Typology of grammatical categories. Grammatical categories. Typology of grammatical categories Typology of parts of speech

Case category. The case category is understood as a grammatical category, which represents the unity of the meaning of the relationship of the designated object to other objects, actions, features and means of its material, linguistic expression.

The real form of expression of this category is the case form, or case form, which is a morpheme consisting of a certain scale, which, together with the root morpheme, gives a certain content to the word. The set of case forms that make up a certain system of changes forms a declension.

The number of cases is not the same in different languages, and this fact can be considered as one of the criteria for the typological characteristics of the morphological system of a given language, since the presence or absence of cases is associated with the presence, absence or weak development of prepositions. So, for example, in the Finnish language, where the number of cases of nouns is 14, prepositions are very few. In English, with its limited case system, the number of prepositions is significant. There are languages in which the case system in the noun is completely absent, as, for example, in Bulgarian, Italian, and French.

Considering the meaning of each individual case as a special grammatical category, we see that it is complex in nature and consists of a number of smaller meanings, which, however, cannot be further decomposed. For example, one of such meanings can be called objectivity, since the category of case is characteristic of nouns denoting objects and phenomena. Another meaning can be the belonging of a noun to a certain grammatical gender. The third meaning is the expression of number - singular or plural. The fourth meaning can be called animateness or inanimateness, which receives its expression in one form or another, etc.

Following prof. E.I. Shendels call semes. So, the concept of seme is understood as a minimal, further indivisible element of grammatical meaning 1.

In the Russian language, the category of case is characterized by the presence of the following semes: objectivity, gender, number, animateness/inanimateness. In addition to the semes that characterize the meaning of the case in general, each of the cases existing in the Russian language is characterized by a number of its own semes, peculiar only to it. For example, the accusative case is characterized by the seme “direction of action.” One of the semes of the genitive case is the seme “belonging”, etc.

The question of the category of case in the English language is still controversial. Depending on the author's approach to this problem, the English language was endowed with a different number of cases. Thus, M. Deitchbein, who accepted the understanding of case as a combination of a preposition with a noun in the initial form, believed that there are four cases in the English language: nominative, genitive, dative and accusative 1. However, this interpretation of the case problem seems fundamentally incorrect, since case is understood as a word form in which there is a corresponding case morpheme, in the case of the English language -’s.

The point of view is almost generally accepted, according to which nouns contain a class of words that vary in two cases - nominative and possessive, formalized by the morpheme ’s. This is a class of animate nouns and nouns of the semantic field “time”. Thus, from the point of view of the typological characteristics of the category of case in a noun, we can note that in English all nouns are divided into two classes: words denoting inanimate objects that do not have a case category, and words denoting living objects and time, which have two case - general and possessive. The semes of the possessive case are as follows: objectivity, animation, possessiveness, subjectivity and objectivity.

According to the point of view of A. M. Mukhin, in the system of nouns of modern English, the category of case no longer exists. It ceased to exist in the Middle English period. The morpheme - es >’s, preserved from the Old English period, is nothing more than a possessive suffix, which, due to its unambiguity (seme of possessiveness) and the ability to attach to the root morpheme without modifying it, is agglutinative in nature 2

If we accept this point of view as fair, which is fully consistent with the current state of the noun system in the English language, then we should conclude that the category of case in the noun system actually does not exist. At the same time, a new grammatical category has emerged in the name system - the category of possessiveness, which has its material expression in the form of the morpheme 's, which is of an agglutinative nature.

Summarizing the consideration of the category of case in both languages, we can draw up a comparative table. See p. 103.

Category of number. In both English and Russian there is a grammatical category of number. This category expresses quantitative relationships that exist in reality, reflected in the minds of speakers of a given language and having morphological expression in the corresponding forms of the language.

The category of number has different expressions in individual languages. So, for example, there are languages in which the category of number is expressed not only by plural, but also by dual and triple numbers; These are some of the Papuan languages on the island of New Guinea.

In the ancient Indo-European languages - Sanskrit, ancient Greek, and ancient Germanic languages - the category of number was represented by three numbers: singular, dual and plural.

Semes of singularity are expressed in Russian as materially expressed morphemes (for masculine nouns -й, for example edge, barn, stream etc., for feminine nouns -and I, For example river, flock, for neuter nouns -о, -е, - me, for example a window, sea, banner), and zero morphemes (for most masculine nouns, for example city, house, beast, and some part of the feminine gender - door, branchetc.).

Semes of singularity are also expressed in morphemes of case word forms, where they are included together with semes of case and gender; compare: houses are rivers. In word form Houses the semes of singularity, objectivity, belonging, masculine gender are presented; in the shape of rivers the semes of singularity, objectivity, belonging, and feminine gender are represented. Thus, comparing the set of semes in both forms houses are rivers, we see that the morpheme -A expresses masculine seme, morpheme -And - this is feminine.

If we take word forms city - cities, then we can easily see that in the morpheme -ohm the semes of singularity, objectivity, case, gender are presented; in morpheme -ami the semes of plurality, objectivity, and case are presented. Comparing the set of semes, we see that in the morpheme -ohm the seme of singularity is represented, and in the morpheme -ami - seme of plurality.

Unlike the Russian language, the seme of singularity in English is represented only by a zero morpheme, for example: town, play, foot, etc.

The category of plural in both languages is represented by the seme of plurality. In Russian, the seme of plurality is expressed by morphemes -s, -i for masculine and feminine nouns (cf.: bridges, nuts, paintings, songs etc.); morpheme -a, -a for masculine and neuter nouns (cf.: cities, houses, rings, clouds etc.). In addition, the seme of plurality is included, together with the semes of case and gender, in the morphemes of word forms; compare: city - semes of singularity, objectivity, case, gender; cities - semes of plurality, objectivity, case, gender. Thus, we see that the composition of the morpheme -A includes the seme of plurality.

Unlike the Russian language, the plurality seme in English is represented by number morphemes -s[-s] and -[z],es[-iz] and in a very limited number of nouns by alternating vowels (foot -feet, man -men, etc.). d.). However, due to its limitations, this method cannot be classified as one of the typological features that characterize the category of number in this language.

In both languages, there is a fairly significant group of nouns in which only the seme of plurality is represented, which receives its expression in the corresponding morphemes of number,

mentioned above, and in the forms of agreement of adjectives, verbs and pronouns. Some of these nouns are the same in both languages. These are primarily nouns denoting paired or compound objects:

scissors - scissors panties - trousers pliers

tongs 1 scales

shackles - fetters glasses - spectacles

trousers - drawers, knickers Some of these nouns do not coincide, and in one language there are nouns in which only the seme of plurality is represented, and in another there are nouns in which there is an opposition between this singularity and plurality.

In Russian, the first group includes nouns:

Denoting paired or composite objects:

rake pl. h. -rake units h. swing pl. h. -swing units h. goats pl. h. -box units h. sheath pl. h. -scabbard units h. sled pl. h. -toboggan units h. sled pl. h. -sledge units h. watch pl. h. -clock units h., etc.

Denoting mass, substance, material:

firewood pl. h. -wood units h. yeast pl. h. -yeast units h. perfume pl. h. -scent units h. wallpaper pl. h. -wallpaper units h. ink pl. h. -ink units h., etc.

Denoting complex actions, processes, states:

elections pl. h. -election units h. blind man's buff pl. h. -blind-man’s-buff units. h. funeral pl. h. -funeral units h.

In the English language there are also a number of nouns in which the seme of plurality has been lost and only the seme of singularity remains:

barracks - barracks news - news,news works - factory Above we tried to identify the sum of similar and different features that characterize the category of number in both languages.

For a complete comparative and typological characterization of this category, we need to find out what place this category occupies in the system of both languages.

Turning to the Russian language, we can easily notice a characteristic feature of it - the presence of agreement in number, and not only in number, in adjectives, pronouns, verbs, ordinal numbers, for example: Around noon there usually appear many round high clouds, golden-gray, with delicate white edges.(I. S. Turgenev. Bezhin meadow).

Agreement in number is very clearly expressed in the verb. In the forms of the present tense, number semes are combined with person semes, as a result of which each of the morphemes expressing the present tense of the imperfective form or the future tense of the perfective form - -Yu,-y; - eat, - eat,-era, - it; -eat, -im, -e, -ite, -yut, -ut, -yat,-am, clearly expresses the category of number.

In the past tense form, the singular seme is combined with gender semes, which gives the structure of these forms a special character: in masculine forms - a zero morpheme; Wed: Telyatev. He was not rich or paid for the wine and immediately wrote it down in my book as an expense (A. N. Ostrovsky. Crazy money)’, feminine - morpheme -a; cf.: Turusina. What else are you asking, I don’t understand. You saw it yourself: right at the gate, some woman crossed our path... (A. N. Ostrovsky. Simplicity is enough for every wise man); neuter - morpheme -o; Wed: A bright summer passed, a damp and bitter autumn passed, but Balashov did not return (K. G. Paustovsky. Nastya the Lacemaker).

The seme of plurality is contained in the past tense morpheme -i; cf.: Glumov. ...You have raised all the bile in me. What were you offended by in my diary? What did you find new for yourself in it?.. (A. N. Ostrovsky. Simplicity is enough for every wise man).

Thus, we can talk about the deep penetration of the category of number into all parts of speech in the Russian language.

We see a completely different picture in the English language, where the category of number is represented only in the noun system. We find agreement in number only in the demonstrative pronoun, where both pronouns this - this and that - That have plural formsthese - theseиthose - those that form attributive phrases with nouns with the agreement this house - this house, these houses - these houses; that house - that house those houses - Gae Houses.

In Russian, agreement in number is widespread, but in English it is practically absent.

Studying the category of number in the Russian language, due to the listed characteristics, presents greater difficulties for the English than studying the same category in English by Russian students.

Category of gender. The vast majority of modern Indo-European languages are characterized by the presence of a special lexicogrammatical category of gender. It manifests itself in the ability of nouns to liken themselves in expressing the grammatical meanings of the forms of words dependent on them - adjectives, pronouns, etc.

In the Russian language, the category of grammatical gender is widespread. Each noun, as part of its semes that determine its grammatical essence, necessarily has a seme of gender - masculine, feminine or neuter. The category of gender for nouns in the Russian language is of a formal nature, except for nouns denoting people and animals, since it is no longer possible to establish any semantic grounds for the presence of this category in an entire class of nouns, for example, to establish real grounds for the fact that nouns bridge,stock,month are masculine, nouns star,Earth,water - to feminine, nouns - Sun,sea,apple - to the neuter gender. Gender semes, together with case and number semes, are included as semantic components in the affixal morphemes of nouns. Yes, into a morpheme -eat in a noun month includes the semes of objectivity, singularity, masculine gender, case, and the morpheme -Ouch in a noun star- semes of objectivity, singularity, feminine gender, case. From a comparison of the set of semes of these two morphemes, it is clear that the difference in gender is expressed by the material difference of the morphemes - -eat for masculine and -Ouch for the feminine gender.

The category of grammatical gender in the Russian language has the ability to be combined with forms of agreed words specific for each gender variety - adjectives, ordinal numbers, possessive and demonstrative pronouns, forming free phrases with them; compare: Revela,distraught,blizzard,but through her roar Filka heard a thin and short whistle(K. G. Paustovsky. Warm bread). A narrow gauge railway runs near Spas-Klepikov(K. G. Paustovsky. Road conversations). Vasya was silent. "Miscellaneous is glass, -he said. - There is something rude,bottle and window. And there is subtle,lead glass"(K. G. Paustovsky. Glassmaker).

As a special characteristic of the morphological structure of the Russian language, absent in other languages, including English, it should be noted the ability of nouns to agree in gender with the forms of the past tense verb; compare: For a minute the moon came out, and in its dim light a white two-story house loomed(V. Ya. Shishkov.Gloomy River).

The category of gender in the Russian language has a formal expression in affixal morphemes. Thus, masculine nouns in the initial form are characterized by the presence of a zero morpheme after the final hard or soft consonant root (cf.: boy,day,rain,maple etc.) or morphemes -And after the last vowel of the root (cf.: Creek,Roy etc.).

Feminine semes are included in morphemes -and I initial form or are reflected in the zero morpheme after a soft consonant root; compare: cloud,leg,song,door,fortress etc.

Neuter semes are included in the morphemes -о, -е, -me initial form; compare: face,heart,stirrup etc.

The feeling of this gender is so strong in the Russian language that it influences the assignment of borrowed words to a certain gender, depending on their design. Thus, inanimate nouns with final -O type lotto,movie,the Bureau etc. by Russian linguistic consciousness were classified as neuter.

Masculine noun metro in its abbreviated form it moved into the class of neuter nouns; compare: Moscow subway, But Moscow Metro.

The category of grammatical gender - masculine, feminine, neuter - was once inherent in nouns of the Old English period. However, the historical development of the morphological structure of the English language has led to the fact that the category of grammatical gender, devoid of morphological means of expression, ceased to exist. It is being replaced by a new category, which Prof. V.N. Yartseva called it the category of activity - passivity 1.

The essence of this new grammatical category is to distinguish two classes of words in the system of nouns: active nouns and passive nouns.

Passives are those nouns that, being the subjects of a sentence, do not require an addition. As V.N. Yartseva notes, “the determining factor is the speaker’s attitude to a given fact, generated by a specific situation of objective reality” 1 .

The category of activity - passivity has its material expression in language. Nouns of the active category correspond to the personal pronouns he, she by natural gender, with the relative pronoun who - which and take the possessive affix -’s.

Nouns of the passive category correspond only to the personal pronoun it and the relative pronoun which; cf.:She spent a great deal of money on her clothes, which she got from the most fashionable dressmakers in Paris... (W. S. Maugham. The Lion's Skin);“Iliked that picture,” she said quietly, “Pm sorry you took it back” (H. S. Walpole. A Picture). They are also used in the prepositional phrase сof; cf.: “The first gentleman detached a slip of paper and gave it to her” (J. Galsworthy. Maid in Waiting).“The engine of his car purred into the morning air, while his mind went back to his mother’s death and his father’s” (G. Gordon. Let the Day Perish).

Summarizing the consideration of the category of gender, we can note that this category, consisting of three genders - masculine, feminine and neuter - constitutes a typological feature of the Russian language, systematically manifesting itself in various aspects of the structure of the language, finding its consistent formal expression everywhere.

In the English language, the ancient category of grammatical gender has disappeared, replaced by a new category - activity - passivity, the belonging of nouns to which is determined by the speaker’s attitude to a given fact, generated by a specific situation of objective reality.

Category of certainty - uncertainty. In many Western European and some Eastern languages, the noun system is characterized by the category of definiteness - indeterminacy. This category has its own morphological design. Most often it is expressed by an article, as in English, German, and French. In other cases, it can be expressed in the form of affixes, so-called postpositive articles, morphemes added to the end of a noun word, as in Bulgarian, Romanian and Scandinavian languages;

Wed Bulgarian:

momcho - boy - momcheto - boy kufar - suitcase - kufart - suitcase dinya - watermelon - dinyata - watermelon

Swede.:

flicka- young woman - flickan - young woman hund - dog - hunden - dog hus- house - huset - house

The content of the category of certainty - uncertainty indicates whether the object denoted by the noun is thought of as belonging to a given class of objects (indefinite article), or as a known object, distinguished from a class of objects similar to it (definite article), or, finally, as taken not in its entirety, but only in some of its part (partitive, or partial, article).

Into the semantics of the article the includes the following semes: 1) the seme of individualization, thanks to which a noun that has an article the, stands out from the class of similar objects; cf.: “Let’s go into the drawing-room,” said Mrs Low. "The boy wants to clear the table." (W. S. Maugham. A Casual Affair); 2) the seme of uniqueness, signaling that the object denoted by the corresponding noun is one of a kind; cf.:the sun - Sun, the earth - Earth(our planet); 3) a demonstrative seme, which is common with the corresponding seme of demonstrative pronouns; Wed: I saw the man, about whom you telephoned me last night; 4) a generalization seme, which makes it possible to perceive a given object as a generalized designation of all objects of a given class; Wed: The horse is a domestic animal - Horse(any horse) pet.

