Separating unions in Russian are examples. Russian grammar

Unions

Conjunctions are functional words expressing syntactic relations between the members of a sentence, parts of a complex sentence and individual sentences:

The stars are fading and go out.

The coachmen tied the bells, to the ringing did not attract the attention of the watchmen.

The intention to find his son did not leave him. But it matures in jerks - it will ache in the heart, then it will subside and be forgotten.

Unions occupy a strictly defined place in the proposal, but are not members of the proposal.

In the semantics of conjunctions, as in the semantics of prepositions, lexical and grammatical meanings are combined.

Unions GC- this is their general indication of the connection of syntactic units, the nature of the syntactic connection between them. According to the GZ, unions are divided into coordinating and subordinating.

LZ unions- this is an indication of specific types of syntactic relations (attachment, adversative, etc.).

Among the unions there are also those that have only one LZ, i.e. unambiguous ( so - relations of consequence), and those that have several DLs, i.e. polysemantic. For example, union Yes can have the following values:

Connecting ( Day and night - day away);

Attachment ( I walked alone, and even at night);

adversative ( The eye sees, but the tooth is numb).

I. Coordinating conjunctions by meaning are divided into:

Connecting ( and, yes, and…and, neither…nor, also, too);

Opposite ( but, but, yes, but, nevertheless, nevertheless, however);

Dividers ( either, or, either… either, or… or, then… that, not that… not that, either… or);

Comparative ( like ... and, not only ... but also);

Connecting ( and yes and yes yes);

Explanatory ( that is, somehow, or, namely).

II. Subordinating conjunctions by value are divided into:

Temporary ( until, barely, only, only, after, since, before);

Explanatory ( what, to, as, as if);

Target ( in order to);

Causal ( because, since, for, because, due to the fact that);

Conditional ( if, if, once, if, when, how soon);

Concessions ( although, let, let, otherwise, for nothing, meanwhile, despite the fact that);

Comparative ( as, as if, as if, as if, exactly);

Consequences ( so before that).

Types of unions by structure

(Russian grammar, v.1)

§ 1673. According to their structure, all unions are divided into simple(single word) and composite(non-conditional).

Simple unions: a, anyhow(simple) already(simple) en(obsolete and simple.), good(colloquial), will(obsolete and simple.), as if, like, Yes, so that(outdated), even, barely, if(obsolete and simple.), if, same, and, for(book), or, so, if only(simple) how, how­ then, when, if and stake(simple and outdated), whether, or, than(book), but, bye, meanwhile(simple) as long as(simple) because the, let(colloquial), let, once, unless, smooth(simple) that is to say(old), like, So, also, too, exactly, though, although, how, purely(simple) what, so that, to, a little(colloquial), supposedly(bookish and obsolete).

A group of words adjoins here, which in the sentence act as analogues of unions: in addition(besides), (besides) (colloquial), after all, rather, however, coming out(hence)(colloquial), Further, farther, more(Moreover), then(further), (in addition), but, means, exactly, otherwise, by the way, only, finally, vice versa, for example, against, but, especially, after(besides) (colloquial), because, that's why, truth, besides, and, simply, quicker(or rather) (more precisely) Consequently, actually(exactly), now(further), (in addition) (colloquial), then(in that case), only, more precisely.

§ 1676. Compound (non-single-word) unions in their structure, they represent incompletely formed compounds of two or more elements, each of which simultaneously exists in the language and as a separate word.

A) In the formation of most compound unions, simple multi-valued unions participate ( and, what, how, how, when, to, if, only).

One of the important elements of speech in everyday life are unions. In Russian, it is very difficult to communicate without them: after all, they are the connecting elements in any text. With them, speech becomes more beautiful and varied.

Let's see what is meant in our language by this term. What words can be attributed to them, what are their functions.

Consider what types and categories of this part of speech are, find out the main features. Let's draw up a plan for parsing these words as a specific category of speech and make an analysis using a specific example.

Definition and functionality

The Russian language is rich in different types of helper words. One of these basic categories of speech are unions.

The essence of this term is as follows: they can be called words that connect various repeating elements in a passage, its segments, several different sentences.

These are kind of linking words.

It's important to know: words of this category do not change and should not be elements (members) of the sentence!

Union types

The classification of such terms occurs, as a rule, in 3 directions. Let's consider each separately.

According to syntactic

These words connect fragments of complex or complex sentences. Let's look at each type separately.

writing

They are also called compound words. These words can only be used when linking equal fragments of a complex sentence.

There are groups of coordinating words, some of them are given in the table.

Subordinating

They are used as follows - one fragment of a complex sentence is subordinate to another. These segments are considered subordinate.

The following groups of such words are distinguished.

Sometimes the elements of the 7th subspecies can be easily confused with explanatory and other categories of this service category of speech. To avoid confusion, clarifying questions should be asked.

