engagement. These are not idioms, with their total lexical meaning fixed, but
only fixed patterns or usage.
Limits of
space do not permit to take notice of all idiomatic patterns established in
this part of English grammar. A few further examples will suffice for
illustration. These are, for instance: I'm friends with you, where friends is
probably part of the indivisible idiom "be friends with" + + noun/pronoun, used predicatively.
Patterns with
"of + genitive" usually
have a portative sense denoting "one of", e. g.: It is a novel of J. London’s (=one of
his novels). Cf. It is a novel by J. London. (=a novel written by J. London).
Similarly:
Fleur's a cousin of ours, Jon. [3, p.83]
In expressive
language this form may become purely descriptive. Endowed with emotive
functions in special linguistic or situational context it may weaken its
grammatical meaning and acquire subjective modal force denoting admiration,
anger, praise, displeasure, etc., e. g.: Margaret ... was taken by surprise by certain
moods of her husband's. [2, 37]
The -'s
inflection offers some peculiar difficulties of grammatical analysis in
idiomatic patterns with the so-called group-genitives, e. g.: Mr. what's-his-name's remark, or He said it in plenty of
people's hearing.
There are also
patterns like "the man I saw yesterday's son" quoted by H. Sweet. One more
example.
The blonde I
had been dancing with's name was Bernice something Crabs or Krebs. [2,p. 95]
We cannot fail
to see that the 's belongs here to the whole structure noun + attributive
clause.
Different kind
of such group-genitives are not infrequent and seem to be on the increase in
present-day colloquial English.
Mention should
also be made of the parallel use of the 's form and the preposition of found in
patterns like the following:
In the light
of this it was Lyman's belief and it is mine — that it is a man's duty and the duty
of his friend to see to it that his exit from this world, at least, shall be
made with all possible dignity. [2, p.53]
…a work's
popularity, the engine's overhaul life. [4, p.67]
And here are a
few examples of special use of the possessive case in fossilised expressions of
the formula character, such as: to one's heart's content, for pity's sake, out
of harm's way, at one's fingers' ends, for old acquaintance's sake, for
appearance's sake. These expressions were grammatically regular and explicable
in their day, but they follow grammatical or semantic principles which have now
fallen into disuse.
A word should
be said about the purely idiomatic absolute use of the genitive case with
locative force in patterns like the following:
There are also
pleonastic patterns with the post-positional genitive intensifier own used with
the 's-form, e.
g.: Mary's
own dressing-table.
I bought this at the grocer's.
The baker's is
round the corner.
The famous St.
Paul's is one of the principal sights of London.
Formations of
this kind are on the borderline between grammar and vocabulary; the
-'s-inflection seems to have developed into a derivative suffix used to form a
noun from another noun.
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4
|