All parts of speech are usually divided into independent and auxiliary. The first ones are the most important.
They represent the basis of linguistic diversity. The latter perform an auxiliary function. This includes unions. In Russian, they serve as connectives. There are also special rules for their use. In addition, such parts of speech can be divided into types. What are conjunctions in Russian? You will find the answer to this question below.
What are unions?
In the Russian language, this part of speech is intended to connect as well as parts and at the same time express semantic relationships between them.
Unlike related prepositions, conjunctions are not assigned to any case. All of them are classified on different grounds. Thus, according to their structure, unions are divided into two types: simple and compound. The first ones consist of one word (or, too), while the second ones consist of several words since).
Main classification
There is one more reason on which conjunctions in the Russian language are divided into types. The table fully reveals the essence of this classification.
Types of unions depending on the functions performed |
|||
Essays (serve to connect both homogeneous members and parts of complex sentences) | Subordinates (connect the main and subordinate parts in a complex sentence) |
||
Connecting | And, yes, too, no, no, also | Explanatory | So that, how... |
Causal | Because, because... |
||
Nasty | Yes, but, well, but, however | So that, then so that... |
|
Temporary | When, barely... |
||
Conditional | If, when... |
||
Separating | Or, either, this, this, this, this, this or that | Concessive | Although, let... |
Comparative | As if... |
||
In addition, all conjunctions can be divided into non-derivative (and, as) and derivatives, that is, formed from other parts of speech (despite).
Punctuation points
There are special rules according to which it is determined whether any punctuation mark needs to be applied or not. As a rule, we are most often talking about a comma. It is always placed before the conjunction, but never after.
It should be noted that, despite the similarity of some parts of speech, the same rules cannot be applied to them. Thus, the conjunctions and prepositions that pepper the Russian language, although they have much in common, are still characterized differently. Let's return to the rules established directly for the part of speech that interests us. So, a comma before conjunctions is needed if they are adversative (“She didn’t get angry, but even screamed”), paired (“It will either snow or rain”) or subordinate (“I will come if you you will call"). In addition, this punctuation mark is needed if it separates parts of a complex sentence (“Spring has come and the starlings have arrived”). If the conjunction connects homogeneous members, then a comma is not required (“Green and blue balls rushed into the sky”). These are the general rules for using this part of speech in writing. If, when writing, there is a comma before the conjunction, then a pause should be made at this point in the speech.
Unions- an auxiliary 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 the Russian language, a unified classification of conjunctions 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 The following types of unions are distinguished:
- derivative conjunctions;
- non-derivative unions.
Derivative conjunctions, as a rule, are formed from other parts of speech. For example, the conjunction until then is formed by combining a preposition, a demonstrative pronoun and a plural noun.
Non-derivative conjunctions, unlike derivatives, by origin are in no way connected with other parts of speech and exist on their own. Examples: and, or, a, but, yes and etc.
Types of unions by structure
By structure unions are divided into two groups:
- simple conjunctions;
- compound unions.
Simple conjunctions consist of one word: and, or, a, but, while, although, etc.
Compound conjunctions, in turn, consist of two or more words that are written separated by a space: so far, since, while, as if.
Types of conjunctions according to syntactic features
By syntactic role in sentences, conjunctions are divided into:
- coordinating conjunctions;
- subordinating conjunctions.
Coordinating Conjunctions– conjunctions that connect equal elements: homogeneous members of a sentence, simple sentences as part of a compound sentence, sentences and paragraphs in the text. Examples of coordinating conjunctions are the conjunctions and, or, and, but, however, yes.
Subordinating conjunctions- conjunctions that, 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 as part of a complex sentence, as well as sentences and paragraphs in the text. Examples: because, although, as if, if, in order etc.
Types of conjunctions by meaning
Coordinating conjunctions are divided into several types according to their meaning:
- Connecting: and, and... and..., yes (meaning "and"), also, not only... but also...
- Nasty: a, but, although, yes (meaning “but”), however, but.
- Separating: or, either... or...
- Explanatory: namely, that is.
- Gradational: not so much... as..., not only... but also...
- Connection: and, yes, also, also, and, besides.
Subordinating conjunctions are divided into:
- Causal: because, since, for.
- Temporary: while, while, then.
- Target: so that, for the purpose of, in order to, in order to.
- Conditional: if, if, if.
- Investigative: So.
- Explanatory: what, how, to.
- Comparative: as if, as if, as if.