According to morphological features

They are divided as simply as the previous type into:

• simple (in one word) - a, and, but, etc .;
• compound (several words) - not only, but also; and others.

Moreover, the latter are also divided into 2 categories: double and repetitive. Most often, the second type is a subtype of the first.

Double can be attributed: if ... yes, when ... then ...; and to repeating - this ... that, neither ... nor ...

By word formation

According to how they are formed, they can be divided into:

• non-derivative - occurred independently of other categories;
• derivatives - formed from words of other categories.

There are such types of the last variety of words:

• a combination of several words of this category of the 1st type;
• decree. word ch. sentence member + simple union;
• word of this category + generalizing link;
• historical education.

Algorithm for parsing a union as a part of speech

How to find and determine the nature of unions in any text is written either in a reference book, or in a textbook or collection.

An example of parsing according to the specified plan

We prepared a scene to perform well at the regional competition of theatrical art. To there was a variety, we included dance, literary, game and musical numbers. Hope, what we'll do well.

For clarity, the search terms are highlighted.

• To

1. Union - connects members of the NGN;
2. Subordinating, simple, derivative.

• To

1. Union - connects members of the NGN;
2. Subordinating, compound, derivative.

1. Union - connects one. members of the SPP;
2. Compelling, simple, non-derivative.

1. Union - connects members of the NGN;
2. Subordinating, simple, non-derivative.

Conclusion

We learned what types of unions are divided into, how the coordinating ones differ from the subordinating ones, what subspecies they are divided into. The result will be a table characterizing this part of speech.

§one. General characteristics of unions

A union is a service part of speech that serves to connect homogeneous members of a sentence, parts of a complex sentence and individual sentences in the text. The peculiarity of unions in the role they perform. This role is an expression of coordinating and subordinating syntactic links. Unlike prepositions, conjunctions are not connected with the grammatical features of other words. Why? Because they serve for higher-level syntactic links.

Unions are an invariable part of speech. The union is not a member of the proposal. Conjunctions - a class that unites dissimilar words. Unions differ in education, structure, function, meaning.

§2. Union formation

Like prepositions, unions, according to the method of formation, are divided into non-derivative and derivative.

• Non-derivatives unions: and, but, or, like, what and etc.
• Derivatives educated differently.
  • by connecting non-derivative unions: as if, but also, as
  • by combining a demonstrative word and a simple union: in order to, in order to
  • by combining a union with a pronoun and a word with a generalized meaning: while, until
    from other parts of speech: although to

§3. The structure of unions

By structure, unions are divided into simple and compound:

• Simple:and, and, but, or, what, so that, how, if, however, but, also, also, moreover, moreover etc., consisting of one word.
• Composite: since, while, as soon as, due to the fact that, due to the fact that. Compounds are divided into double and repeating: not only ..., but also ..., neither ... nor ..., then ... then ...

§four. The function (role) of unions. Ranks by value

The function (role) of unions is the expression of syntactic links: coordinating and subordinating.

A coordinative connection is a connection that expresses equal relations of elements.

Writing unions. Ranks by value

1. Connecting: and, yes (=and: cabbage soup and porridge), and ... and ..., not only ... but also, like ... so and, too, also
2. Dividing: or, either, then ... then, not that ... not that, or ... or, either ... or
3. Opposite: a, but, Yes(= but: good-looking, but poor), but, but
4. Gradational *: not only, but also, not so much ... how much, not that ... but
5. Explanatory*: that is, namely
6. Attachment *: also, also, yes and, and moreover, moreover

* Traditionally, sentences with a coordinative connection are considered more accessible for understanding and are introduced into teaching earlier than others: already in elementary school. Then the children are taught to distinguish the meanings of unions. Therefore, the material is presented in a simplified form. This is how the idea is assimilated that there are three types of coordinating conjunctions: connecting, dividing and adversative. In high school, children are faced with a wider range of phenomena that need to be understood and realized. For example, everyone should be able to distinguish and write conjunctions correctly too, also and combinations the same, the same you need to know how to punctuate sentences with different conjunctions. And the question of what these unions are does not arise. However, gradational, explanatory and connecting unions are very frequent, they can be caught in test tasks. Therefore, I advise high school students and graduates to pay special attention to them.