Into the semantic structure of the indefinite article a, ap includes: 1) classification seme, which relates the object with which it is associated to one or another class of objects; Wed:a dog - dog(any dog); 2) seme of singularity, since nouns with the indefinite article a, an are always thought of in the singular; cf.:His gaze rested for a moment on Anthony, and the intense dark eyes filled with pity (G. Gordon. Let the Day Perish).

In contrast to English, in Russian the category of certainty - uncertainty does not have a morphological expression and is expressed mainly lexically.

The means used for this purpose are as follows:

A particle is added to a noun that needs to be individualized; cf.: “Have we finished in Shilov?” - asks Anna Ivanovna. “The remaining stack was swept away as I left. I told you not to leave without it, so as not to end up.” - “Is the hay good?” - “Hay is rare these days: dry, ringing” (M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. A day on a landowner’s estate).

This particle is especially widely used in Russian dialect speech: ... Pyotr Danilovich laughed loudly from the bottom of his heart: “What a guard ^... That’s so clever \” - “Oh, father, help me... Do me a favor.” Pyotr Danilovich firmly put him on the ground. “Yes, mow the stick... I can’t bend over,” the old fox whined pitifully, as if caught in a trap (V. Ya. Shishkov. Gloomy River).

Demonstrative pronouns this, this, this, these or that, that, that, those, in which in this case the seme of indicativeness is extinguished and the seme of individualization is put forward.

Indefinite pronouns some, some, some, some.

Numeral one, corresponding in its function to the indefinite article a(ap); compare: About fifteen versts from my estate lives a man I know...(I. S. Turgenev. Burmister).

Inverted order, when the subject of the sentence is in postposition to its predicate; cf.: In the very middle of the brightly lit courtyard, in the very heat, as they say, there lay, face to the ground and covering his head with an overcoat, what seemed to me to be a boy (I. S. Turgenev. Kasyan with the Beautiful Sword). Near the sofa stood a girl with pigtails and joyful eyes looking at Potapov... (K. G. Paustovsky. Snow).

Consideration of the category of certainty - uncertainty showed significant differences in this regard in the structure of both languages. The absence of a morphologically expressed category of definiteness - uncertainty in the Russian language deprives a student - a native speaker of the Russian language - of solid support for his native language. And this serves as the cause and source of numerous grammatical errors in students’ speech. To avoid them, it is necessary to study their typology, carefully compare both languages in terms of this category and develop a multi-stage methodology for teaching the article at various levels of teaching English.

Category of degree of quality. The main means of expressing the category of degree of quality are adjectives. In terms of their typological characteristics, adjectives in both languages differ significantly from each other. According to their composition, adjectives in the Russian language are divided into three categories: 1) qualitative adjectives, which directly denote the attribute of an object. These adjectives form a number of semantic groups - size ( big small,high Low); volume ( thick - thin); color, taste, temperature, evaluation, etc.; 2) relative adjectives, denoting the attribute of an object through its relationship to another object or action. Relative adjectives in Russian are derived from the stems of nouns: stone - stone,spring - spring,Moscow - Moscow etc.; 3) possessive adjectives, denoting that an object belongs to a person or animal; compare: fathers,wife etc.

Unlike the Russian language, English adjectives have only one category clearly represented by vocabulary - qualitative adjectives; cf.: white, large, strong, etc. Relative adjectives are represented by a very limited number of lexical units, a significant part of which belong to the field of science; cf.:biological, chemical, etc.

The absence of a full-fledged category of relative adjectives in the English language is compensated by attributive phrases consisting of two nouns, of which the first noun performs an attributive function, being a definition of the second; compare: stone - stone,a stone wall - stone wall;gold - gold,a gold watch - gold watch;Moscow- Moscow,the Moscow streets - Moscow streets.

Possessive adjectives as a special category are also absent in English. This absence is compensated by phrases in which a Russian adjective corresponds to a noun formalized by the possessive particle ’s; compare: fathers house - my father's house, wife's bag - that wife's bag, etc.

With regard to the grammatical categories they express, adjectives in both languages also differ significantly: Russian adjectives have the ability to agree with the noun they define in gender, number and case, while English adjectives agree neither in gender, nor in number, nor in have no case; compare: green leaf - green grass - green apple.

The next differential feature of Russian adjectives should be considered the presence of two forms of qualitative adjectives: full and short. Adjectives in their full form perform an attributive function in a sentence (cf.: high tower,blue sky etc.) and occasionally a predicative function (cf.: our street is wide etc.). Short adjectives perform a predicative function in a sentence; compare:

In that tower, high and cramped, Queen Tamara lived:

Beautiful as a heavenly angel,

Like a demon, insidious and evil.

(M. Yu. Lermontov. Tamara)

Molchalin was so stupid before

(A. S. Griboyedov. Woe from mind)

Short adjectives in the predicative function have agreement in gender and number:

The clouds are rushing, the clouds are swirling,

The invisible moon illuminates the flying snow;

The sky is cloudy, the night is cloudy.

(A.S. Pushkin. Demons)

Unlike the Russian language, in English there is no division of adjectives into full and short. The same form of adjectives is used in both attributive and predicative functions: “Yes, Mrs Hartley, I don’t feel too fit.” His voice was thick and heavy (G. Gordon. Let the Day Perish).

As noted by E.B. Gulyga and E. I. Schendels, adjectives have two semes: 1) the seme “quality beyond comparison” and 2) the seme “comparativeness” 1.

The seme “comparativeness” is present in qualitative adjectives in both languages, but the morphological ways of expressing it are structurally different in them.

In Russian, the comparative degree is formed synthetically, that is, by adding a morpheme to the base of an adjective in the positive degree -her(or -to her) or unproductive morphemes -e or -she; compare: strong - stronger,full - fuller;old - older, thin - thinner etc. Adjectives in the comparative form do not have any agreement.

Another way of forming the comparative degree is the analytical method, in which the words are used before the adjective in the positive degree more or less; compare: more strong,stronger,stronger,stronger.

The superlative degree of adjectives is formed analytically, by adding the word to the positive form of the adjective most; compare: strongest,the oldest etc.

In English, there are two series of forms of forming comparative degrees: 1) synthetic forms with morphemes -er for comparative forms and -est for superlative forms. The synthetic method of forming degrees of comparison is used for one-syllable and some two-syllable adjectives; cf.: strong -stronger -(the) strongest. Easy - easier - (the) easiest; 2) analytical forms formed by the words more and most, added to the unchangeable forms of the positive degree; cf.: intelligent -more intelligent -(the) most intelligent.

In Russian there is a special form of the superlative degree, the so-called elative, with the seme “extreme”, denoting an unrelatively high degree of quality. This form in Russian is formed synthetically - by adding affixal morphemes -eysh-(-gt, - and I, -ee) and -aysh(-gt, - and IGoh), if the base of the adjective ends in the back consonants g, To, and; compare: most necessary,nearest,minute etc. In English, the elative is expressed analytically; Wed: a most beautiful woman.

Everything said above about the quality degree category can be summarized in the following table.


	English
Qualitative adjectives
Full form
Short form
General form
Comparative
a) synthetic
b) analytical
Superlative
a) synthetic
b) analytical
Relative adjectives
Possessive adjectives
Coordination

Category of aspect and tense. Among the various grammatical categories that are distinguished in the system of the verb as a special part of speech, it is necessary to name the category of aspect and category of tense. These two grammatical categories in different languages have far from the same development and a very diverse morphological composition. At the same time, they are closely related to each other, since species-specific morphological indicators simultaneously serve as temporary indicators, and semantically, species-specific meanings are often layered on temporal ones. These categories, like any other grammatical category, which represents the largest lexico-grammatical category of words united by both common semantic and morphological-syntactic features, should be considered as two typological values correlated with each other.

The category of type is usually defined as a lexical and grammatical category that conveys the characteristics of the course of an action or process denoted by a verb - repetition, duration, multiplicity, instantaneous action, or effectiveness, completeness - incompleteness, or, finally, ultimateness, that is, the relationship action to its inner limit.

The listed characteristics of the course of an action or process receive a wide variety of morphological or morphological-syntactic expressions in different languages, in connection with which we can talk about different divisions of the category of species. So, for example, we can talk about an initial form, denoting the beginning of a process, if it is expressed in the appropriate form (cf.: Turkish okur oldu - started, started reading, where the initial form is expressed by the stem of the indicative verb and the personal form of the verb olmak - be), about the continuous form, as, for example, in the English form am writing, etc.

In the Russian language, the main species differences pass along the line of expressing the relationship of an action to its internal limit, and therefore two types are distinguished in this language: the imperfect form and the perfect form.

The imperfect form expresses the action in its flow, in the process of its completion, without any indication of its limit; Wed Verbs write, read, speak etc.

The perfect form expresses an action limited by the limit of its commission at any moment of its implementation or communicating the result of a given action or process; compare: write, come, say etc.

The system of types in the Russian language has its own distinctive feature - the presence of correlative pairs of verbs, which form correlative series of forms that permeate the entire system of verbal forms with the identity of their lexical meaning; compare: carry - carry;carried - carried; give - give; come on - give; gave - gave etc.

To express specific meanings in the Russian language there is its own special system of morphological means:

Suffixes -iv-, -iv-, -ov, -ev- with alternating vowels or consonants, added to the verb stem; in this case, imperfective verbs are formed from perfective verbs; compare: warm up-> warm; show-> show; close-> close; take a walk-> take a walk.

Suffix -Well-, added to the verb stem; Perfective verbs are formed from imperfective verbs, cf.: move->move; scream->shout.

Prefixes o, na-, for-, o-, po-, from- and some others; compare: write -> write; eat -> eat; build -> build; build -> rebuild; hide -> hide; go blind -> go blind

AND etc.

A change in the vowels of the root, in some cases accompanied by an alternation of vowels in the verb stem; compare: decide->decide; imagine-> imagine.

Changing the place of stress with the same phonemic composition of the word: sprinkle-> pour; cut-> cut.

In addition to the same-root aspectual pairs of verbs, there is a limited number of pairs formed from different stems; compare: take-> take; talk-> say; put-> put. The category of aspect in the Russian language developed at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 16th century. In the Old Russian language, this category was much less developed, due to which the Old Russian language had a slightly different typology.

The development of linguistic means of expressing the category of aspect in the Old Russian period began with the emergence and gradual growth of the number of prefixed verbs, in which prefixes, joining the base of the verb with the general meaning of a certain action or process, gave it the meaning of perfectivity. We observe a similar process in the ancient Germanic languages; Wed function of the perfect particle ga- in Gothic, ge- in Old High German and Old English. As JI notes. P. Yakubinsky, the development of the prefix expression of species played a decisive role in the fate of the temporary forms of the aorist and imperfect 1.

Gradually, this technique became more and more widespread, and the use of temporary forms of the aorist and imperfect became unnecessary, and these temporary forms gradually died out. Only the perfect is preserved, for example, I walked, I walkedecu,walked (is), expressing a perfect action, which, as a result of the disappearance of the auxiliary verb, gave rise to the past tense form of the modern period of development of the Russian language.

In Old English, the category of aspect was represented, as in Old Russian, by two forms - imperfect, which is the stem of the verb, usually not complicated by prefixes, for example, wyrcan - do, work; settan - put, put, and perfect, formed with the help of prefixes, mainly with the help of the prefix ze- and some others, for example 3 ewyrcan- do; gesettan - put, put.

But already in the Old English period one can find a number of cases when the addition of a prefix did not entail the formation of a perfective verb, but the formation of a new lexical unit, that is, a word with a meaning different from the meaning of the corresponding imperfective verb, for example: cuman - come; becuman - happen; sittan - sit; besittan - besiege etc.

The two-species system proved to be unstable during the Old English period. On the one hand, aspectual prefixes gradually acquired the meaning of word-forming morphemes, which has been preserved to this day, for example: to come - come, to become - become; to lie - lie; to belie - slander; on the other hand, during the Middle English period there was a gradual disappearance of prefixes, due to which the morphological means of expressing the types of imperfect and perfect were gradually lost. Along with them, correlative aspect pairs of verbs disappeared, and thus the category of aspect was lost in the Middle English period. This has led to the fact that in modern English, Russian aspectual correlative pairs of verbs usually correspond to one verb in English; compare: get - to receive and receive - to receive; get up - to get up and stand up - to get up.

The disappeared category of species was replaced by a complex system of temporary forms, which at a certain stage of its development, already in the New England period, gave rise to new species characteristics of action and process, which received an ambiguous interpretation in modern English studies.

Based on the understanding of aspect as a grammatical category that characterizes an action based on the signs of its occurrence and has fixed morphological indicators, prof. A. I. Smirnitsky identified in the system of grammatical categories of modern English the category of aspect, consisting of two types - general aspect, represented in the present tense by zero morphemes and -(e)s (3rd person singular), in the past tense morpheme -ed (-t) or forms with alternating vowels such as sit - sat, speak - spoke, etc., in the future tense shall (will) + V and denoting the very fact of the action, and the long form 1 represented by the verb to be in the form of the corresponding tense and the -ing form, for example: I am sitting, he is standing, they are walking, etc.

But unlike the Russian language, where imperfective and perfective verbs form correlative pairs of lexical units, each with its own morphological features and characteristics and forming two rows of correlative forms, in English verbs of the general and continuous form do not form such pairs. Every verb in English, with few exceptions, can take either a general form or a continuous form; in other words, verbs in English do not form correlative aspectual pairs.

A different point of view on the problem of aspect in English is expressed by Prof. I. P. Ivanova 2. She believes that there is no aspect as a special grammatical category in the English language. She calls groups of temporary forms: basic, continuous, perfect and perfect-continuous - discharges. She believes that the main category (Indefinite) is the only form capable of conveying dynamics, changing events. Other bits detail the action in terms of simultaneity or precedence, but are not used to convey the change of actions over time. I. P. Ivanova believes that the main category is indifferent to the category of aspect, since it can, firstly, convey the meaning of singleness and multiplicity and, secondly, along the line of non-finite verbs and dual verbs, it is synonymous with forms of a long category, these latter and the forms of the perfect are mutually opposite in their specific content, since the specific content of a long discharge is a process in its course, and the specific content of the perfect is an action in its execution. Both continuous and perfect discharge, according to I.P. Ivanova, are not aspectual, but only have a grammatical meaning of aspect, closely intertwined with the category of time, which is considered as leading in this system.

Time category. Simultaneously with the category of aspect, and closely intertwined with it, in many languages there is a category of time, which expresses the relationship of action to the moment of speech, taken as the starting point.

There are absolute forms of time that do not depend on other tense forms in a sentence and are determined by their relationship with the moment of speech: the form of the present tense, denoting an action coinciding with the moment of speech; the past tense form, expressing an action that took place before the moment of speech, and the future tense form, conveying an action that will take place after the moment of speech.

Along with absolute forms of time, there are relative forms of time, denoting actions that are considered not from the point of view of the moment of speech, but from the point of view of another time form or moment taken as a starting point.

In the Old Russian language, the category of tense was characterized by a greater number of forms than in the modern language, which is explained by the weaker development of the category of aspect in this language. The category of time in the Old Russian language consisted of the following forms: present tense - I'm leading, guide, know etc.; imperfect - leading, leading, leading etc., expressing a long-term or repeated action in the past; aorist - vedbkh, in food, in food etc., expressing instant action in the past; perfect - I am Vel, I am Vela, ecuvel,eculed etc., conveying the effective nature of an action long past - bah vel, bah vela, byeshe vel, byshe led etc.; the future, which was previously simple, and the former future - I will lead, I will lead etc., naming an action that will occur before another action in the future and is correlated with it.

The subsequent development of the imperfect and perfect forms led to the gradual disappearance of the imperfect and aorist and to the expansion of the semantics of the perfect forms, which acquired the ability to express the meaning of the perfect form if the verb had a prefix, for example brought, took away etc., and the meaning of the imperfect form if the verb did not have a prefix, for example carried, led etc.