), which is used to express the syntactic (coordinating 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 components of words ( two- and three-story houses). Conjunctions are divided into coordinating and subordinating conjunctions. 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 did the same to the French in 1940["Domestic Notes" (2003)]) and words with the word ( Petya is smarter than Vasya)), and coordinating - any homogeneous components (word and word, word and clause, clause and clause). Unlike the preposition, which is functionally close to the subordinating conjunction, the conjunction does not assign a case.
Conjunctions are classified on a number of formal and semantic grounds: by formal structure, by syntactic and semantic properties, by their ability to be used illocutionarily (see Illocutionary uses of conjunctions):
Classification of unions by formal structure (I)
Classification of unions by formal structure (II)
/>
Classification of conjunctions according to syntactic and semantic properties
/>
Classification of conjunctions according to their ability to be used illocutionarily
/>
Etymologically, many Russian conjunctions come from prepositional-pronominal and prepositional-nominal phrases ( because while), less often - from participial 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 at least barely) and pronouns ( what how); sometimes significant parts of speech are used as conjunctions ( Truth), which significantly complicates their statistics.
In some cases, a word traditionally classified as a conjunction (see lists of conjunctions below) has in one sense or another intermediate properties (conjunction and particle, conjunction and preposition, coordinating and subordinating conjunction, simple and compound conjunction). In these cases, in the absence of more detailed research, the assignment of a word to conjunctions or to one or another class of conjunctions should be considered to some extent conditional.
Unions should be distinguished from the so-called. allied words (pronominal words that connect parts of a complex sentence and are at the same time members of the sentence).
The lists of conjunctions in this article are given according to the Academic Grammar 1954 [Grammar 1954: 665–673] and the Academic Grammar 1980 [Grammar 1980: §§1673–1683].
The term "union" is a translation from the Greek. syndesmos and lat. conjunctio.
1. Formal classes of unions
Conjunctions 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 spelling conventions behind it, is also given in this article.
Based on how many conjuncts are connected by a conjunction and which of them are marked with a conjunction indicator, conjunctions are divided into:
1.1. Simple vs. compound unions
1.1.1. Simple conjunctions
Simple conjunctions consist of one, usually one- or two-syllable word.
List of simple conjunctions [Grammar 1980: §1673]: a, anyhow, as much, an, good, it will be, as if, like, yes, so that, even, barely, if, if, then, but, and, for, or, so, if, how, when, if, if, whether, either, only, rather than, but, while, for the time being, as long as, since, moreover, moreover, let, let, once, perhaps, exactly, that is, as if, so, also, also, only, exactly, although, although, than, purely, that, so that, slightly, supposedly.
1.1.2. Complex or compound conjunctions
Complex, or compound, conjunctions consist of two or more words that semantically represent one unit. The formation of most compound unions involves:
Some complex conjunctions, for example because, because, due to the fact that, in connection with the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, in view of the fact that, then that; despite the fact that, despite the fact that; as, after, since, just as, in case, in order to and some others allow different punctuation - a comma is placed either before the entire conjunction or before the word what / how / to / if:
(1) Almost all gardeners although this was not officially permitted; a strip of land about two meters wide was plowed in front of the fence on the street side, and potatoes grew on it. [A. Varlamov. Kupavna (2000)]
(2) <…>many issuers from list A could leave it and pension funds would have to sell these securities although they are reliable and promising. [A. Verzhbitsky. Pensioners' assets will be preserved (2010)]
In the terminology of AG-80 [Grammar 1980(2): §2949], the first option is called “undivided”, the second – “dismembered”.
Different punctuation reflects a certain semantic difference between the dissected and unsegmented 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 types of modal operators. Wed:
(3) a. Shekhtel came to Moscow because
b. Perhaps Shekhtel ended up in Moscow because
When (3a) is included in the scope of the modal word Maybe the meaning of ‘Shekhtel got 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 incorrect:
(4) a. Shekhtel ended up in Moscow, because his mother was the Tretyakovs' housekeeper. ["Izvestia" (2002)]
b. Perhaps Shekhtel ended up in Moscow, because his mother was the Tretyakovs' housekeeper.
1.1.2.1. Simple conjunctions within compounds
Below 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 thanks to the fact that, no matter what, for nothing, then that, despite the fact that, not that, because, because, provided that, unless, so that, especially since, especially since, just.
With the participation of the union How compound unions formed all the same, as, while, before, as if, as suddenly, as if, as for example, as soon as, meanwhile, before, likewise, as, after just like, because, just like, just like, almost like, just like, just like, just like, just like, since, since, whereas, exactly like.
With the participation of the union to compound unions formed without, not, instead of, in order to, then so that, not that, for the sake of, for the purpose of, so that.