A subordinate relationship is a relationship of unequal components, in which one of the components depends on the other. This is how parts of complex sentences are connected.

subordinating unions. Ranks by value

1. Temporary: when, while, barely, just, while, just, a little, just a little
2. Causal: because, because, because, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, because (obsolete), due to the fact that
3. Conditional: if (if, if, if - obsolete), if, once, whether, how soon
4. Target: so that, in order to, in order (obsolete), in order to, so that, then so that
5. Consequences: so
6. Concessions: although, despite the fact that
7. Comparative: as, as if, as if, exactly, than, as if, like, rather than (obsolete)
8. Explanatory: what, how, to

Attention:

Some unions are polysemantic and can, performing different functions, enter into different categories. For example, let's compare:

Tell him, to he did not call: I will not be at home.
to - explanatory conjunction

To to please his mother, he washed the dishes left in the sink in the morning.
to- target union

When the teacher entered the classroom, Mishka was talking on the phone.
when- temporary union

I dont know, when he will call.
when- explanatory union

When He does not want to understand anything, how can you explain it to him?
when- conditional union

Attention:

Many unions have homonymous forms, which creates problems in their distinction and correct spelling. See the exam: "A, B, C" - everything for preparation. A18. Continuous, hyphenated, separate spelling of words.

test of strength

Check your understanding of the contents of this chapter.

Final test

1. What are unions for?

   • To connect words in a sentence
   • To connect homogeneous members of a sentence, parts of complex sentences and individual sentences in the text

2. Is there a difference between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions?

3. Is it true to assume that simple conjunctions are coordinating, and compound ones are subordinating?

4. Is it correct to assume that simple conjunctions are used in simple sentences, and compound ones in complex ones?

5. What syntactic relationship expresses equal relations of elements?

   • writing
   • Subordinating

6. What syntactic relationship expresses the unequal relationship of elements, in which one depends on the other?

   • writing
   • Subordinating

7. Do coordinating or subordinating conjunctions express a coordinating connection?

   • writing
   • Subordinating

8. Do coordinating or subordinating conjunctions express a subordinating relationship?

   • writing
   • Subordinating

9. Are there multi-valued conjunctions in Russian?

10. Is it true that many unions have homonyms?

11. Unions are derivative or non-derivative: and, but, or, how - ?

    • Derivatives
    • non-derivative

), which is used to express the syntactic (composing or subordinating) connection of units of different nature and volume, from clauses ( Research continues and hypotheses multiply["Knowledge is power" (2003)]) to phrases ( Apples and prunes are traditionally served with goose[Recipes of national cuisines (2000-2005)]) and even word components ( two and three storey houses). Unions are divided into coordinating and subordinating. Subordinating conjunctions prototypically connect clauses (although a connection between a word and a clause is possible ( The decisive argument was the fact that the Germans in 1940 did the same in relation to the French[“Domestic Notes” (2003)]) and words with the word ( Petya is smarter than Vasya)), and coordinative - any homogeneous components (word and word, word and clause, clause and clause). Unlike a preposition that is functionally close to a subordinating conjunction, the conjunction does not attribute a case.

Conjunctions are classified according to a number of formal and semantic grounds: according to their formal structure, according to their syntactic and semantic properties, according to their ability to be used illocutionally (see Illocutionary Uses of Unions):

Classification of unions according to formal structure (I)

Classification of unions according to formal structure (II)

/>

Classification of unions according to syntactic and semantic properties

/>

Classification of conjunctions according to their ability to be used illocutively

/>

Etymologically, many Russian conjunctions come from prepositional-pronominal and prepositional-nominal phrases ( because while), less often - from participle forms of the verb ( although) Many conjunctions are polysemic and sometimes belong in other meanings to other parts of speech, primarily to particles ( yes, and, though, barely) and pronouns ( what how); sometimes significant parts of speech are used in the function of conjunctions ( truth), which significantly complicates their statistics.

In some cases, a word traditionally referred to unions (see lists of unions below) has in one sense or another intermediate properties (conjunction and particle, union and preposition, coordinating and subordinating union, simple and compound union). In these cases, in the absence of more detailed research, the assignment of a word to unions or to one or another class of unions should be recognized to some extent as conditional.

Unions should be distinguished from the so-called. allied words (pronominal words that connect parts of a complex sentence and are members of the sentence).

The lists of conjunctions in this article are from Academic Grammar 1954 [Grammar 1954: 665–673] and Academic Grammar 1980 [Grammar 1980: §§1673–1683].

The term "union" is a tracing paper from the Greek. syndesmos and lat. conjunctio.

1. Formal classes of unions

Unions are traditionally divided into simple (see) (consisting of one word) and compound () (consisting of more than one word). This division, although in most cases there are purely orthographic conventions behind it, is also given in this article.

By how many conjuncts the union connects and which of them are marked by the union indicator, the unions are divided into:

1.1. Simple vs. compound unions

1.1.1. Simple unions

Simple conjunctions consist of one, usually one- or two-syllable word.

List of simple conjunctions [Grammar 1980: §1673]: but, anyhow, already, an, good, be, as if, like, yes, so that, even, barely, if, if, then, then, but, and, for, or, so, if only, how, when, if, if, whether, or, only, rather than, but, for now, for now, for now, because, moreover, moreover, let, let, once, unless, exactly, that is, as if, so, also, too, only, exactly, at least, although, than, purely, that, in order to, slightly, allegedly.