Thus, the category of aspect in modern Russian is represented by forms of two types - imperfect and perfect, and the category of time - by three forms of time in imperfective verbs and two forms in perfective verbs.

With regard to the categories of aspect and tense, the Russian language has changed its typology due to the development of forms of the category of aspect, which permeates all forms of the verb, on the one hand, and due to the disappearance of a number of forms of the category of tense, on the other.

We see a completely different picture in English. In the Old English period, as already noted, there were two types - imperfect and perfect, which had their morphological expression in the form of verbs with prefixes.

The category of time was expressed by the forms of two tenses - present and past; compare: ic cume - I come ic com - I came, I came. In addition, all verbs fell into two classes - the class of verbs with alternating vowels (ic bide - ic bad - wait, expect, ic fare - ic for - drive etc.) and the class of verbs with a dental suffix (ic laere - ic laerde - learn, teach).

According to the point of view presented by a number of scientists, the system of tense forms of modern English consists of two correlative series of tense forms - absolute tense forms, which include forms of the Indefinite group, and relative tense forms, which include tenses of the perfect group and continuous 1. Species meanings, without forming, according to this point of view, a morphologically expressed category, are, as it were, superimposed on temporary meanings.

The attitude of the subject to the action in most languages is expressed in the personal endings of the verb; the relation of the action to the object can be expressed by case control or adjacency, depending on the typology of the language.

Based on the morphological criteria used in languages to express voice, it can be argued that the number of voices in different languages is very different. So, for example, in the Turkish language there are five voices: main, reciprocal, the morphological means of expression of which is the affix -i§ with variants (cf.: vurmak - beat, vuru§mak - fight, fight); reflexive, formed using the affix -(i)n with variants (cf.: giymek - dress, giyinmek - dress); passive, formed using the affix -il and its variants or the affix -p with verb stems on a vowel (cf.: segmek - choose, segilmek - be chosen; almak - take, alinmak- to be taken); forced, using the affix -dir with variants (cf.: yemek - There is, yedirmek - (to) feed (force to eat).

In the Russian language, only transitive verbs have a voice category, so this category is more private in nature than the category of aspect or tense. There are three voices in total in the Russian language.

Active voice, expressed by certain syntactic structures, covering transitive verbs denoting action directed to a direct object, expressed in the accusative case form without a preposition; cf.: Golutvin. I followed you, observed you, collected information, features from your life, wrote your biography and attached a portrait. In particular, he vividly depicted your latest activities. So would you like to buy the original from me, otherwise I will sell it to a magazine... (A. N. Ostrovsky. Simplicity is enough for every wise man).

Reversible-average deposit, the morphological indicator of which is the affix -sya, added to the base of the transitive verb. Verbs of the reflexive-medial voice, depending on their semantics, fall into several groups, of which we will name only the main ones: a) reflexive verbs, denoting an action that extends to the bearer of the action, that is, an action in which the subject and object are represented by the same person (cf.: dress, put on shoes, powder etc.); b) reciprocal verbs, denoting the action of two or more persons, each of whom is both the producer and the object of the same action on the part of another person (cf.: embrace, kiss); V) reflexive verbs, indicating the concentration of action in the producer himself (cf.: rejoice, stay etc.). For example: I stayed on short stops for a month along with the train., and his light, it seemed, became brighter, - there must be, from the silence(K. G. Paustovsky. Fenino's happiness).

Passive voice, the morphological indicators of which are the affix -sya, attached to verbs of the active voice, or forms of passive participles formed from transitive verbs using suffixes -m-at-n- (-nn-)at-T- in combination with personal forms of the verb be. In this case, the noun denoting a person or thing that is the subject of an action takes the form of the instrumental case, the so-called instrumental actor; compare: There was a bouquet of wildflowers on the table - daisies, lungworts, wild rowan. The bouquet was collected, there must be, recently(K. G. Paustovsky. Rainy dawn).

In English, morphologically expressed features have two voices: valid, or active voice, existing in the forms of the indicative and its constituent tense forms and associated with a direct or prepositional object, and passive, or passive voice, expressed in analytical forms consisting of

forms of the verb to be and the participle P of the conjugated verb, that is, Уь e +

+ Vpt 2 .

The supposed two other pledges that are sometimes spoken of - mutual and reciprocal - do not have any special means of expression that characterize them, and therefore cannot be considered as special forms of pledge.

As in a number of other languages, voice forms as a special grammatical category are represented only in transitive verbs. Intransitive verbs, which include, for example, verbs of movement to go, to creep, to swim, verbs of position in space to sit, to lie, to stand, verbs of physical state to rest, verbs of moral state to cry, to weep, etc. d., do not have forms of collateral.

However, if these verbs develop a transitive meaning, semes of transitivity, and, therefore, require a direct object, then they acquire all the characteristics of a transitive verb, that is, they are included in the series of verbs that have both voices; cf.: to fly - fly; to fly and plane - pilot a plane, the plane was flown by Jim Atkins - the plane was piloted by Jim Atkins; to run - run, to run a hotel - manage a hotel, the hotel was run by a young man - the hotel was run by a young man.

Functional differences in the use of voice forms in Russian and English. The presence of similar grammatical categories in both languages, although they have slightly different morphological expressions, does not always indicate their typological similarity. It is also necessary to take into account their distribution and functional use 1 .

A comparison of the cases of use of forms of the passive voice in both languages shows that their functioning in speech is completely different. If the English language prefers to use passive forms in sentences where a person or object in the function of the subject is influenced by someone else, then the Russian language in a similar situation more often uses the active voice form with a direct object, formalized in the accusative case in the position before the predicate; cf.: this long bridge was built by the workers of our factory last year - this long bridge was built by the workers of our factory. Sentences of this structure occur frequently and thereby determine the relative importance of the passive form in both languages.

In addition to this characteristic case associated with discrepancies in the system of grammatical categories and their morphological expression in both languages - the presence of an accusative case form in Russian to express a direct object and the absence of a case category in the system of nouns in English, there are a number of cases when Russian sentences with Predicates in the form of the active voice correspond in English to sentences with a predicate in the form of the passive voice. These are the following cases:

The predicate of indefinite-personal sentences in the form of the active voice in Russian corresponds to the predicate in the form of the passive of the corresponding sentences in English; compare: we were told good news - we were told good news; John was given a good rating - John was given a good mark.

The predicate of the main sentence, expressed by verbs of speech or judgment in the form of the 3rd person plural ( They say, believe, consider, suggest etc.), usually corresponds to the passive form of the same verbs in English. This correspondence is especially often observed in newspaper, political and scientific literature.

The category of modality can be expressed by different means in different languages. In English and Russian languages, modality is expressed both by grammatical means - forms of moods, and by lexical means: modal words Maybe, probably, Maybe, Seems, apparently etc. - certainly, maybe, perhaps, probably, possibly, surely, etc.; modal verbs - be able, be able to, want, want, must etc. - can, may, must, etc.; modal particles - maybe, hardly, perhaps etc., as well as intonation.

For the typological characteristics of a language, grammatical means of expressing modality and elements of the structure of the language are important. Therefore, the comparison of the category of modality in both languages will be further carried out in terms of comparison of the grammatical means of its expression.

The relationship of action to reality can be different: if the action is thought of as real, then we have a modality of reality; if the action is thought of as unreal, possible or impossible, as desirable or probable, then we have the modality of invalidity. The main grammatical means of expressing the modality of reality is the indicative mood, or indicative. It denotes an action that is perceived by the speaker as corresponding to reality. Hence the presence in all forms of the modality of reality of the seme “reality” 1. The indicative mood, both in one and in another language, denotes a real action that occurs in terms of the present tense, has occurred in the past or is about to happen in the future, as a result of which this mood receives its expression in the corresponding forms of tense and person. Therefore, although the modality of reality is similar in its content in both languages, nevertheless, the methods of its expression depend on the system of tense forms, which, as is known, have significant differences in these languages. So, for example, in Russian the modality of reality relating to the present tense is expressed by the present tense form; in English it can be expressed not only by the Present Indefinite form, but also by the Present Perfect Continuous form; cf.: It was a wonderful opportunity, and when he had finished his explanations, Isabel was once more all smiles. "You foolish boy, why have you been trying to make me miserable." His face lit up at her words and his eyes flashed (W. S. Maugham.

Significantly greater differences are observed in the system of grammatical means that exist in both languages to express the modality of invalidity.

In the Russian language there is only one mood - the subjunctive, which is sometimes called conditional or presumptive. It denotes an action that is conceived by the speaker as unreal and only as possible or desirable.

The subjunctive mood is formed analytically - by combining a verb in the past tense with a particle wouldat which can be located either before or after the verb form directly or at a distance; compare:

So, quietly send your grandson with this note to O... to that...

To the neighbor... and tell him to

So that he doesn't say a word,

So that he doesn't call me...

(A.S. Pushkin. Evgeny Onegin)

Shchedrin. Faithful Trezor); this “condition”; cf.: ... and if there was a six to the right, and a king of diamonds to the left, then he would have completely won back, bet everything on p and won fifteen thousand clean, then he would have bought himself a pacer from the regimental commander, a couple more horses, bought a phaeton would (JI. N. Tolstoy. Two Hussars), this is “hypothetical”; semu "intention"; this “wish”, etc.

A special feature of the Russian subjunctive mood is its timeless nature, that is, it can express action both in the present and in the past and in the future; compare: I wish I knew, How are you going to approach the pike with your love? - the ruff calmed him down(M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Crucian idealist).

The limited nature of the subjunctive mood results in the ability of the Russian form of the indefinite mood to be combined with the particle would to express modality; compare: Shouldn't we get lost? - I said to the coachman. But, without receiving a response, asked the question more clearly: - What, let's get to the station, coachman? won't we get lost?(JI. N. Tolstoy. Blizzard).

The seme “condition” can, in addition to the form of the subjunctive mood, also be expressed by the form 2 -th person singular imperative; compare: Yes\ - Ivan Dmitrich became angry again. - You despise suffering, maybe your finger will get caught in the door, so you'll scream at the top of your lungs\(A.P. Chekhov. Chamber MB).

This use of the imperative form in English is completely impossible.

In contrast to the Russian language, the modality of invalidity in English is expressed by four so-called indirect moods: subjunctive I, subjunctive P, presumptive and conditional 1.

The subjunctive mood I, like the Russian subjunctive mood, has a timeless character. It expresses neither the category of person nor the category of number. As the main seme, the subjunctive I has the seme “hypotheticalness”, “uncertainty in the reality of a given phenomenon”; but at the same time it does not express any opposition to what takes place in reality; cf: Mrs Erlynne... As for me, if suffering be an expiation, then at this moment I have expiated all my faults, whatever they have been; for to-night you have made a heart in one who had it not, made it and broken it (O. Wilde. Lady Windermere's Fan).

The subjunctive mood P has “unreality” as the main seme, in which it occupies a polar position with the indicative forms, in which the seme “reality” is present. Unlike the subjunctive I, the seme “present”, or “future”, or the seme “past” is added to the main seme “unreality”, as a result of which the subjunctive P has different forms of the present tense (cf.: If I came, If I were ) and past tense forms (cf.: If I had come. If I had been); cf.: And so it would have been strange and unaccountable, if it had been a stuffed trout, but it was not. That trout was plaster-of-Paris (J.K. Jerome. Three Men in a Boat).

The presumptive mood, as the name itself shows, has “assumption” as its main subject. Its morphological structure consists of the verb should + Vinf- Thus, this mood does not have any grammatical categories; cf.: Was not a South Sea merchant, and he had agencies in many of the islands of the Pacific. He had suggested that Edward should go to Tahiti for a year or two... (W. S. Maugham. The Fall of Edward Barnard).

This mood in Russian corresponds to the form of the subjunctive mood.

In this regard, the main seme of the forms of this mood is the seme “motivation”. If the forms of this mood are combined with negation Not, then the seme “incentive” is extinguished and the seme “prohibition” appears instead.

The imperative mood in both languages has the categories of person and number. 2 The th person singular and plural in the Russian language is expressed in synthetic forms: read - read, write - write; in English, unlike Russian, there is only one form for 2 the th person of both numbers: read, write, take, go, etc.

The 1st person plural form, addressed to either one or more interlocutors, can be expressed in two ways; if the verb is perfective, then this is the form expressed synthetically ( let's go to, let's go, let's take, let's say); if the verb is imperfect, then this form receives an analytical expression (we will read, will write, will talk).

These two Russian forms in English correspond to only one analytical form - let us (let’s) read, let us (let’s) go, let us (let’s) take, etc.

The 3rd person form of both numbers is expressed analytically in both languages; compare: let him come - let him come; let them come - let them come.

Along with the main seme “motivation”, presented in the meanings of the imperative mood of both languages and constituting their similarity, in the semantic structure of the Russian imperative mood there are a number of semes that are absent in the structure of the English form and make up their great difference.

So, in the Russian form we find a “condition” for this; compare: if he worked at a factory, he would master several professions, which can be replaced by an equivalent sentence: if he worked at a factory, he would master several professions.

In a sentence for the life of me, I do not remember The seme “assumption” appears.

Thus, the above shows that the semantic structure of the Russian imperative mood is characterized by greater complexity compared to the English one, with the identity of the main seme “motivation”.

Face category. In a number of languages - Indo-European, Turkic, Finno-Ugric - there are special morphemes to designate a person, that is, the subject of speech, the so-called personal endings. They are used to express the attitude of the action and its subject to the speaker. The personal endings of the verb thus serve as a morphological means of expressing the grammatical category of the person.

However, there are languages, such as Japanese, Chinese, Indonesian and some others, in which there are no morphological means of facial expression; cf.: Japanese watakushi wa yukimas - I'm coming, anata wa yukimas - you go(yukimas - I'm coming, I'm coming, coming etc.) etc.; indonesian saja menulis - I write engkau menulis - you are writing, you write(menulis - writing, you write, writes etc.), etc. In this case, the category of person is expressed only lexically using personal pronouns or nouns, which must be used in a sentence to avoid ambiguity.

As individual languages testify, the personal endings of verbs were formed from personal pronouns, which were once placed at the end of words denoting actions and processes; Wed: Tatar, sin kile| sin - you are coming, without kilebez - we are coming; Finnish those sanomme - We are speaking te sanotte - you speak etc. In further development, the personal forms gradually simplified and began to differ in their sound form from the forms of the corresponding personal pronouns; Wed: Tatars, min baram - I'm coming, I'm going; first person morpheme -m is a simplified form of the personal pronoun 1 th person singular - min - I.

The personal forms of the verb contain the following semes: the “subject of speech” seme, which appears in the morpheme 1 -th person, this “addressee of speech” - in the morpheme 2 -th person, thus “participant of speech” - in the 3rd person morpheme. In addition, there is a certain additional set of semes included in certain facial morphemes. Thus, the seme “impersonality” is revealed in all three personal forms of the verb; compare: drive more quietly, you will continue(proverb); what we have, we don’t store, having lost - we cry(proverb); they meet you by their clothes, escorted according to the mind(proverb); seme “repetition of action”; compare: I'm re-reading the letter.

In Russian, the category of person is expressed by personal forms of the verb - a special form for each person in the present tense of the imperfective, in the present-future tense of the indicative mood and in the form of the imperative mood: -And (-And, soft consonant), -those.

Unit h. Mn. h.

e l. -yu (-y) 1 -e l.-em (~yom u -im)

e l. -eat (-eat, -eat) 2 -e l.-ete (-yoshe, -ite)

e l. -et(-yosh, -it) 3rd l. -yut (-ut, -ash, -yat)

In the past tense of the imperfective and perfective forms and in the subjunctive mood, the category of person is not expressed in personal forms.

In English there are two ways of morphologically expressing the category of person: 1 ) using the morpheme -es(-s) in the 3rd person singular of the affirmative form of the present common tense (he goes to school in the morning; she comes home late; John takes English lessons); 2) using auxiliary verbs have (has) for the Perfect category; am (is, are) for the Continuous category; do (does) for interrogative and negative forms of the Indefinite category.