1.1.2. Compound or compound unions

Complex, or compound, unions consist of two or more words that semantically represent one unit. Most constituent unions are formed by:

Some complex conjunctions, such as because, because, due to the fact that, in connection with the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, then that; despite the fact that, despite the fact that; as, after, since, as, in case, in order to and some others allow different punctuation - a comma is placed either before the whole union or before the word what / how / to / if:

(1) Almost all gardeners, although this was not officially allowed, a strip of land about two meters wide was plowed in front of the fence from the side of the street, and potatoes grew on it. [BUT. Varlamov. Kupavna (2000)]

(2) <…>many issuers from list A could fly out of it and pension funds would have to sell these securities although they are reliable and promising. [BUT. Verzhbitsky. Pensioners' assets will be preserved (2010)]

In the terminology of the AG-80 [Grammar 1980(2): §2949] the first variant is called "undivided", the second - "partitioned" .

Different punctuation reflects a certain semantic difference between the divided and undivided variants: in the first case, the meaning corresponding to the main clause is included in the meaning of the complex sentence as a presumption. Accordingly, this meaning does not fall within the scope of various kinds of modal operators. Wed:

(3) a. Shekhtel came to Moscow because

b. Perhaps Shekhtel ended up in Moscow because

By including (3a) in the scope of the modal word Maybe the meaning of ‘Shekhtel came to Moscow’ remains unaffected by the epistemic modality expressed by this word, i.e. (3b) does not imply ‘it is possible that Shekhtel ended up in Moscow’.

For a similar sentence with undivided because this statement is false:

(4) a. Shekhtel came to Moscow, because his mother was a housekeeper at the Tretyakovs. [Izvestia (2002)]

b. Perhaps Shekhtel ended up in Moscow, because his mother was a housekeeper at the Tretyakovs.

1.1.2.1. Simple unions as part of compound

The following are the main simple unions, with the participation of which complex unions are formed. At the same time, the lists of complex conjunctions are not exhaustive, their purpose is to demonstrate the mechanism of word formation.

With the participation of the union what compound unions formed due to the fact that, anyway, no matter what, then that, in spite of the fact that, not that, because, because, on the condition that, unless, so, all the more so, even more so, just now.

With the participation of the union how compound unions formed no matter how, while, before, as if, as if, suddenly, as if, as, for example, as soon as, meanwhile, before, as, as, as, after just like, because, just like, just like, almost like, just like, just like, exactly like, just like, since, since, then like, just like.

With the participation of the union to compound unions formed without not, instead of, in order to, so that, not that, for the sake of, in order to.

With the participation of the union if unions formed if, if not, as if, in case.

With the participation of unions how, than unions formed whatever, earlier than, before; before.

With the participation of unions only, only unions formed as soon as, as soon as, as soon as, barely, just, barely, just, just a little.

1.1.2.2. Prepositions in compound conjunctions

Unions are formed with the participation of prepositions due to the fact that, instead of, in spite of the fact that, in relation to the fact that, up to the fact that, in contrast to the fact that, in contrast to the fact that, as a result of the fact that, like that, in connection with the fact that, due to the fact that that, due to the fact that, in comparison with the fact that, due to the fact that, on the basis of the fact that, except that, on the basis of the fact that, along with the fact that, about the fact that, despite the fact that, not like , regardless of the fact that, in spite of the fact that, regarding the fact that, under the guise of that, like, under the pretext of that, as, in addition to the fact that, about the fact that, because, because, after as, in comparison with the fact that, in addition to that, according to the fact that, judging by the fact that.

1.1.2.3. Particles in compound unions

With the participation of particles would, no, really unions formed as if, good, if, if, if, as if, as if, as if, when, if, if only, as if, if only, if only, what would, and not, what would, as if not, not yet, not yet, not yet, not that, but not that, not that, if, when, if, if.

1.1.2.4. Adverbs in compound conjunctions

With the participation of adverbs, unions are formed: for nothing that, Suddenly, as soon as, before, just like, as well as, earlier than, just like, especially, Nonetheless, exactly-in-just like.

1.1.2.5. Pronouns in compound conjunctions

With the participation of a pronominal noun then formed the following unions: otherwise, and then, and then, not that, yes and that, not that, I mean, that is, whether, due to the fact that, thanks to, similar to, while, although, especially since, while, before as. With the participation of a pronominal adjective then union formed since.

1.2. Single, double and repeated alliances

1.2.1. Single unions

The vast majority of unions in the Russian language are single, they are found among both coordinating and subordinating ones. Single unions are located between the connected parts of the text or are positionally adjacent to one of them:

(5) She came a he left; He left, because she came; He is tired and gone; Because the she came, he left.