Comparing the ways of expressing the category of person in both languages, we see that the typological characteristic of the expression of this category in the Russian language is the personal endings of the verb; in English, as opposed to Russian, the typological characteristic of the category of person is its expression with the help of auxiliary verbs and the absence of personal endings.

These discrepancies in the typology of means of expressing the category of person in both languages are the reason that English language learners have great difficulty mastering the form of the 3rd person singular present common tense; they tend to forget about the 3rd person morpheme -es (-s), the only person morpheme in the entire verb system, which is the reason for their numerous errors both in oral and written speech in English, especially in the first language stage of training. These errors cannot be explained by the influence and interference of the native language; they directly reflect the influence of language typology on the process of learning and mastering this language.

Under the case category is understood as a grammatical category that represents the unity of meaning of the relationship of the designated object to other objects, actions, features and means of its material, linguistic expression. Real form of expression This category is served by the case form, or case form, which is a morpheme consisting of a certain scale, which, together with the root morpheme, gives a certain content to the word. The set of case forms that make up a certain system of changes forms a declension. The presence or absence of cases is associated with the presence, absence or weak development of prepositions. In russian language The case category is represented by six cases - nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental and prepositional. Considering the meaning of each individual case as a special grammatical category, we see that it is complex in nature and consists of a number of smaller ones connotations (semes), which, however, cannot be further expanded. For example, one of such meanings can be called objectivity, since the category of case is characteristic of nouns denoting objects and phenomena. Another meaning can be the belonging of a noun to a certain grammatical gender. The third meaning is the expression of number - singular or plural. The fourth meaning can be called animateness or inanimateness, which receives its expression in one form or another, etc. The question of the category of case in English is still controversial. An almost generally accepted point of view is that nouns contain a class of words that vary in two cases - nominative and possessive, formalized by the morpheme "s. This is a class of animate nouns and nouns of the semantic field "time". According to the point of view of A. M. Mukhin, in the system of nouns of modern English, the category of case no longer exists. It ceased to exist in the Middle English period. The morpheme preserved from the Old English period - es> "s is nothing more than a possessive suffix, which, due to its unambiguity (seme possessive) and the ability to attach to the root morpheme without modifying it, is agglutinative in nature. The category of case is represented in the system of personal pronouns in the English language by two cases - nominative and objective - with the main semes of objectivity, number and direction.

In both English and Russian there is grammatical category of number. This category expresses quantitative relationships that exist in reality, reflected in the minds of speakers of a given language and having morphological expression in the corresponding forms of the language. In Russian and English, the category of number is represented by the semes of singularity and plurality, which are expressed in singular and plural forms. Semes of singularity are expressed in Russian as materially expressed morphemes (for masculine nouns -y, for example edge, barn, stream, etc., for feminine nouns -а, -я, for example river, flock, for neuter nouns - o, -e, -mya, for example, window, sea, banner), and zero morphemes (for most masculine nouns, for example city, house, beast, and some of the feminine gender - door, branch, etc.). Unlike the Russian language, the seme of singularity in English is represented only by the zero morpheme, for example: town, play, foot, etc. The category of the plural in both languages is represented by the seme of plurality. Turning to the Russian language, we can easily notice a characteristic feature of it - the presence of agreement in number, and not only in number, in adjectives, pronouns, verbs, ordinal numbers. Agreement in number is very clearly expressed in the verb. In the forms of the present tense, number semes are combined with person semes, as a result of which each of the morphemes expressing the present tense of the imperfect form or the future tense of the perfect form - -yu, -u; -eat, -eat, -eat, -it; -eat, -im, -ete, -ite, -yut, -ut, -yat, -am, clearly expresses the category of number. Thus, we can talk about the deep penetration of the category of number into all parts of speech in the Russian language. We see a completely different picture in the English language, where the category of number is represented only in the noun system. We find agreement in number only in the demonstrative pronoun, where both pronouns this - this and that - that have plural forms these - these and those - me, forming attributive phrases with nouns with agreement this house - this house, these houses - these Houses; that house - that house, those houses - those houses.

Category of certainty - uncertainty. This category has its own morphological design. Most often it is expressed by an article, as in English, German, and French. The category of definiteness - indeterminacy has a grammaticalized character in the English language: it is the definite article the and the indefinite article a or an. In contrast to English, in Russian the category of certainty - uncertainty does not have a morphological expression and is expressed mainly lexically.

Quality degree category. The main means of expressing the category of degree of quality are adjectives. In terms of their typological characteristics, adjectives in both languages differ significantly from each other. According to their composition, adjectives in the Russian language are divided into three categories: 1) qualitative adjectives, which directly denote a feature of an object. These adjectives form a number of semantic groups - size (large - small, high - low)] volume (thick - thin)] color, taste, temperature, rating, etc.; 2) relative adjectives, denoting a characteristic of an object through its relationship to another object or action. Relative adjectives in Russian are derived from the stems of nouns: stone - stone, spring - spring, Moscow - Moscow, etc.; 3) possessive adjectives, denoting that an object belongs to a person or animal; cf.: fathers, wives, etc. Unlike the Russian language, English adjectives have only one category clearly represented by vocabulary - qualitative adjectives; cf.: white, large, strong, etc. Relative adjectives are represented by a very limited number of lexical units, a significant part of which belong to the field of science; cf.: biological, chemical, etc. The absence of a full-fledged category of relative adjectives in the English language is compensated by attributive phrases consisting of two nouns, of which the first noun performs an attributive function, being a definition of the second; cf.: stone - stone, a stone wall - stone wall; gold - gold, a gold watch - gold watch; Moscow - Moscow, the Moscow streets - Moscow streets. Possessive adjectives as a special category are also absent in English. This absence is compensated by phrases in which a Russian adjective corresponds to a noun formalized by the possessive particle "s; cf.: father's house - my father's house, wife's bag - that wife's bag, etc. In relation to the grammatical categories they express, adjectives in both languages also differ significantly: Russian adjectives have the ability to agree with the noun they define in gender, number and case, while English adjectives have no agreement in gender, number or case; cf.: green leaf - green grass - green apple The next differential feature of Russian adjectives should be considered the presence of two forms for qualitative adjectives: full and short. Adjectives in their full form perform an attributive function in a sentence (cf.: high tower, blue sky, etc.) and occasionally a predicative function (cf.: our street is wide, etc.). Short adjectives perform a predicative function in a sentence.

Category of type and time. Among the various grammatical categories that are distinguished in the system of the verb as a special part of speech, it is necessary to name the category of aspect and the category of tense. Type category is usually defined as such a lexical and grammatical category that conveys the characteristics of the course of an action or process designated by a verb - repetition, duration, multiplicity, instantaneity of action, or effectiveness, completeness - incompleteness, or, finally, uttermostness, that is, the relationship of the action to its internal limit. In the Russian language, the main species differences pass along the line of expressing the relationship of an action to its internal limit, and therefore two types are distinguished in this language: the imperfect form and the perfect form. The imperfect form expresses the action in its flow, in the process of its completion, without any indication of its limit; Wed verbs to write, read, speak, etc. The perfect form expresses an action limited by the limit of its commission at any moment of its implementation or communicating the result of a given action or process; cf.: write, come, say, etc. Based on the understanding of aspect as a grammatical category that characterizes an action according to the signs of its occurrence and has fixed morphological indicators, prof. A. I. Smirnitsky identified in the system of grammatical categories of modern English the category of aspect, consisting of two types - general aspect, represented in the present tense by zero morphemes and -(e)s Cth person singular), in the past tense by morpheme -ed (-t) or forms with alternating vowels such as sit - sat, speak - spoke, etc., in the future tense shall (will) + V and denoting the very fact of the action, and long form 1, represented by the verb to be in the form of the corresponding tense and the -ing form, for example: I am sitting, he is standing, they are walking, etc. I. P. Ivanova, believes that there is no aspect as a special grammatical category in the English language. She calls groups of temporary forms: basic, continuous, perfect and perfect-continuous - discharges. She believes that the main category (Indefinite) is the only form capable of conveying dynamics and changing events. Other bits detail the action in terms of simultaneity or precedence, but are not used to convey the change of actions over time. Time category. Simultaneously with the category of aspect, and closely intertwined with it, in many languages there is a category of time, which expresses the relationship of action to the moment of speech, taken as the starting point. There are absolute forms of time that do not depend on other tense forms in a sentence and are determined by their relationship with the moment of speech: the form of the present tense, denoting an action coinciding with the moment of speech; the past tense form, expressing an action that took place before the moment of speech, and the future tense form, conveying an action that will take place after the moment of speech. Along with absolute forms of time, there are relative forms of time, denoting actions that are considered not from the point of view of the moment of speech, but from the point of view of another time form or moment taken as a reference point. According to the point of view presented by a number of scientists, the system of tense forms of modern English consists of two correlative series of tense forms - absolute tense forms, which include forms of the Indefinite group, and relative tense forms, which include tenses of the perfect group and continuous 1. Specific meanings, without forming, according to this point of view, a morphologically expressed category, are, as it were, superimposed on temporary meanings. Thus, the category of aspect in modern Russian is represented by forms of two types - imperfect and perfect, and the category of time - by three forms of time in imperfective verbs and two forms in perfective verbs. It should be noted that the category of aspect and the category of time are respectively expressed both in the forms of the participle (writing, writing, having written) and in the forms of the gerund (writing (shi)).

Collateral category. The category of voice is a verbal category that expresses various relationships between the subject and object of an action, which have their morphological expression in the form of a verb. The attitude of the subject to the action in most languages is expressed in the personal endings of the verb; the relation of the action to the object can be expressed by case control or adjacency, depending on the typology of the language. In the Russian language, only transitive verbs have a voice category, so this category is more private in nature than the category of aspect or tense. There are three voices in total in the Russian language. 1. Active voice, expressed by certain syntactic structures, covering transitive verbs denoting an action aimed at a direct object, expressed in the accusative case form without a preposition; 2. Reflexive-medial voice, the morphological indicator of which is the affix -sya, added to the base of the transitive verb. 3. Passive voice, the morphological indicators of which are the affix -sya, attached to active voice verbs, or forms of passive participles formed from transitive verbs using the suffixes -m-, -n- (-nn-), -t- in combination with personal forms of the verb to be. In English, morphologically expressed features have two voices: the active or active voice, which exists in the forms of the indicative and its constituent tense forms and is associated with a direct or prepositional object, and the passive or passive voice, expressed in analytical forms consisting of forms of the verb to be and the participle P of the conjugated verb. As in a number of other languages, voice forms as a special grammatical category are represented only in transitive verbs. A comparison of the cases of use of forms of the passive voice in both languages shows that their functioning in speech is completely different. If the English language prefers to use passive forms in sentences where a person or object in the function of the subject is influenced by someone else, then the Russian language in a similar situation more often uses the active voice form with a direct object, formalized in the accusative case in the position before the predicate; cf.: this long bridge was built by the workers of our factory last year - this long bridge was built by the workers of our factory. Sentences of this structure occur frequently and thereby determine the relative importance of the passive form in both languages.

Modality category. The category of modality is a lexical-grammatical category that expresses the relation of action to reality, established by the speaker. The category of modality can be expressed by different means in different languages. In the English and Russian languages, modality is expressed both by grammatical means - forms of moods, and lexical ones: modal words possibly, probably, probably, seems, apparently, etc. - certainly, maybe, perhaps, probably, possibly, surely, etc. .d.; modal verbs - can, be able to, want, desire, must, etc. - can, may, must, etc.; modal particles - maybe, hardly, perhaps, etc., as well as intonation. The relationship of action to reality can be different: if the action is thought of as real, then we have a modality of reality; if the action is thought of as unreal, possible or impossible, as desirable or probable, then we have the modality of invalidity. The main grammatical means of expressing the modality of reality is the indicative mood, or indicative. Significantly greater differences are observed in the system of grammatical means that exist in both languages to express the modality of invalidity. In the Russian language there is only one mood - the subjunctive, which is sometimes called conditional or presumptive. It denotes an action that is conceived by the speaker as unreal and only as possible or desirable. The subjunctive mood is formed analytically - by combining a verb in the past tense form with a particle would, which can be located either before or after the verb form directly or at a distance. In contrast to the Russian language, the modality of invalidity in English is expressed by four so-called indirect moods: subjunctive I, subjunctive P, presumptive and conditional 1. Subjunctive mood I, like the Russian subjunctive mood, has a timeless character. It expresses neither the category of person nor the category of number. The category of modality also finds its expression in forms of the imperative mood. This mood in both languages can express the will, request, order of the speaker or encouragement of the interlocutor to action. The imperative mood in both languages has the categories of person and number.

Face category. In Russian, the category of person is expressed by personal forms of the verb - a special form for each person in the present tense of the imperfective form, in the present-future tense of the indicative mood and in the form of the imperative mood: -и (-и, soft consonant), -te. In the past tense of the imperfective and perfective forms and in the subjunctive mood, the category of person is not expressed in personal forms. In English, there are two ways to morphologically express the category of person: 1) using the morpheme -es(-s) in the 3rd person singular of the affirmative form of the present common tense (he goes to school in the morning; she comes home late; John takes English lessons); 2) using auxiliary verbs have (has) for the Perfect category; am (is, are) for the Continuous category; do (does) for interrogative and negative forms of the Indefinite category.

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………

1. The main typological differences in the morphological system of the two languages………………………………………………………………………………………….

2. Typology of parts of speech………………………………………………………………

3.Different approaches to the definition of the concept “part of speech”….

4. Typological criteria essential for comparing parts of speech………………………………………………………………………………………..

5. Typology of grammatical categories in two languages……………….

6. Functional differences in the use of forms of voices in Russian and English languages…………………………………………………………

Conclusion……………………………………………………………….

List of references………………………………………………………

Introduction.

Typology is a branch of linguistics that deals with elucidating the most general patterns of different languages that are not related to each other by common origin or mutual influence. Typology seeks to identify the most likely phenomena in different languages. If a certain phenomenon is identified in a representative group of languages, it can be considered a typological pattern applicable to the language as such.

To date, the most developed is the morphological typology of languages. It is based on the way of combining morphemes (morphemics), typical for a particular language. The problem of studying the typology of morphological systems is very relevant in our modern times, in connection with the study of foreign languages and when using a computer.

The subject of our research is English and Russian. The object is the typology of the morphological systems of these languages.

This report examined the main differences in the morphological systems of the two languages, the typology of parts of speech, different approaches to defining the concept of “part of speech”, typological criteria essential for comparing parts of speech, the typology of grammatical categories in two languages, functional differences in the use of voice forms in Russian and English languages.

1.Main typological differencesmorphological system of two languages.

Despite the fact that English and Russian belong to the same family of languages - Indo-European, the typology of their morphological systems as a result of the unique historical development of these languages differs sharply from one another. This can primarily be seen in the morphological structure of words in both one and another language. Thus, in the English language, the overwhelming number of words belonging to the significant parts of speech are single-morpheme formations in which the root morpheme simultaneously acts as a generating stem and as an independent word, as can be seen from the following Table 1.

In contrast to the morphological structure of a word in the English language, significant words in the Russian language usually consist of two morphemes - a root and an affixal, less often of three - a root, a stem-forming suffix that forms the base of the word with the root morpheme, and an affixal morpheme, as can be seen from the following Tables 2.

2. Typology of parts of speech.

Already in ancient times, people paid attention to the fact that the words they used in their native language behave differently in speech. Some words name objects, others - actions, processes, others - qualities, properties of objects. Some words are declined according to cases, others change according to persons and tenses, etc.

These observations, which were noted by ancient Indian and ancient Greek grammarians, gave them the basis for identifying two distinct categories of words - noun and verb. Aristotle (384-322 BC) identified three parts of speech - names, verbs and conjunctions.

In the Hellenistic era, in the 3rd and 3rd centuries. BC e., the so-called Alexandrian school of grammar emerged, which, in the person of its representative Aristarchus of Samothrace (c. 217-145 BC), developed the first classification in history, consisting of 8 parts of speech: name, verb, participle, article, pronoun , preposition, adverb and conjunction. There is no adjective in this classification, which generally reflects the typological feature of the Greek language, in which adjectives had a common declension system with nouns and together with them formed one part of speech called “name”. On the other hand, in this classification the participle is separated into a separate part of speech.

Aristarchus based his classification of parts of speech on two principles: the morphological principle - “a name is an inflected part of speech...”, the semantic principle - “... denoting a body or thing...”, and also took into account the general and particular nature of the subject of speech - “and expressed as general and as particular (general, for example, - man, particular, for example, - Socrates)."

Another Alexandrian grammarian, Dionysius of Thracia (170-90 BC), characterizes the system of tenses in Greek: “There are three tenses - present, past, future. Of these, the past has four varieties - continuous, presenting, pre-completed, unlimited. They have three affinities - the present with the continuous, the present with the previously completed, the unlimited with the future."

Despite the many shortcomings that exist in the system of parts of speech proposed by the Alexandrian grammarians, such as the presence in it of intersecting features characteristic of a name and a verb, this classification has firmly entered into scientific and school use and, with some modifications, is still used today.

3.Different approach to definitionconcept of "part of speech".

The development of linguistic thought, associated with the development of science in general, as well as the increasingly in-depth study of languages of various systems, was the reason that the previous classical system of parts of speech began to be revised.

F.I. Buslaev (1818-1897) distinguished two groups of parts of speech - significant ones, to which he included nouns, adjectives and verbs, and auxiliary parts of speech - pronouns, numerals, prepositions, conjunctions and adverbs. A.A. Potebnya (1835-1891), while maintaining the basic division of parts of speech into significant and auxiliary, included the first adverb, and the second - particles and auxiliary verbs; pronouns occupy a separate place in his system.

A very special classification of words by category was developed by Academician. F.F. Fortunatov (1848-1914). He based his classification on only one criterion - morphological, that is, the presence or absence of a grammatical form, or, as we would now say, the ability or inability of a word to attach certain inflectional morphemes. He divides all words of the language into complete words denoting objects of thought, partial words and interjections.

Complete words can have a form, that is, “the ability of individual words to distinguish from themselves for the consciousness of speakers the formal and basic affiliation of the word.”

Full words are divided into two classes: the class of words with inflectional forms and the class of words without inflectional forms. Words with inflectional forms are divided into: 1) conjugated words, that is, verbs; 2) inflected words, that is, nouns; 3) words that are inflected with gender agreement, that is, adjectives.

In inflected words he distinguishes: a) personal nouns, that is, 1st and 2nd person pronouns; b) impersonal nouns, which include a) nouns-names, that is, words-names, and b) nouns - impersonal pronouns.

In the class of words without changes F.F. Fortunatov includes infinitives, gerunds, as well as indeclinable nouns and adverbs.

However, this classification, based on only one criterion, was not further developed.

4. Typological criteria, essentialto match parts of speech.

In order to be able to establish typological characteristics of several languages at the level of parts of speech, it is necessary to try to find criteria that would be of the most general nature, so that they could be applicable to the maximum number of languages.

Since parts of speech are large groupings or categories into which words existing in a language are distributed, both sides of the word must be reflected in them. From here, two criteria follow for characterizing a word - semantic and formal, or morphological.

The semantic criterion involves classifying a given word into a broad conceptual category. Thus, words with the meaning of objectivity form the semantic category of nouns, words with the meaning of attribute, properties of an object form the semantic category of adjectives, etc. This criterion was established long ago and serves as one of the differential signs of identifying parts of speech in languages.

The morphological criterion is used to assign a given word to a certain category based on its morphological characteristics. So, for example, the presence of a declension paradigm indicates that a word with such a paradigm belongs to the category of nouns if this morphological feature coincides with the semantic feature of objectivity. If the presence of a declension paradigm coincides with the semantic sign of quality, property, then this word should be classified as an adjective, etc.

In addition to these basic properties of meaning and form, a word is characterized by its ability to function in speech, in a sentence. It turns out that not all words in a language can perform identical functions in a sentence. Thus, words with an objective meaning, that is, nouns, usually lack the ability to function as predicate sentences, that is, to predicate. From the normative course of grammars it is known that the main function of the subject noun is to control the predicate and object; The main function of the verb is predication, that is, the attribution of the content of a statement to reality, expressed in a sentence. The main function of an adverb is to characterize the predicate or definition.

Therefore, as the third criterion for determining the part of speech, we consider it necessary to name the function of the word in a sentence, or the functional criterion.

By analyzing different categories of words, we can easily see that not all words can be grammatically combined with each other. Thus, adverbs, when combined with adjectives and verbs, are not combined with either nouns or pronouns. For example, an adverb goes well with verbs (writes well, dances well, etc.), but does not combine at all with nouns and even with adjectives (cf.: “good house,” “good red,” etc.). The English adverb very also does not combine with the noun - “very house, etc.

The combinability of words becomes especially important in those languages where morphological indicators are poorly developed. Thus, in the Chinese language, with its widely developed homonymy of words, one of the criteria for classifying words as nouns can be compatibility with so-called counting words, which occupy a position between a numeral and a noun; Wed: san ben shu - three books, letters, three root book. The countable noun ben is the root, showing that the word shu is the noun book. The compatibility criterion is widely used to distinguish the two main parts of speech of the Indonesian language - nouns and predicates. Thus, nouns in this language are not combined with the negative word tidak - not, with which predicates (process and qualitative words) are combined. Therefore, this criterion should be included among the criteria used to determine the typology of parts of speech.

Finally, for each part of speech it is possible to identify a word-formation paradigm unique to it. Thus, in the Russian language we can name a number of word-forming affixes, the presence of which indicates that the given word refers to a noun; Wed affixes -schik in the words yamshchik, naturschik, etc., classifying these words not only as nouns, but also signaling their grammatical gender, and -tse in the words sun, saucer, etc., classifying these words as nouns with an indication on their belonging to the neuter gender,

In English we also find word-forming affixes that classify a given word as a noun; cf.: -ship in the words friendship - friendship, kinship - kinship; -ment in the words arrangement - arrangement, nourishment - food, etc.

Therefore, the system of word-forming affixes should also be taken into account as one of the criteria for identifying parts of speech.

From the above, the following criteria for identifying parts of speech in typological terms follow: 1) semantic criterion - classifying a given word as a broad conceptual category; 2) morphological criterion - the presence of materially expressed morphological categories; 3) syntactic criterion - the function of a given word in a speech chain; 4) compatibility criterion - the ability of words of the given part of speech to be combined with words of other parts of speech; 5) word formation criterion - the ability of words of a given part of speech to form new words of a certain type.

Returning to the parts of speech in Russian and English, we should note that, despite significant morphological and syntactic differences in the structure of these languages,
becoming parts of speech in them turns out to be largely similar,
as can be seen from the table below:
Russian language English language

1.Noun

2.Adjective

3.Numeral name

4. Pronoun

6.Adverb

7.Preposition

9.Particles

10. Interjections

11. Article

12. Linking verbs

However, despite the relative similarity of parts of speech in composition in both languages, a deeper acquaintance with them indicates a significant difference between them. This difference primarily lies in the divergence in the composition of grammatical categories and the means of their expression in both languages.

Noun. The noun in the Russian language is characterized by the presence of three grammatical categories: 1) the category of case, expressed by the declension paradigm, consisting of six cases; 2) the category of number, consisting of two numbers - singular and plural; 3) categories of grammatical gender, representing three genders - masculine, feminine and neuter, having a corresponding morphological expression.

Unlike Russian, a noun in English is characterized by the presence of two grammatical categories: I) the category of number, consisting of two numbers - singular and plural; 2) the category of determinativity (certainty - uncertainty), expressed by articles in preposition.

Adjective. An adjective in Russian is characterized by the presence of agreement with a noun in gender, number and case and a category of degree of quality.

Unlike Russian, an adjective in English does not have agreement with a noun and in this regard approaches languages of a completely different type - agglutinative ones, for example Turkic, in which the lack of agreement with a noun is typological in nature.

At the same time, in English, as in Russian, there is a morphologically expressed category of degree of quality.

Verb. The verb in the Russian language is characterized by the presence of seven grammatical categories: 1) the category of aspect, expressed by morphological forms of the imperfect and perfect form; 2) the category of time, which finds its expression in the forms of five times - three forms of imperfect time and two forms of perfect time;

4)categories of mood, represented by the forms of three moods
- indicative, imperative and subjunctive or conditional
desirable; 5) category of person expressed by personal endings
mi; 6) categories of number expressed by personal endings; 7) categories of grammatical gender in singular forms of the past tense.

The English verb system presents the following grammatical categories: I) the category of time, expressed by three forms of time - present, past and future; 2) the category of mood, represented by six morphologically expressed forms; moods - indicative, imperative, subjunctive I, subjunctive II, presumptive and conditional; 3) category of voice, which has a morphological expression in the form of forms of active and passive voice; 4) category of appearance, represented by forms, of two types - general appearance and long-term appearance; 5) the category of temporal reference, represented by perfect forms; b) category of person, expressed in the present tense by the morpheme -(e)s and zero morphemes in other persons; 7) category of number.

5. Typology of grammatical categoriesin two languages.

Case category. The category of case is understood as a grammatical category, which represents the unity of meaning of the relationship of the designated object to other objects, actions, features and means of its material, linguistic expression.

Considering the meaning of each individual case as a special grammatical category, we see that the eye is complex in nature and consists of a number of smaller meanings, which, however, cannot be further expanded. For example, one of such meanings can be called objectivity, since the category of case is characteristic of nouns denoting objects and phenomena. Another meaning can be the belonging of a noun to a certain grammatical gender. The third meaning is the expression of number - singular or plural. The fourth meaning can be called animateness or inanimateness, which receives its expression in one form or another, etc.

Following prof. E.I. We call Schendels semami. So, the concept of seme is understood as a minimal, further indivisible element of grammatical meaning."

The question of the category of case in the English language is still controversial. Depending on the author's approach to this problem, the English language was endowed with a different number of cases. Thus, M. Deitchbein, who accepted the understanding of case as a combination of a preposition with a noun in the initial form, believed that there are four cases in English: nominative, genitive, dative and accusative." However, this interpretation of the problem of case seems completely incorrect, since case is understood a word form in which there is a corresponding case morpheme, in the case of English - "s.

The point of view is almost generally accepted, according to which in the composition of nouns there is a class of words that change in two cases - nominative and possessive, formalized by the morpheme "s. This is a class of animate nouns and nouns of the semantic field "time". Thus, from the point of view of the typological characteristics of the category case in a noun, we can note that in English all nouns are divided into two classes: words denoting inanimate objects, which do not have a case category, and words denoting living objects and time, having two cases - general and possessive. the following: objectivity, animation, possessiveness, subjectivity and objectivity.

According to the point of view of A.M. Mukhina, in the noun system of modern English, the category of case no longer exists. It ceased to exist in the Middle English period. The morpheme preserved from the Old English period - es > "s is nothing more than a possessive suffix, which, due to its unambiguousness (seme possessive) and the ability to attach to the root morpheme without modifying it, is agglutinative in nature 2.

If we accept this point of view as fair, which is fully consistent with the current state of the noun system in the English language, then we should conclude that the category of case in the noun system actually does not exist. At the same time, a new grammatical category has emerged in the name system - the category of possessive and, which has its material expression in the form of a morpheme "s", which is of an agglutinative nature.

Number category. In both English and Russian there is a grammatical category of number. This category expresses quantitative relationships that exist in reality, reflected in the minds of speakers of a given language and having morphological expression in the corresponding forms of the language.

In the ancient Indo-European languages - Sanskrit, ancient Greek, ancient Germanic languages - the category of number was represented by three numbers: singular, dual and plural. The category of number, as reflecting quantitative relationships between real objects, is naturally tied to a noun.

Semes of singularity are expressed in Russian as materially
expressed morphemes (for masculine nouns -a,
for example tap, barn, stream, etc., for feminine nouns
gender -a, -ya, for example river, flock, for neuter nouns
-o, -e, -mya, for example, window, sea, banner), and zero morphemes
(for most masculine nouns, for example city,
ladies, beast, and some of the feminine gender - door, branch, etc.).
Semes of singularity are also expressed in case morphemes of the word
forms, where they are included along with the semes of case and gender; Wed: at home -
rivers. The word form of house represents the semes of singularity, objectivity, belonging, and masculine gender; presented in the shape of a river
semes of singularity, objectivity, belonging, feminine gender,
Thus, comparing the set of semes in both forms of house -
| rivers, we see that the morpheme -a expresses the masculine gender,
the morpheme -i - semu is feminine.

If we take the word forms city - cities, then we can easily see that the morpheme -th represents the semes of singularity, objectivity, case, gender; in morphemes they represent the semes of plurality, objectivity, and case. Comparing the set of semes, we see that the morpheme -om represents the seme of singularity, and the morpheme -ami represents the seme of plurality.

Unlike the Russian language, the seme of singularity in English is represented only by a zero morpheme, for example: town, play, etc.

The category of plural in both languages is represented by the seme of plurality. In Russian, the seme of plurality is expressed by the morphemes -ы, -и for masculine and feminine nouns (cf. bridges, nuts, paintings, songs, etc.); morpheme –a in masculine and neuter nouns (cf.: cities, houses, a, clouds, etc.). In addition, the seme of plurality is included, together with the semes of case and gender, in the morphemes of word forms; cf.: city - semes of singularity, objectivity, case, gender; cities - semes of plurality, objectivity, case, gender. Thus, we see that the morpheme includes the seme of plurality.

Unlike the Russian language, the seme of plurality in English is represented by number morphemes -s[-s] and -[z], es[-iz] and in a very limited number of nouns by alternating vowels (foot - feet, man - men, etc.). d.). However, due to its limitations, this method cannot be classified as one of the typological features that characterize the category of number in this language.

In both languages, there is a fairly significant group of nouns in which only the plurality seme is represented, which is expressed in the corresponding number morphemes discussed above, and in the forms of agreement of adjectives, verbs and pronouns. Some of these nouns are the same in both languages. These are primarily nouns denoting paired or compound objects:

Scissors

Trousers – trousers

Scales

Some of these nouns do not coincide, and in one language there are nouns in which only the seme of plurality is represented, and in another there are nouns in which there is an opposition between this singularity and plurality.

In Russian, the first group includes nouns:

1. Denoting paired or composite objects:

rake plural h. - rake units h.

swing plural h. - swing units h.

koalas plural h. - box units h.

scabbard pl. h. - scabbard units h.

sled pl. h. - toboggan unit. h.

sleigh pl. h. - sledge units h. hours pl, h, - clock units. h, etc.

2. Denoting mass, substance, material:

firewood plural h. -wood units including yeast pl. h. -yeast units h. perfume plural, h. -wallpaper unit. h. wallpaper many h. -wallpaper units h. ink plural h. -ink units h., etc.

3. Denoting complex actions, processes, states: plural choices. h. - election units. h.. funeral mi. h. - funeral unit, h,

In the English language there are also a number of nouns in which the seme of plurality has been lost and only the seme of singularity remains: barracks - barracks news - news, news works - plant

Above we tried to identify the sum of similar and different features that characterize the category of number in both languages.

For a complete comparative and typological characterization of this category, we need to find out what place this category occupies in the system of both languages.

Turning to the Russian language, we can easily notice a characteristic feature of it - the presence of agreement in number, and not only in number, in adjectives, pronouns, verbs, ordinal numbers, for example: Around noon, a lot of round high clouds, golden-gray, usually appear. with unclear white edges (I.S. Turgenev. Bezhin meadow).

Agreement in number is very clearly expressed in the verb. In the forms of the present tense, number semes are combined with person semes, as a result of which each of the morphemes expressing the present tense of the perfect form or the future tense of the perfect form yu, -u;-eat, -in, -et, -it; ~eat, -im, ~ete, -ite, -yut, -ut, -yat, -ot, clearly express the category of number.