List of simple single unions (see also the list of Simple unions (see)): but, anyhow, already, an, good, be, as if, like, yes, so that - even, barely, if, if, but, then, and, for, or, so, if, like, like that, when, if, if, whether, or, only, than, but, for now, for now, for now, because, moreover, moreover, let, let, once, unless, exactly, that is, as if, so, also, too, only, exactly, at least, though, than, purely, what, so that, slightly, supposedly.

List of compound single unions: and not that, but that, and that, and that and, and not, and not that, without not, due to the fact that, as if, be it, in view of the fact that, instead of, despite the fact that, in in relation to the fact that, up to the fact that, as opposed to that, as opposed to the fact that, as a result of the fact that, like the fact that, it doesn’t matter how, it doesn’t matter what, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that , in case, in comparison with the fact that, while, and even then, for nothing, in order to, it would be good, until, until, until, just, barely, if only, if would, if, if not, due to the fact that, then what, then so that, proceeding from the fact that, as if, as if, as if, as if not, as suddenly, as if, as for example, as- then, as soon as, when, when, if, if, if, as soon as, except that, if only, only, meanwhile, on the basis of the fact that, along with the fact that, in case, about that that, despite the fact that, unlike how, regardless of the fact that, despite the fact that, n that, not that, not that, but not, regarding the fact that, because, before, under the guise of that, just as, under the pretext of that, until, until, until, as long as since, besides, about the fact that, on account of the fact that, after, compared with that, because, because, before, before, on the condition that, just like, just like, just like -so how, as well as, in order to, perhaps, since, earlier than, in addition to that, as if, depending on the fact that, just like, since, in order to, judging by the fact that, since, so that, so that, all the more so, the more that, that is, while, that is, if only, if only not, just, just, exactly like, at least, than to, whatever, not to, just a little, just a little.

Unobvious from the point of view of the formal classification of conjunctions is a construction like Masha and Petya and Vanya, where, on the one hand, the conjunction and labels more than one conjunct, and on the other hand, it labels not all conjuncts. The first circumstance would seem to rule out this and from among single unions; the second - excludes it from the number of repeating ones (see).

In this article, the interpretation is adopted, according to which in the construction of the type Masha and Petya and Vanya featured a repeat of a single and. This interpretation is justified by the fact that the specified construction, in its semantic and syntactic properties, is close to a single and, but not with repeating and... and. Yes, repetitive and... and, unlike a single one, is not used with a symmetrical predicate (for more details, see Coordinating conjunctions / p. 2. Repeating conjunctions), and this restriction does not apply to the construction under discussion. Compare: * And Spanish, and Italian, and French are similar vs. Spanish and Italian and French are similar.

1.2.2. Double alliances

Double conjunctions are found among both coordinating and subordinating conjunctions. They consist of two parts, each of which is located in one of two connected syntactically or semantically unequal parts.

Subordinating double unions are characterized by syntactic disparity - one of the clauses is the main one (see Glossary), and the other is dependent (see Glossary):

(6) If a the sauce won't be hot enough then you can add red ground pepper [Recipes of national cuisines: Scandinavian cuisine (2000-2005)];

(7) I only guessed that if I would save this woman then would be rewarded with some magical reward. [E. Grishkovets. Simultaneously (2004)]

(8) But barely he threw back the pillow how discovered a cigarette case made of dark red transparent plastic [A. Solzhenitsyn]

At the same time, the second part of the union if...then may be omitted, especially in colloquial speech, provided that each of the clauses contains a subject:

(9) However, if you are tired and want to relax, we have such places here, like cafes, restaurants. ["Screen and Stage" (2004)]

(10) If a the sauce is not spicy enough, you can add red ground pepper

(11) *I only guessed that if If I had saved this woman, I would have been rewarded with some magical reward.

For coordinating double unions, the semantic inequality of conjuncts is characteristic: usually the second conjunct is more unexpected for the Speaker: He's not so much tired as upset; He was more angry than offended.. In this way, double coordinating conjunctions differ from recurring ones, which presuppose the equality of parts: He is tired and upset(for details, see Coordinating conjunctions / p. 3.2. Double alliances, Coordinating unions / p. 2.1. Repeating unions: Semantics, Coordinating unions / p. 2.3. Repeating vs. double coordinating unions).

Coordinating and subordinating double alliances have their own characteristics.

Double coordinating unions usually connect not whole clauses, but homogeneous members, and consist of two parts, the first of which is placed before the first of the compared members, the second before the second: He is equally well versed in both the theoretical and practical aspects of the matter.

Double subordinating conjunctions consist of two parts, the first of which is placed before the first clause, the second before the second: As soon as she entered, he got up and left.