The seme of plurality is contained in the past tense morpheme -i; cf.: Glumov. ...You have raised all the bile in me. What were you offended by in my diary? What did you find new for yourself in it?.. (A.N. Ostrovsky. Simplicity is enough for every wise man).

Thus, we can talk about the deep penetration of the category of number into all parts of speech in the Russian language.

We see a completely different picture in the English language, where the category of number is represented only in the noun system. We find agreement in number only in the demonstrative pronoun, where both pronouns this - this and that - that have plural forms these - these and those - me, forming attributive phrases with nouns with agreement in number:

this house - this house, that house - that house,

these houses - these houses; those houses - those houses.

2. In the Russian language, agreement in number is widespread, but in English it is practically absent.

3. Studying the category of number in the Russian language, due to the listed characteristics, presents greater difficulties for the English than studying the same category in English by Russian students.

Category of the genus. The vast majority of modern Indo-European languages are characterized by the presence of a special lexico-grammatical category of gender. It manifests itself in the ability of nouns to liken themselves in expressing the grammatical meanings of the form of words dependent on them - adjectives, pronouns, etc.

In the Russian language, the category of grammatical gender is widespread. Each noun, as part of its semes that determine its grammatical essence, necessarily has a seme of gender - masculine, feminine or neuter. The category of gender for nouns in the Russian language is of a formal nature, except for nouns denoting people and animals, since it is no longer possible to establish any semantic grounds for the presence of this category in an entire class of nouns, for example, to establish real grounds for the fact that the nouns bridge, warehouse, month belong to the masculine gender, the nouns star, earth, water - to the feminine gender, the nouns - sun, sea, apple - to the neuter gender. Gender semes, together with case and number semes, are included as semantic components in the affixal morphemes of nouns. Thus, the morpheme -еm in the noun month includes semes of objectivity, singularity, masculine gender, case, and the morpheme -ой in the noun star includes semes of objectivity, singularity, feminine gender, case. From a comparison of the set of semes of these two morphemes, it is clear that the difference in gender is expressed by the material difference between the morphemes -em for the masculine gender and -oi for the feminine gender.

The category of grammatical gender in the Russian language has the ability to be combined with forms of agreed words specific for each gender variety - adjectives, ordinal numbers, possessive and demonstrative pronouns, forming free phrases with them; cf.: The blizzard roared madly, but through its roar Filka heard a thin and short whistle (K.G. Paustovsky. Warm bread). A narrow-gauge railway runs near Spas-Kyaepiki (K.G. Paustovsky. Road conversations). Vasya was silent. “Glass is different,” he said. - There is rough, bottle and window. And there is thin, lead glass" (K.G. Paustovsky. Glass master).

As a special characteristic of the morphological structure of the Russian language, absent in other languages, including English, it should be noted the ability of nouns to agree in gender with the forms of the past tense verb; Wed: For a minute the moon came out, and in its dim light loomed a white two-story house in L, Shishkov. Gloomy River).

The category of gender in the Russian language has a formal expression in morphemes. Thus, masculine nouns in the initial form are characterized by the presence of a zero morpheme after the final hard or soft consonant root (cf.: boy, day, rain, maple, etc.) or a morpheme -and after the last vowel root (cf.: stream, swarm, etc.).

Feminine semes are included in the morphemes -a, -i of the initial form or are reflected in the zero morpheme after the soft consonantal root; cf.: cloud, leg, song, door, fortress, etc.

Neuter semes are included in the morphemes -o, e, -mya of the initial form; cf.: face, heart, stirrup, etc.

The feeling of this gender is so strong in the Russian language that it influences the assignment of borrowed words to a certain gender, depending on their design. Thus, inanimate nouns with final -o such as lotto, cinema, bureau, etc. Russian linguistic consciousness were classified as neuter.

The masculine noun metropolitan in its abbreviated form has moved into the class of neuter nouns; cf.: Moscow metro, but Moscow metro.

The essence of this new grammatical category is to distinguish two classes of words in the system of nouns: active nouns and passive nouns.

Active nouns are those which, being the subject of a sentence, control the object. This can include both persons, that is, people, and non-persons, that is, objects that, due to the current situation, are considered active by speakers. Passives are those nouns that, being the subjects of a sentence, do not require an addition. As V.N. Yartseva notes, “the determining factor is the speaker’s attitude to a given fact, generated by a specific situation of objective reality” 2 .

The category of activity - passivity has its material expression in language. Nouns of the active category correlate with the personal pronouns he, she according to their natural gender, with the relative pronoun who - which takes the possessive affix - "s.

Nouns of the passive category correlate only with the personal pronoun it and the relative pronoun which; cf.: She spent a great deal of money on her clothes, which she got from the most fashionable dressmakers in Paris... (W.S. Maugham. The Lion's Skin); “I liked that picture,” she said quietly, “ “I’m sorry you took it back” (H. S. Walpole. A Picture). They are also used in a prepositional phrase with of; cf.: “The first gentleman detached a slip of paper and gave it to her” (J. Galsworthy. Maid in Waiting). “The engine of his car purred into the morning air, while his mind went back to his mother's death and his father's” (G. Gordon, Let the Day Perish).

Category of certainty - uncertainty. In many Western European and some Eastern languages, the noun system is characterized by the category of definiteness - indeterminacy. This category has its own morphological design. Most often it is expressed by the article, as in English, German, and French. In other cases, it can be expressed in the form of affixes, so-called postpositive articles, morphemes added to the end of the word of a noun, as in Bulgarian, Romanian and Scandinavian languages; Wed bolg: momche - boy - momcheto - boy (given)

dinya - watermelon - dinyata - watermelon (given)

Swedish: flicka - girl - flickan - girl (given)
hund - dog - hunden - dog (given)
hus - house - huset - house (given)

The semantics of the article the includes the following semes: 1) the seme of individualization, thanks to which a noun that has the article the is distinguished from the class of objects similar to it; cf.: “Let"s go into the drawing-room,” said Mrs. Low. “The boy wants to clear the table.” (W.S. Maugham. A Casual Affair); 2) the seme of uniqueness, signaling that the object denoted by the corresponding noun is one of a kind; cf.: the sun - the sun, the earth - the earth (our planet); 3) a demonstrative seme, which is common with the corresponding seme of demonstrative pronouns; cf.: I saw the man, about whom you phoned me last night; 4) a generalization seme, which makes it possible to perceive a given object as a generalized designation of all objects of a given class; cf.: The horse is a domestic animal - A horse (any horse) is a domestic animal.

The semantic structure of the indefinite article a, an includes: 1) a classification seme, relating the object with which it is associated to one or another class of objects; cf.: a dog - dog (any dog); 2) the seme of singularity, since nouns with the indefinite article a, an are always thought of in the singular; cf.: His gaze rested for a moment on Anthony, and the intense dark eyes filled with pity (G. Gordon. Let the Day Perish).

In contrast to English, in Russian the category of certainty - uncertainty does not have a morphological expression and is expressed lexically.

The means used for this purpose are the following: I. Particle - that which is added to the noun which is to be individuated; cf.: “What, I finished in Shilov!” - asks Anna Ivanovna. “The remaining stack was swept away as I left. I told you not to leave without it, so as not to end up.” - “Hay is good - “Hay is rare these days: dry, ringing” (M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Laziness on a landowner’s estate).

This particle is especially widely used in Russian dialect speech: ... Pyotr Danilovich laughed loudly from the bottom of his heart: “What a guard... That’s so clever.” - “Oh, father, help me... Do me a favor.” Pyotr Danilovich firmly put him on the ground. “Give me a stick... I can’t bend over,” the old fox, caught in a trap, whined pitifully (V.Ya. Shishkov. Gloomy River).

2. Demonstrative pronouns this, this, this, these or that, that,
then, those for whom in this case the seme of indicativeness is extinguished and
the theme of individualization is put forward.

3. Indefinite pronouns some, some, some,
some.

4. Numeral one, corresponding in its function to the indefinite article a (an); Wed : Fifteen versts from mine
On the estate lives one person I know... (I.S. Turgenev. Burmist).

5. Inverted order, when the subject of the sentence is in postposition to its predicate; cf.: In the very middle
brightly lit courtyard, in the very heat, as they say, lay,
egg to the ground and covering his head with an overcoat, as it seemed to me,
boy (I.S. Turgenev. Kasyan with the Beautiful Sword). Near the sofa stood a girl with pigtails and joyful eyes looking at Potapov... (K.G, Paustovsky, Snow).

Consideration of the category of certainty - uncertainty showed significant differences in this regard in the structure of both languages. The absence of a morphologically expressed category of definiteness - uncertainty in the Russian language deprives a student - a native speaker of the Russian language - of solid support for his native language. And this serves as the cause and source of numerous grammatical errors in students’ speech. To avoid them, it is necessary to study them, carefully compare both languages in terms of this category, and develop a multi-stage methodology for teaching articles at various levels of teaching English.

Quality degree category. The main means of expressing the category of degree of quality are adjectives. In terms of their typological characteristics, adjectives in both languages differ significantly from each other. According to their composition, adjectives in the Russian language are divided into three categories: 1) qualitative adjectives, which directly denote a feature of an object. These adjectives form a number of semantic groups - size (large- small, tall- short); volume (thick- thin); color, taste, temperature, rating, etc.; 2) relative adjectives, denoting a characteristic of an object through its relationship to another object or action. Relative adjectives in Russian are derived from the stems of nouns: stone- stone, spring- spring, Moscow-Moscow etc.; 3) possessive adjectives, denoting that an object belongs to a person or animal; compare: fathers, wife etc.

The absence of a full-fledged category of relative adjectives in the English language is compensated by attributive phrases consisting of two nouns, of which the first noun performs an attributive function, being a definition of the second; compare: stone - stone, a stone wall - stone wall; gold - gold, a gold watch - gold watch; Moscow - Moscow, the Moscow streets - Moscow streets.

Possessive adjectives as a special category are also absent in English. This absence is compensated by phrases in which a Russian adjective corresponds to a noun formalized by the possessive particle "s; cf.: fathershouse- my father's house, wife's bag- my wife's bag, etc.

The next differential feature of Russian adjectives should be considered the presence of two forms of qualitative adjectives: full and short. Adjectives in their full form perform an attributive function in a sentence (cf.: high tower, thblue sky etc.) and occasionally a predicative function (cf.: ourthe street is wide etc.). Short adjectives perform a predicative function in a sentence; compare:

Queen Tamara lived in that towerBeautiful as a heavenly angel. Like a demon, insidious and evil.

(M.Yu. Lermontov. Tamara) They were silent” used to be like this stupid! (A.S. Griboyedov. Woe from mind)

Short adjectives in the predicative function have agreement in gender and number:

Clouds are rushing, clouds are curling, The invisible moon Illuminates the flying snow; The sky is cloudy, the night is cloudy.

(A.S. Pushkin. Demons)

Unlike the Russian language, in English there is no division of adjectives into full and short. The same form of adjectives is used in both attributive and predicative functions: “Yes, Mrs Hartley, 1 don"t feel too fit.” His voice was thick and heavy (G, Gordon. Let the Day Perish).

As noted by E.B. Gulyga and E.I. Schendels, adjectives have two semes: 1) the seme “quality beyond comparison” and 2) the seme “comparativeness.”

The seme “comparativeness” is present in qualitative adjectives in both languages, but the morphological ways of expressing it are structurally different in them.

In Russian, the comparative degree is formed synthetically, that is, by adding a morpheme to the base of an adjective in the positive degree -her(or -to her) or unproductive morphemes -e or ~she; compare: strong - stronger, full - fuller;old - older, thin - thinner etc. Adjectives in the comparative form do not have any agreement.

Another way of forming the comparative degree is the analytical method, in which the words more or less are used before an adjective in the positive degree; cf.: stronger, stronger, stronger, stronger.

The superlative degree of adjectives is formed analytically, by adding the word most to the positive form of the adjective; cf.: the strongest, the oldest, etc.

In English, there are two series of forms of forming comparative degrees: 1) synthetic forms with morphemes -er for comparative forms and -est for superlative forms. The synthetic method of forming degrees of comparison is used for one-syllable and some two-syllable adjectives; compare: strong - stronger - (the) strongest. Easy - easier - (the) easiest; 2) analytical forms formed by the words more and most, added to the unchangeable forms of the positive degree; compare: intelligent - more intelligent - (the) most intelligent.

In the Russian language there is a special form of the superlative degree, the so-called elative, with the seme “extremeness”, denoting an unrelatively high degree of quality. This form in Russian is formed synthetically - by adding the affixal morphemes -eysh (-im, -aya, -ee) and -aysh (-sh, ~aya, ~oe), if the base of the adjective ends in the back consonants g, k, x cf.: closest, most necessary, smallest, etc. In English, the elative is expressed analytically; cf.: a most beautiful woman.

Category of type and time. Among the various grammatical categories that are distinguished in the system of the verb as a special part of speech; It is necessary to name the category of type and category of time. These two grammatical categories in different languages have far from the same development and a very diverse morphological composition. At the same time, they are closely related to each other, since species-specific morphological indicators simultaneously serve as temporary indicators, and semantically, species-specific meanings are often layered on temporal ones. These categories, like any other grammatical category, which represents the largest lexico-grammatical category of words united by both common semantic and morphological-syntactic features, should be considered as two typological values correlated with each other.

The type category is usually defined as a lexical and grammatical category that conveys the characteristics of the course of an action or process denoted by a verb - repetition, duration, multiplicity, instantaneous action, or effectiveness, completeness-incompleteness, or, finally, ultimateness, that is, the relation of action to its inner limit.

The listed characteristics of the course of an action or process receive a wide variety of morphological or morphological-syntactic expressions in different languages, in connection with which we can talk about different divisions of the category of species. So, for example, we can talk about the initial form, denoting the beginning of the process, if it is expressed in the appropriate form (cf.: Turkish okur oldu - began, began to read, where the form of the initial form is expressed by the stem of the indicative verb and the personal form of the verb olmak - to be ), about the continuous form, as, for example, in the English form am writing, etc.

In the Russian language, the main species differences pass along the line of expressing the relationship of an action to its internal limit, in connection with which two types are distinguished in this language: the imperfect form and the perfect form.

The imperfect form expresses an action in its flow, in the process of completion, without any indication of its limit; Wed verbs, read, speak, etc.

The perfect form expresses an action limited by the limit of self at any moment of its implementation or communicating the result of a given action or process; cf.: write, come, say, etc.

The system of types in the Russian language has its own distinctive feature - the presence of correlative pairs of verbs, which form correlative series of forms that permeate the entire system of verbal forms with the identity of their lexical meaning; Wed: wear - carry; post - carried; give - give; come on - give; gave - gave and HD,

To express specific meanings in the Russian language there is its own special system of morphological means:

1.Suffixes -ыв-, -ив-, -ов-, -ев- with alternating vowels or
consonants added to the verb stem; thus forming
imperfective verbs from perfective verbs; compare:
warm -» warm; show -» show; close -> close; stroll - stroll.

2. The suffix -nu-, added to the verb stem; are formed
perfective verbs from imperfective verbs, cf.;
move -» move; shout -> scream.

3.Prefixes with-, na-, for-, o-, po-, from- and some others; compare:
write -» write; eat - eat; build -> build; build -> rebuild; hide - "hide; go blind -> go blind
etc.

4. Change in root vowels, in some cases accompanied by alternation of vowels in the verb stem; cf.: decide ->
decide; imagine -> imagine.

5. Changing the place of stress with the same phonemic composition of the word: pour -» pour; cut ~> cut.

In addition to the same-root aspectual pairs of verbs, there is a limited number of pairs formed from different stems; cf.: take -> take; talk - say; put.

The development of linguistic means of expressing the category of aspect in the Old Russian period began with the emergence and gradual increase in the number of prefixed verbs, in which prefixes, joining the stem of the verb with the general meaning of a certain action or process, gave it the meaning of perfectivity. We observe a similar process in the ancient Germanic languages; Wed function of the perfect particle ga- in Gothic, ge- in Old High German and Old English. As noted by L.P. Yakubinsky, the development of the prefix expression of species played a decisive role in the fate of the temporary forms of the aorist and imperfect."

Gradually, this technique became more and more widespread, and the use of temporary forms of the aorist and imperfect became unnecessary, and these temporary forms gradually died out. Only the perfect has been preserved, for example hodil' am, hodil' ecu, hod'il (is), expressing a perfect action, which, as a result of the disappearance of the auxiliary verb, gave rise to the past tense form of the modern period of development of the Russian language.

In Old English, the category of aspect was represented, as in Old Russian, by two forms - imperfect, which is the stem of the verb, usually not complicated by prefixes, for example wyrcan - to do, to work; settan - put, put, and perfect, formed with the help of prefixes, mainly with the help of the prefix z e ~ and some others, for example sewyrcan - make; jesettan - put, put.

Just as in Old Russian, and even more so in modern Russian, verbs of the imperfect form had correlative verbs of the perfect form, as a rule, with the same lexical meaning, for example: sellan - give - ^esellan - give;
bindan - bind - jebindan - tie, etc.
But already in the Old English period one can find a number of cases when the addition of a prefix did not entail the formation of a perfective verb, but the formation of a new lexical unit, that is, a word with a meaning different from the meaning of the corresponding imperfective verb, for example: cuman - to come; becuman - to happen; sittan - sit; besittan - to besiege, etc.
The two-species system proved to be unstable during the Old English period. On the one hand, aspectual prefixes gradually acquired the meaning of word-forming morphemes, which remained until
present tense, for example: to come - to come, to become -
become; to lie - to lie; to belie - to slander; on the other hand - in
During the Middle English period, there was a gradual disappearance of prefixes, due to which the morphological means of expression
the types of imperfect and perfect were gradually lost. Along with them, correlative aspect pairs of verbs disappeared, and thus the category of aspect was lost in the Middle English period. This has led to the fact that in modern English, Russian aspectual correlative pairs of verbs usually correspond to one verb in English; compare: receive - to receive and receive - to receive; get up - to get up and get up - to get up.

Based on the understanding of aspect as a grammatical category that characterizes an action based on the signs of its occurrence and has fixed morphological indicators, prof. A.I. Smirnitsky identified in the system of grammatical categories of modern English the category of aspect, consisting of two types - general aspect, represented in the present tense by zero morphemes and ~(e)s (3rd person singular), in the past tense by the morpheme -ed ( -t) or forms with alternating vowels such as sit - sat, speak - spoke, etc., in the future tense shall (will) + V and denoting the very fact of the action, and the continuous form represented by the verb to be in the form of the corresponding tense and the -ing form, for example: I am sitting, he is standing, they are walking, etc.

A different point of view on the problem of aspect in English is expressed by Prof. I.P. Ivanova. She believes that there is no aspect as a special grammatical category in the English language. She calls groups of temporary forms: basic, continuous, perfect and perfect-continuous - discharges. She believes that the main category (Indefinite) is the only form capable of conveying dynamics and changing events. Other bits detail the action in terms of simultaneity or precedence, but are not used to convey the change of actions over time. I.P. Ivanova believes that the main category is indifferent to the category of aspect, since it can, firstly, convey the meaning of singleness and repetition and, secondly, along the lines of non-finite verbs and dual verbs, it is synonymous with forms of the continuous category, these latter and perfect forms are mutual are opposite in their specific content, since the specific content of a long discharge is the process in its course, and the specific content of the perfect is the action in its execution. Both long-term and perfect discharge, according to I.P. Ivanova, is not specific, but only has a grammatical meaning of aspect, closely intertwined with the category of time, which is considered as leading in this system.

There are absolute forms of time that do not depend on other tense forms in a sentence and are determined by their relationship with the moment of speech; present tense form, denoting an action coinciding with the moment of speech; the past tense form, expressing an action that took place before the moment of speech, and the future tense form, conveying an action that will take place after the moment of speech.

In the Old Russian language, the category of tense was characterized by a greater number of forms than in the modern language, which is explained by the weaker development of the category of aspect in this language. The category of time in the Old Russian language consisted of the following forms: present tense - vedu, vedesha, ved(t), etc.; imperfectives - vedakh, vedash, led, etc., expressing a long-term or repeated action in the past; aorist - vedokh, vede, vede etc., expressing an instant action in the past; perfect - I am led, I am led,ecuvel,eculed etc., conveying the effective nature of an action long past - byah led, byah led, byashe, byashe led etc.; the future, which was previously simple, and the former future - I will lead, I will lead to etc., which named an action that will occur before another action in the future and is correlated with it.

The subsequent development of the imperfect and perfect forms led to the gradual disappearance of the imperfect and aorist and to the expansion of the semantics of the perfect forms, which acquired the ability to express the meaning of the perfect form if the verb had a prefix, for example brought, took away etc., and the meaning of the imperfect form if the verb did not have a prefix, for example carried, led etc.

IN In relation to the categories of aspect and tense, the Russian language has changed its typology due to the development of forms of the category of aspect, which permeates all forms of the verb, on the one hand, and due to the disappearance of a number of forms of the category of tense, on the other.

The category of time was expressed by the forms of two tenses - present and past; compare: ic cume - I come, ic com - Icame, I came. In addition, all verbs fell into two classes - the class of verbs with alternating vowels (ic bide - ic bad - wait, expect, ic fare - ic for - drive etc.) and the class of verbs with a dental suffix (ic lære - ic lærde - teach, teach).

According to the point of view presented by a number of scientists, the system of tense forms of modern English consists of two correlative series of tense forms - absolute tense forms, which include forms of the Indefinite group, and relative tense forms, which include tenses of the perfect and continuous groups. Species meanings, without forming, according to this point of view, a morphologically expressed category, are, as it were, superimposed on temporary meanings.

Based on the morphological criteria used in languages to express voice, it can be argued that the number of voices in different languages is very different. So, for example, in the Turkish language there are five voices: main, reciprocal, the morphological means of expression of which is the affix -15 with variants (cf.: vurmak - beat, vuru$mak - fight, fighthuddle); reflexive, formed using the affix -(!)p with variants (cf.: giymek - dress, giyinmek - dress)", passive, formed using the affix -il and its variants or the affix -p with verb stems with a vowel (cf.: secmek - choose, secilmek - to be chosen; almak - take, alinmak- to be taken); forced, using the affix -dir with variants (cf.: yemek- There is, yedirmek - (to) feed (to force to eat).

1. Active voice, expressed by certain syntactic structures, covering transitive verbs denoting an action aimed at a direct object, expressed in the accusative case form without a preposition; cf.: Golutvin. I went foryou, observed, collecting information, features from your life, wrote your biography and attached a portrait. In particular, he vividly depicted your latest activities. So would you like to buy the original from me, otherwise I’ll sell it to a magazine.... (L.N. Ostrovsky. Simplicity is enough for every wise man).

2. Reflexive-medial voice, the morphological indicator of which is the affix -sya, added to the base of the transitive verb. Verbs of reflexive-medial voice, depending on their semantics, fall into several groups, of which we will name only the main ones: a) verbs of proper reflexive meaning, denoting an action that extends to the bearer of the action, that is, an action in which the subject and object are represented as one and by the same person (cf.: dress, put on shoes, powder, etc.); b) verbs of reciprocal meaning, denoting the action of two or more persons, each of whom is both the producer and the object of the same action on the part of another person (cf.: hug, kiss)", c) verbs of reciprocal meaning, denoting the concentration of action in the producer himself (cf.: to be happy, to stop, etc.) For example: At short stops, the month stopped along with the train, and its light seemed to become brighter - probably because of the silence that had ensued (K.G. Paustovsky. Fenino’s happiness ).

3. Passive voice, the morphological indicators of which are the affix -sya, attached to active voice verbs, or forms of passive participles formed from transitive verbs using the suffixes -m-, -n- (-nn), -t- in combination with personal forms of the verb to be. In this case, the noun denoting a person or thing that is the subject of an action takes the form of the instrumental case, the so-called instrumental actor; Wed: On the foot stood a bouquet of wild flowers - chamomile, lungwort, wild rowan. The bouquet must have been collected recently (K.G. Paustovsky. Rainy Dawn).

In English, morphologically expressed features have two voices: the active or active voice, which exists in the forms of the indicative and its constituent tense forms and is associated with a direct or prepositional object, and the passive or passive voice, expressed in analytical forms consisting of forms of the verb to be and the participle of the 11th conjugated verb, that is, Vbe+VpII.

However, if these verbs develop a transitive meaning, semes of transitivity, and, therefore, require a direct object, then they acquire all the characteristics of a transitive verb, that is, they are included in the series of verbs that have both voices; cf.: to fly - to fly; to fly a plane - to pilot the plane, the plane was flown by Jim Atkins - the plane was piloted by Jim Atkins; to run - to run, to run a hotel - to manage the hotel, the hotel was run by a young man - the hotel was run by a young man.

6. Functional differences in the use of formspledges in Russian and English.

The presence of similar grammatical categories in both languages, although they have slightly different morphological expressions, does not always indicate their typological similarity. Their distribution and functional use must also be taken into account.

A comparison of the cases of use of forms of the passive voice in both languages shows that their functioning in speech is completely different. If the English language prefers to use passive forms in sentences where a person or object in the function of the subject is influenced by someone else, then the Russian language in a similar situation more often uses the active voice form with a direct object, formalized in the accusative case in the position before the predicate; cf.: this long bridge was built by the workers of our factory last year - this long bridge was built by the workers of our factory. Sentences of this structure are found frequently and determine the proportion of the passive form in both languages.

1. The predicate of indefinite personal sentences in the form of the active voice in Russian corresponds to the predicate in
the passive form of the corresponding sentences in English;
Wed: we were told good news;
John was given a good mark.

2. The predicate of the main sentence, expressed by verbs of speech or
judgments in the 3rd person plural form (they say, believe, consider, assume, etc.) usually correspond to the passive form of the same verbs in English. This correspondence is especially often observed in newspaper, political and scientific literature.

The category of modality can be expressed by different means in different languages. In the English and Russian languages, modality is expressed both by grammatical means - forms of moods, and by lexical ones: modal words perhaps, probably, probably, it seems, apparently, etc. - certainly, maybe, perhaps, probably, possibly, certainly, etc.; modal verbs can, be able, want, desire, must, etc. -can. m must, etc.; modal particles - perhaps, hardly, shaken, etc., as well as intonation.

The relationship of action to reality can be different: if the action is thought of as real, then we have a modality of reality; if the action is thought of as unreal, possible or impossible, as desirable or probable, then we have the modality of invalidity. The main grammatical means of expressing the modality of reality is the indicative mood, or indicative. It denotes an action that is perceived by the speaker as corresponding to reality. Hence the presence in all forms of the modality of reality of the seme “reality”. The indicative mood, both in one and in another language, denotes a real action that occurs in terms of the present tense, has occurred in the past or is about to happen in the future, as a result of which this mood receives its expression in the corresponding forms of tense and person. Therefore, although the modality of reality is similar in its content in both languages, nevertheless, the methods of its expression depend on the system of tense forms, which, as is known, have significant differences in these languages. So, for example, in the Russian language, the modality of reality relating to the present tense is hiccupped by the present tense form; in English it can be expressed not only by the Present Indefinite form, but also by the Present Perfect Continuous form; cf.: It was a wonderful opportunity, and when he had finished his explanations, Isabel was once more all smiles. “You foolish boy, why have you been trying to make me miserable,” His face lit up at her words and his eyes flashed (W. Maugham. The Fall of Edward Barnard). Significantly greater differences are observed in the system of grammatical means that exist in both languages to express the modality of invalidity.

The subjunctive mood is formed analytically - by combining a verb in the past tense form with a particle would, which can be located either before or after the verb form, directly or at a distance; compare:

“So, let’s go quietly grandson

With this note to O... to that...

To the neighbor... and tell him to

So that he doesn't say a word,

So that he doesn’t call me...”

(A.S. Pushkin. Evgeny Onegin)

The subjunctive mood combines a number of semes: seme “unreality”; semu "desire"; cf.: And that from now on he should only dream of one thing: that the old rusty chain (he had already broken it once) be removed and bought a new, strong one (M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Faithful Trezor); this “condition”; cf.: ...and if there was a six to the right, and a king of diamonds to the left, then he would have completely won back, bet everything on p and won fifteen thousand clean, then he would have bought himself a pacer from the regimental commander, a couple more horses, bought a phaeton would (L.N. Tolstoy. Two Hussars), this is “hypothetical”; semu "intention"; this “wish”, etc.

A special feature of the Russian subjunctive mood is its timeless nature, that is, it can express action both in the present and in the past and in the future; cf.: I would like to know how you will approach the pike with your love." - the ruff cooled him down (M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Crucian carp is an idealist).

The limited nature of the subjunctive mood results in the ability of the Russian form of the indefinite mood to be combined with the particle would to express modality; Wed: Let us not get lost! ~ I said to the coachman. But, having not received an answer, he asked the question more clearly: “What, let’s get to the station, coachman?” Let’s not get lost 1? (L.N. Tolstoy. Snowstorm).

The seme “condition” can, in addition to the form of the subjunctive mood, also be expressed by the form of the 2nd person singular of the imperative mood; Wed: Yes! - Ivan Dmitry got angry again. “You despise suffering, and if your finger gets caught in the door, you’ll scream at the top of your lungs!” (A.P. Chekhov. Chamber No. b).

This use of the imperative form in English is completely impossible.

In contrast to the Russian language, the modality of invalidity in English is expressed by four so-called indirect moods: subjunctive 1, subjunctive II, presumptive and conditional."

The subjunctive mood I, like the Russian subjunctive mood, has a timeless character. It expresses neither the category of person nor the category of number. As the main seme, the subjunctive I has the seme ((hypotheticality, “uncertainty in the reality of a given phenomenon”; but at the same time it does not express any opposition to what takes place in reality; cf.: Mrs Erlynne... As for me, if suffering be an expiation, then at this moment I have expiated all my faults, whatever they have been; for to-night you have made a heart in one who had it not, made it and broken it (O. Wilde. Lady Windermere's Fan).

The subjunctive mood II has “unreality” as the main seme, in which it occupies a polar position with the indicative forms, in which the seme “reality” is present. Unlike subjunctive 1, the seme “present”, or “future”, or the seme “past” is added to the main seme “unreality”, as a result of which subjunctive II has different forms of the present tense (cf.: If I came, If I were ) and past tense forms (cf.: If I had come. If I had been); cf.: And so it would have been strange and unaccountable, if it had been a stuffed trout, but it was not. That trout was plaster-of-Paris (J.K. Jerome. Three Men in a Boat).

The presumptive mood, as the name itself shows, has “assumption” as its main subject. Its morphological structure consists of the verb should + Vinf. Thus, this mood does not have any grammatical categories; cf.: Was not a South Sea merchant, and he had agencies in many of the islands of the Pacific. He had suggested that Edward should go to Tahiti for a year or two... (W.S. Maugham. The Fall of Edward Barnard).

This mood in Russian corresponds to the form of the subjunctive mood.

The category of modality also finds its expression in forms of the imperative mood. This mood in both languages can express the will, request, order of the speaker or encouragement of the interlocutor to action. In this regard, the main seme of the forms of this mood is the seme “motivation”. If the forms of this mood are combined with the negation of not, then the seme “incentive” is extinguished and the seme “prohibition” appears instead.

The imperative mood in both languages has the categories of person and number. The 2nd person singular and plural in the Russian language is expressed in synthetic forms: read - read, write - write; in English, unlike Russian, there is only one form for the 2nd person of both numbers: read, write, take, go, etc.

The 1st person plural form, addressed to either one or more interlocutors, can be expressed in two ways; if the verb is perfective, then this is a form expressed synthetically (let's go, let's go, take, say)", if the verb is imperfect, then this form receives an analytical expression (we'll read, we'll write, we'll speak).