List of double alliances: enough ... to, barely ... how ..., if ... then, if ... then, if we talk about ... (then), if not ... then, how ... so, and, moreover, ... (also), not ... ah, not ... but, not to say that ... (but), not so much ... how much, not only ... but also, not that ... but rather ... than, it was worth ... how, only ... how, than ... it would be better, as for ... (that), at least ... otherwise.

1.2.3. Recurring alliances

Repeating conjunctions are found only among coordinating ones. They are formed by reproducing the same or, less commonly, functionally close components: and...and, or...or, then...then etc., which are placed before each of two or more equal and formally identical parts:

(12) I always had a dream that someone would appear who or will buy or give, or will give Spivakov a real violin for life use. [FROM. Spivakov. Not Everything (2002)]

The exception is the union whether... whether, whose parts are located in the position of the Wackernagel clitic, i.e. after the first full-stressed word:

(13) First of all - your rest is open, think about it; suddenly someone sees us, dwarf whether, full-length whether household member (T. Mann, trans. S. Apta)

Union whether ... or the first part is located in the position of the Wackernagel clitic, the second part is in front of the conjunct:

(14) First of all - your rest is open, think about it; suddenly someone sees us, dwarf whether, or full size household

List of repeated unions: and ... and ... and; neither ... neither ... neither; whether ... whether... whether; or ... or ... or; then ... then ... then; or ... or ... or,not that ... not that ... not that; or ... or ... or; be ... be, though ... though; then ... then ... otherwise; then ... then ... and then; or ... or ... either; or ... or ... or; either ... either ... or; whether ... or; or ... or ... maybe; maybe ... maybe ... maybe; Maybe ... Maybe; Maybe ... maybe.

Repeating conjunctions deserve detailed consideration because they have common semantic and syntactic features that are typologically relevant. To understand these features, it is important to distinguish a repeated union from a formally similar unit - a repeated single union. The main formal difference between them is that the repeating union is repeated before each, including the first, conjunct, while the single union can only be located between the conjuncts, thereby not affecting the position before the first conjunct. Wed repeating examples and... and and repeat single and, respectively:

(15) Sounded and requirements, and criticism … ["Weekly Magazine" (2003)]

(16) So that inside you - peace, and outside - lively life, cultural values and boutiques, and trams, and shopping pedestrians, and small cafes with the aroma of sweet cheesecakes. ["Brownie" (2002)]

2. Semantic-syntactic classes of unions

In this section, two types of conjunctions are considered - coordinating and subordinating, in accordance with the two types of relations between the syntactic units that the union expresses - composition (coordination) and subordination (subordination).

2.1. Writing vs. subordination

Composition and subordination are two fundamental types of syntactic relations that have a variety of manifestations in different languages.

For example, in German, composed clauses require a different word order:

(17) Ergeht nach Hause, denn er ist krank – ‘He is going home because he is sick, lit. is sick’

(18) Ergeht nach Hause, Weil er krank ist– ‘He is going home because he is sick, lit. sick eat’

Despite the fact that composition and submission are the basic concepts of grammar, there is no single generally accepted approach to their definition (see Composition, Submission, Composition and submission). Along with the traditional syntactic approach, according to which the elements of a coordinating construction are characterized by the same syntactic function, and the elements of the subordinating construction are characterized by different syntactic functions, [Beloshapkova 1977], there are also semantic and pragmatic-communicative approaches.

With all the differences in approaches, the generally accepted idea is that the compositional relations are characterized by symmetry, and the subordinating - asymmetry. The symmetry of the composition manifests itself at different levels of the language: morphological (cf. * smoking and reading lying down is harmful; *he was handsome and smart), syntactic (usually the same members of a sentence are composed), lexico-semantic (cf. when and where did it happen vs. *yesterday and at five o'clock).

In the Russian grammatical tradition, the question of distinguishing between composition and subordination and the question of distinguishing between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions are equated to each other. Strictly speaking, however, these are different issues. But the difference is significant, first of all, for those languages ​​where the union is not the main means of polypredicative connection. For the Russian language, where the allied way of framing the dependent predication dominates, the indicated difference, somewhat coarsening, can be neglected. Typical examples of composing conjunctions in Russian are - and, but, or, or, typical examples of subordinating conjunctions - because, when, so that, as a result of which, if, although.

Within the class of subordinating conjunctions, in addition, the following distinction is significant: unions that usually introduce actant (subject or object) clauses, and unions that usually introduce circus constant clauses. In Russian terminology, the first roughly correspond to explanatory conjunctions (what, to, as, as if etc.), and the second - all other subordinating unions ( because though, if, when and etc.). In the typological literature, for conjunctions leading an actant clause, the term is adopted complementizer, for unions heading a circumstantial clause - the term adverbial subordinator. English term complementizer wider than the Russian term explanatory conjunction: Complementizers include, in particular, the interrogative particle whether heading the actant clause.

It should be borne in mind that conjunctions that introduce actant and circumstantial clauses do not necessarily form two non-overlapping groups. So, in Russian, unions to, as if, as if can serve both functions. Wed:

(19) <…>Kazbich imagined as if Azamat, with the consent of his father, stole his horse, at least I believe so. [M. Y. Lermontov. Hero of Our Time (1839-1841)] – the clause fills in the object valency of the main predicate

(20) The snakes busily studied the situation, as if figured out where to start ... ["Criminal Chronicle" (2003)] - the clause does not fill the valency of the main predicate

The distinction between actant and circus constant clauses - and in the case when both types of clauses can be introduced by the same union, as in (18) - (19), and the distinction between unions - is based on a number of formal grounds (see the article Subordination for more details). For example, the removal of an interrogative pronoun is permissible from an actant, but not from a circo-constant clause, cf. examples (20) and (21) respectively:

(21) a. Do you want to be paid a million?

b. How do you want to be paid?

(22) a. Did you come to get paid a million?

b. ??? How did you come to get paid?

2.2. Coordinating conjunctions

Coordinating conjunctions are traditionally divided into three semantic groups:

• connecting unions: and, yes, and also; like ... and, not only that ... also, not ... but, not ... but, not to say that ... but, not so much ... how much, not only ... but also, not that ... but, rather ... than;and... and... and; Yes Yes Yes; neither... nor... nor; whether... whether... whether; or... or... or; then ... then ... then; either ... or ... or, not that ... not that ... not that; either ... or ... or; be ... be, at least ... at least; then ... then ... and then; then ... then ... and then; either ... or ... either; either... either... or; either ... or ... or; be it... or; or... or... or maybe; maybe... maybe... maybe; maybe... maybe; maybe... or maybe;
• opposite unions: but yes in meaning but, however, but, but, and then;
• dividing unions: or, either, otherwise, not that, not that; or... or, either... or; whether ... whether, whether ... or, at least ... at least, what ... what, whether ... or; and then, and maybe (be); not... so, if (and) not... then; maybe (be), maybe (be) ... maybe (be), maybe (be) ... or maybe (be); not that ... not that, either ... or; then... then.

2.3. Subordinating conjunctions

Subordinating conjunctions are divided into the following semantic groups:

(1) causal conjunctions ( because, because, since, because, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, because, then that);

(2) conjunctions of consequence ( so, and then, and not that);

(3) target unions ( so that, so that, so that, so that, so that, so that);

(4) conditional conjunctions ( if, if, if, if, once, whether, as soon as, if (if), if, if);

(5) concessive alliances ( although, at least; for nothing; if only, if only; despite the fact that, despite the fact that; at least, at least, let, let; while, meanwhile, while; it would be good, let it be; only truth);

(6) temporary alliances ( barely, barely, as soon as, as, when, only, only, as soon as, after, since, until, until, until, until, until, until, before, before than, just, just, a little, a little, a little, before, while);

(7) comparative conjunctions ( as, that, as if, as if, as if, as if, as if (like), like, exactly, exactly (like), than, rather than).

(8) explanatory conjunctions ( what, what, as if, how);

3. Illocutionary use of conjunctions

An illocutionary conjunction is such a use when it expresses a connection between the propositional content of one clause in a compound sentence and the illocutionary modality of another:

(23) Yes, and until forgot, give them a coin. [BUT. Belyanin. Ferocious Landgrave (1999)]

Bye expresses here the temporal connection between the propositional meaning of the subordinate clause and the illocutionary modality of the request included in the content of the main one. Wed with non-illocutionary conjunction bye(see Subordinating unions / clause 7.1. Temporary unions) :

(24) Knead the dough until bye it not will become brilliant and will not lag behind the fun. [Recipes of national cuisines: Czech Republic (2000-2005)]

Conjunctions are capable of illocutionary use because the, because, once, if, bye, to, otherwise, otherwise, not that, so, for and some others. Wed examples:

(25) Because the we don't know each other, let me introduce myself: Vasily Ivanovich Stepanenko. ["Science and Life" (2007)]

(26) A once so, on what to test combines? [BUT. Azolsky. Lopushok (1998)]

(27) You brat, cut yourself short, not that lie in your grave! [M. Gigolashvili. Ferris Wheel (2007)]

(28) Rejoice, nothing was asked, so rest! [SMS messages from senior students (2004)]

4. Statistics

The statistics of groups of unions is given for the Main Corpus with unresolved homonymy, because the check shows that in the Corpus with removed homonymy, the homonymy of conjunctions with particles and pronouns is not removed. Thus, the data for the much smaller, dehomonymized Corpus are not more accurate. In addition, many unions are polysemantic and are included in several classes at once. Any accurate statistics of many unions, especially frequent, multi-valued, double ones, often turns out to be completely impossible. The data presented below reflect, therefore, far from a complete picture. In general, unions, like other auxiliary parts of speech, quite evenly permeate the most diverse registers of speech, so that their diachronic analysis, as well as analysis in different language registers, is relatively uninformative, especially in relation to entire classes and subclasses of unions.