These two Russian forms in English correspond to only one analytical form - let us (let"s) read, let us (let"s) go, let us (let"s) take, etc.

The 3rd person form of both numbers is expressed analytically in both languages; cf.: let him come - let him come; let them come - let them come.

So, in the Russian form we find a “condition” for this; compare: if he worked at a factory, he would master several professions, which can be replaced by an equivalent sentence if, while working at a factory, he would master several professions,

In the sentence, for the life of me, I don’t remember, the seme “assumption” appears.

Face category. In a number of languages - Indo-European, Turkic, Finno-Ugric - there are special morphemes to designate a person, that is, the subject of speech, the so-called personal endings. They are used to express the relationship of the action and its subject to the speaking person. Personal endings of the verb, thus, serve as a morphological means of expressing the grammatical category of the person.

However, there are languages, such as Japanese, Chinese, Indonesian and some others, in which there are no morphological means of facial expression; Wed; Japanese watakushi wa yukimas - I'm going, anata wa yukimas - you're going (yukimas - going, going, going, etc.), etc.; indonesian saja menulis - I write, engkau menulis - you write, you write (menulis - I write, you write, writes, etc.), etc. In this case, the category of person is expressed only lexically using personal pronouns or nouns, which must be used in a sentence to avoid ambiguity.

As individual languages testify, the personal endings of verbs were formed from personal pronouns, which were once placed at the end of words denoting actions and processes; Wed: Tatar, sin kile! sin - you come, without kilebez - we come; Finnish me sanomme - we say, me sanotte - you say, etc. In further development, the personal forms gradually simplified and began to differ in their sound form from the forms of the corresponding personal pronouns; Wed: Tatar, min baram - I'm going, I'm going; The first person morpheme -m is a simplified form of the 1st person singular personal pronoun - min -ya.

The personal forms of the verb contain the following semes: seme “subject of speech”, which appears in the 1st person morpheme, seme “addressee of speech” - in the 2nd person morpheme, seme “non-participant of speech” - in the 3rd person morpheme. In addition, there is a certain additional set of semes included in certain facial morphemes. Thus, the seme “impersonality” is revealed in all three personal forms of the verb; cf.: if you drive more slowly, you will go further (proverb); What we have, we don’t keep; if we lose, we cry (proverb); one is greeted by one's clothes, one is seen off by one's mind (proverb); seme “repetition of action”; Wed: I am re-reading the letter.

In Russian, the category of person is expressed by personal forms of the verb - a special form for each person in the present tense of the imperfective form, in the present-future tense of the indicative mood and in the form of the imperative mood: -и (-и, soft consonant), -te.

Units Mn. h.

1st l. -yu (-y) 1st l. –eat (-em, -im)

2nd l. -eat (-eat, -ish) 2 liters. – here (-yote, -ite)

3rd l. -et (- ot, -it) 3rd l. –yut (-ut, -at, -yat)

In the past tense of the imperfective and perfective forms and in the subjunctive mood, the category of person is not expressed in personal forms.

In English, there are two ways to morphologically express the category of person: 1) using the morpheme -es(-s) in the 3rd person singular of the affirmative form of the present common tense (he goes to school in the morning; she comes home late; John takes English lessons); 2) using auxiliary verbs have (has) for the Perfect category; am (is, are) for the Continuous category; do (does) for interrogative and negative forms of the Indefinite category.

A grammatical category is a generalized, abstract linguistic meaning inherent in a number of words, word forms, syntactic structures and finding its regular (standard) expression in grammatical forms, namely in the opposition of variants (forms) of units. Unlike the lexical meaning characteristic of a particular word, the grammatical meaning is not concentrated in one word, but, on the contrary, is characteristic of many words of the language.

The following types of categories are distinguished:

*semantic category- some generalized meaning that does not necessarily have a clearly expressed formal designation. For example, the semantic category of animate/inanimate. For example, the semantic category of number includes the morphological category of number, numerals, as well as nouns, adjectives and adverbs that reflect quantity, and some verbs whose lexical meaning includes plurality or singularity.

Category of determination– a semantic category reflected in languages by articles. Structures with an article are considered either as syntactic structures or as morphological categories of the noun. The category of determination has two meanings: uncertainty and certainty.

Category of representation– according to A.I. Smirnitsky, a morphological category that ensures the use of words of a certain part of speech in secondary functions. This category is most fully developed for the verb. The verb system contrasts forms in which the verb represents (represents) an action as an action with forms of the verb that represent the action as something else. Forms that represent an action as an action are finite forms, verb forms that represent an action as something else are impersonal forms. In English, among non-finite forms, there are forms that represent an action as an object (infinitive and gerund) and forms that represent an action as an attribute (participle). In Slavic languages, in addition, among non-personal forms there are forms that represent an action as a sign of another action (gerunds).

Typology of parts of speech

In order to establish typological characteristics of several languages at the level of parts of speech, it is necessary to find criteria that would be of the most general nature, so that they could be applicable to the maximum number of languages.

There are several such criteria:

1) Semantic the criterion presupposes the attribution of a given word to a broad conceptual category. For example, a noun denotes an object, an adjective – a characteristic, etc.

2) Morphological the criterion is used to assign a given word to a certain category based on its morphological characteristics. So, for example, the presence of a declension paradigm indicates that a word with such a paradigm belongs to the category of nouns if this morphological feature coincides with the semantic feature of objectivity.

3) Functional the criterion assumes the ability of a word to function in a sentence. So, for example, the main function of an adverb is to characterize the predicate or definition.

4) Compatibility criterion determines how words can be grammatically combined with each other. Thus, adverbs, when combined with adjectives and verbs, are not combined with either nouns or pronouns. For example, adverb Fine, English adverb well

5) Derivational the criterion implies the ability of words of a given part of speech to form new words of a certain type. Thus, in the Russian language we can name a number of word-forming affixes, the presence of which indicates that a given word refers to a noun; Wed affixes - box in words coachman, model etc. In English: -ship in words friendship, -membership etc., in Belarusian language -tsa: sun, sir, aken.

It is worth noting that, despite significant morphological and syntactic differences in the structure of the Russian, Belarusian and English languages, co-
becoming parts of speech in them turns out to be largely similar (in English, in addition to parts of speech similar to the Russian and Belarusian languages, there are also articles and linking verbs).

Noun typology.

Name . The noun noun in the Russian language is characterized by the presence of three grammatical categories: 1) the category of case, expressed by the declension paradigm, consisting of six cases; 2) the category of number, consisting of two numbers - singular and plural; 3) categories of grammatical gender, representing three genders - masculine, feminine and neuter, having a corresponding morphological expression. Unlike Russian, the name is a being in English language characterized by the presence of two grammatical categories: 1) the category of number, consisting of two numbers - singular and plural; 2) the category of determinativity (certainty - uncertainty), expressed by articles in preposition.

K. NUMBERS qty. relations that exist in real action. (in the ancient Indo-European I-th category of numbers was represented by 3 numbers: singular, dual, and plural). In RY and AY cat. numbers are represented by the semes of singularity and plurality, which find their expression in the forms singular and plural. h.

The real form of expression is the case form (case form), represented. a morpheme, comp. from def. scale, cat. together with the root morpheme gives def. agreement to the word. A set of case forms, composition and definition. with changes, arranging declination.

The presence/absence of cases is associated with the presence/absence/weak development of prepositions. (in Finnish - 14 days, in Italian, French - no).

Each noun, as part of its semes that determine its grammatical essence, necessarily has a seme of gender - masculine, feminine or neuter. Category of certainty - uncertainty. This category has its own morphological design. Most often it is expressed by an article.

1. A particle is added to a noun that needs to be individualized

2. Demonstrative pronouns this, this, this, these or that, that, that, those.

3. Indefinite pronouns some, some, some, some.

12. Verb typology In P, the verb has the grammatical categories of tense, mood, voice, kind, faces, numbers and sort of.B A (species, genus) PLEDGE in A, P: active voice, passive voice. Constructions with active voice verbs are called active, and constructions with passive voice verbs – passive Usually the passive construction is used when the speaker needs to emphasize the object of the action. This necessity is most often caused by the fact that the actor is unknown, difficult to define, or appears to the speaker to be less important than the object of the action: The church was built in 1887.

MOOD R and A: indicative(the Indicative Mood), subjunctive mood(the Subjunctive Mood) and imperative mood(the Imperative Mood).In Russian subjunctive mood is formed by a combination of the particle “would (b)” and the verb form with -l (would have come, would have brought, sang b, warmer b) - as you can see, the forms of the subjunctive mood vary in number and gender, but do not have forms of tense and person. in A: to express desirability, (Past Indefinite Tense) or Past Complete Tense (Past Perfect Tense), as well as the verbs should, would, may, might, could in combination with infinitives. Imperative mood expresses a request or command, as well as an incentive to action on the part of the speaker. Imperative form English verb coincides with its infinitive: Close the door! - Close the door! Pass the bread, please. - Please pass the bread. In contrast from English, in Russian the form of the imperative mood changes according to persons and numbers. Forms of the imperative mood can express various shades of motivation to action.
Thus, in English, various shades of motivation to action are created only by intonation.

SPECIES CATEGORY There are two types in Russian: perfect And imperfect.In And there is no grammatical category of aspect, the aspect of the verb in a sentence can be determined analytically by comparing it with the translation into Russian.
Grammatical category of person and number IN in Russian and in English the verb has three persons(first, second, third) and two numbers (singular and plural).
In English the third person plural form is not expressed in verb forms, and the singular form is expressed by the verbs to be and to have in the present tense (He is a student; he has this book), verbs in the Present Indefinite by adding –(e)s (He reads English well).

Time category There are three tenses in Russian: present, past and future, and there are five forms of time, since the category of time is related to the category of aspect. To the English verb tense system tenses include present, past, perfect(time)+16 tenses. Present tense– verb tense, indicating that the process called by the verb occurs simultaneously with the moment of speech. In Russian, a distinction is made between the actual present tense (present actual) and the improperly present tense (present irrelevant). Actually, the present tense means that the process called the verb coincides with the moment of speech: The teacher reads, the students listen. In English, this action is conveyed by The Present Continuous Tense: The teacher is reading; the pupils are listening to. Moreover, in English, The Present Perfect - Continuous Tense is used to denote an action that began at a certain moment before the moment of conversation and continues until the present moment: We have been waiting for you since 10 o’clock - We have been waiting for you since 10 o’clock. Improper present tense(irrelevant) has two varieties: present constant And present abstract.Present constant tense denotes a process the implementation of which has no time restrictions: the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea. Present abstract time denotes repeating processes, the implementation of which is not associated with a specific time: He often goes to the theater. In English, these processes are denoted by The Present Indefinite Tense: The Volga runs into the Caspian See; He often goes to the theater. The present tense forms of the Russian and English languages can express the meanings inherent in the forms of the future and past tenses. In this case, the situation and context play a big role. Forms of the present tense, used in the meaning of the future, express confidence in the imminent implementation of the process: Tomorrow I am going to the theater - I go (am going) to the theater tomorrow. The forms of the present tense in the meaning of the past bring the described event closer to the moment of speech and add expressiveness. In Russian this use is called “present historical” tense, and in English “present dramatic” tense.

Past tense forms have several meanings.
Perfect past tense verbs, firstly, denote an action that took place in the past, and the result remains until the present: He built a fence around his house. In English, this action is expressed by The Present Perfect Tense: He has built a fence around his house. Secondly, an action that occurred before another, past: When they arrived, she had already prepared dinner. In English, The Past Perfect Tense is used to convey such an action: She had already cooked dinner when they came.. Future tense verbs denote an action that is performed (or will be performed) after the moment of speech. Future tense form of imperfective verbs complex, it denotes that the process named by the verb will be carried out as a long or repeated process, but does not indicate its completion or result, or the action will take place at a certain point in the future: I will visit him twice a month; Tomorrow at seven o'clock I will be working in the garden. In English, this action corresponds to The Future Indefinite Tense: I shall visit him twice a month; and also The Future Continuous Tense: I shall be working in the garden at this time tomorrow. The Future Perfect Continuous is used to express an action that began before a certain point in the future and continues for a certain period up to that point: By next June he will have been living here for ten years . As you can see, the English verb in this case is translated into Russian by a verb of the future tense of the imperfect form. Future form of perfective verbs simple, it indicates the time of completion of the process and indicates its completion, while the time by which the process will be completed can be indicated: By the end of this year they will buy a car. In English, such an action can be expressed by The Future Perfect Tense: They will have bought a new car by the end of this year.

GRAMMAR CATEGORY, a system of opposing series of grammatical forms with homogeneous meanings. In this system, the defining feature is the categorizing feature (see Language category), for example, the generalized meaning of tense, person, voice, etc., which unites the system of meanings of individual tenses, persons, voices, etc. into the system of appropriate forms. A necessary feature of a grammatical category is the unity of its meaning and the expression of this meaning in the system of grammatical forms.

Grammatical categories are divided into morphological and syntactic. Among the morphological grammatical categories, there are, for example, the grammatical categories of aspect, voice, tense, mood, person, gender, number, case; The consistent expression of these categories characterizes entire grammatical classes of words (parts of speech). The number of opposed members within such categories can be different: for example, in the Russian language, the grammatical category of gender is represented by a system of three rows of forms expressing the grammatical meanings of masculine, feminine and neuter, and the grammatical category of number is represented by a system of two rows of forms - singular and plural . In languages with developed inflection, grammatical categories are inflectional, that is, those whose members can be represented by forms of the same word within its paradigm (for example, in Russian - tense, mood, person of the verb, number, case, gender, degrees comparisons of adjectives) and non-inflectional (classifying, classification), that is, those whose members cannot be represented by forms of the same word (for example, in Russian - gender and animate-inanimate nouns). The belonging of some grammatical categories (for example, in Russian - aspect and voice) to an inflectional or non-inflectional type is the subject of debate.

There are also grammatical categories that are syntactically identified, that is, indicating, first of all, the compatibility of forms as part of a phrase or sentence (for example, in Russian - gender, case), and non-syntactically identified, that is, expressing, first of all, various semantic abstractions, abstract from the properties, connections and relations of extra-linguistic reality (for example, in Russian - type, tense); grammatical categories such as number or person combine features of both of these types.

The languages of the world differ:

1) by the number and composition of grammatical categories; compare, for example, the category of verb aspect specific to some languages - Slavic and others; the category of the so-called grammatical class - person or thing - in a number of Caucasian languages; the category of definiteness-indeterminacy, inherent primarily in languages with articles; the category of politeness, or respectfulness, characteristic of a number of Asian languages (in particular, Japanese and Korean) and associated with the grammatical expression of the speaker’s attitude towards the interlocutor and the persons in question;

2) by the number of opposed members within the same category; compare the traditionally identified 6 cases in the Russian language and up to 40 in some Dagestan ones;

3) by which parts of speech contain one or another category (for example, in the Nenets language, nouns have the categories of person and tense). These characteristics may change during the historical development of one language; compare three forms of number in Old Russian, including dual, and two in modern Russian.

Lit.: Shcherba L.V. About parts of speech in the Russian language // Shcherba L.V. Selected works on the Russian language. M., 1957; Gukhman M. M. Grammatical category and structure of paradigms // Research on the general theory of grammar. M., 1968; Katsnelson S. D. Typology of language and speech thinking. L., 1972; Lomtev T. P. Sentence and its grammatical categories. M., 1972; Typology of grammatical categories. Meshchaninov readings. M., 1973; Bondarko A. V. Theory of morphological categories. L., 1976; Panfilov V. 3. Philosophical problems of linguistics. M., 1977; Lyons J. Introduction to theoretical linguistics. M., 1978; Kholodovich A. A. Problems of grammatical theory. L., 1979; Russian grammar. M., 1980. T. 1. P. 453-459; Typology of grammatical categories. L., 1991; Melchuk I. A. Course of general morphology. M., 1998. T. 2. Part 2; Gak V.G. Theoretical grammar of the French language. M., 2004.