More informative is the statistical analysis of some individual unions, namely, those that are unambiguous and not homonymous to other parts of speech. This is usually characteristic of compound (see), while not double (see) and not repeating (see) unions, such as similar to. Such an analysis makes it possible to correct the descriptions of some conjunctions existing in dictionaries and grammars as bookish, obsolete or rare. Compare, for example, alliances so that, single or and some others that have returned to modern language as colloquial or frequent newspaper texts. The statistics of some individual unions for the Main and Newspaper Corps is given.

Some unions are given with incompletely removed homonymy, but only in cases where their statistics are still relatively representative. For example, for the union and homonymy with a particle is not removed and. However, since the allied lexeme is much more frequent, statistics on and, however, is of interest. For some unions, individual filters were developed, which made it possible to partially remove homonymy - for example, for a comparative union how only contexts were taken into account comparative degree.

Table 1. Frequency of the main semantic-syntactic classes of conjunctions

Table 2. Frequency of main conjunctions in percentage (of the total number of words)

Notes on Tables:

1) homonymy with particles and pronouns has not been removed;

2) homonymy between single and double / repeated unions has not been removed;

3) homonymy between unions of different groups has not been removed;

4) parts of double and repeated unions are given with a distance of up to 4 words, unless another distance is indicated.

Bibliography

Main literature

See also [Rosenthal et al. 1999: section 108] about punctuation in compound subordinating conjunctions and the conditions for their division. “The conditions for dismembering a complex union include: 1) the presence of negation before the union not; 2) the presence of amplifying, restrictive and other particles before the union; 3) the presence of an introductory word before the union, 4) the inclusion of the first part (correlative word) in a series of homogeneous members.

Conjunctions with a similar set of properties are found in the main European languages ​​(cf. English. both… and, either… or, neither… nor, German. sowohl… als auch, entweder… oder etc.). However, as can be seen from the examples, the very sign of "repeatability", i.e. the coincidence of parts of the union is not typologically significant.

Unions- a service part of speech that allows you to connect homogeneous members of a sentence, components of a complex sentence, sentences in one paragraph, as well as several paragraphs in the text.

In Russian, a unified classification of unions has been adopted according to several criteria:

• of Education;
• by structure;
• by the nature of syntactic relations;
• by value.

Types of unions by education

According to the principle of education allocate unions of the following types:

• derivative unions;
• non-derivative unions.

Derivative unions, as a rule, are formed from other parts of speech. For example, the union is still formed by combining a preposition, a demonstrative pronoun and a plural noun.

Non-derivative unions, unlike derivatives, by origin are in no way connected with other parts of speech and exist on their own. Examples: and, or, but, yes and etc.

Types of unions by structure

By structure unions are divided into two groups:

• simple unions;
• compound unions.

Simple unions consist of one word: and, or, but, but, yet, although, etc.

Compound unions, in turn, consist of two or more words that are written with a space: until now, since, while, as if.

Types of unions according to syntactic features

By syntactic role in sentences, conjunctions are divided into:

• coordinating conjunctions;
• subordinating unions.

Coordinating conjunctions- unions that connect equal elements: homogeneous members of a sentence, simple sentences as part of a compound sentence, sentences and paragraphs in a text. Examples of coordinating conjunctions are conjunctions and, or, a, but, however, yes.

Subordinating conjunctions- unions, which, on the contrary, connect unequal syntactic elements, indicating the dependence of one element on another. They connect homogeneous and heterogeneous members of a sentence, simple sentences in a complex sentence, as well as sentences and paragraphs in a text. Examples: because, although, as if, if, in order etc.

Types of unions by value

Coordinating conjunctions are divided into several types according to their meaning:

1. Connecting: and, and... and..., yes (meaning "and"), also, not only... but also...
2. opposing: a, but, although, yes (meaning "but"), however, but.
3. Dividing: or, either ... or ...
4. Explanatory: namely, that is.
5. gradation: not so much ... as ..., not only ... but also ...
6. Connecting: and, yes, also, also, moreover, moreover.

Subordinating conjunctions are divided into:

1. Causal: because, since, for.
2. Temporary: while, while, then.
3. Target: so that, for the purpose of, in order to, in order to.
4. Conditional: if, if, if.
5. Investigative: so.
6. Explanatory: what, how to.
7. Comparative: like, like, like.