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 barely, as soon as, just, just barely, just barely, barely, just, just barely.
1.1.2.2. Prepositions as part of compound conjunctions
Conjunctions are formed with the participation of prepositions in view of 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 the fact 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, based on the fact that, in addition to the fact that, on the basis of the fact that, along with the fact that, regarding the fact that, in spite of the fact that, unlike how , regardless of that, despite the fact that, regarding that, under the guise of that, just as, under the pretext that, as, in addition to that, regarding the fact that, due to the fact that, after that how, in comparison with that, in addition to that, depending on 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, as if, as if, as if, when, if, if only, as if, if only, even if, that, and not, than, as if not, not yet, not yet, not yet, not that, not that, not that, if, when, if, since, since.
1.1.2.4. Adverbs in complex conjunctions
Conjunctions are formed with the participation of adverbs: for nothing that, Suddenly, as soon as, before, just like, as well as, earlier than, just like, especially, nevertheless, exactly-V-exactly like.
1.1.2.5. Pronouns in complex conjunctions
With the participation of a pronominal noun That The following unions were formed: otherwise, and even then, or even, otherwise, yes even then, not really, I mean, that is, either, due to the fact that, thanks to, similar to, while, although, especially since, meanwhile, before as. With the participation of a pronominal adjective That union formed since.
1.2. Single, double and repeating conjunctions
1.2.1. Single unions
The vast majority of conjunctions in the Russian language are single, they are found both among coordinating and subordinating ones. Single conjunctions 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's tired And gone; Because the She came, he left.
List of simple single conjunctions (see also list of Simple conjunctions (see)): a, anyhow, as much, an, good, be, as if, like, yes, so that, even, barely, if, if, then, then, and, for, or, so, if, as, as that, when, if, if, or, only, than, but, while, for the time being, as long as, since, moreover, moreover, let, let, once, perhaps, exactly, that is, as if, so, also, also, only, exactly, at least, although, than, purely, that, so that, slightly, supposedly.
List of compound single unions: and not that, and that, and and that, and then and, and not, and not that, without not, thanks to the fact that, as if, be it, in view of the fact that, instead of, in spite of the fact that, in in relation to the fact that, up to the point that, in contrast to the fact that, in contrast to the fact that, as a result of the fact that, like that, anyway, anyway, in connection with 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 that, in order that, good, until, until, until, barely, hardly only, if, if would, if, if not, due to the fact that, then what, then so that, based on the fact that, as if, as if, as if, as if not, how suddenly, as if, as for example, how- then, as soon as, whenever, when already, if only, if only, if only, in the meantime, on the basis of the fact that, along with the fact that, in case if, about that that, despite the fact that, not as an example of how, regardless of the fact that, despite the fact that, not that, not that, not that, but not, regarding that, because, before, under the guise that, just as, under the pretext that, not yet, not yet, not yet, as, in addition to the fact that, regarding the fact that, due to the fact that, after, in comparison with the fact that, because, because, before, before, on condition that, simply as, just like, just as, just as, in order that, unless, since, before than, in addition to that, as if, depending on the fact that, just like, since, for the purpose that, judging by the fact that, since, so that, so that, especially since, all the more so, that is, whereas, that is, only if only, if only not, just, just, just like, even if, with whatever, whatever, so as not, just, just barely.
Not obvious 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 coordinating conjunction And marks more than one conjunction, but on the other hand, does not mark all conjunctions. The first circumstance would seem to exclude this And from among single unions; the second excludes it from the number of repeating ones (see).
This article adopts the interpretation that in a design like Masha and Petya and Vanya features a repeat of a single And. This interpretation is justified by the fact that the specified construction in its semantic-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 / paragraph 2. Repeating conjunctions), and this restriction does not apply to the construction under discussion. Wed: * Spanish, Italian, and French are all 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 syntactically or semantically unequal parts connected.
Subordinating double conjunctions are characterized by syntactic inequality - one of the clauses is the main one (see Glossary), and the other is dependent (see Glossary):
(6) If the sauce won't be spicy enough That you can add ground red pepper [Recipes of national cuisines: Scandinavian cuisine (2000-2005)];
(7) I just guessed that If I wish I could save this woman That would be rewarded with some magical reward. [E. Grishkovets. Simultaneously (2004)]
(8) But barely he threw back the pillow, How found a cigarette case made of dark red transparent plastic [A. Solzhenitsyn]
Moreover, 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 and restaurants. ["Screen and Stage" (2004)]
(10) If the sauce will not be spicy enough, you can add ground red pepper
(11) *I just guessed that If If I saved this woman, I would be rewarded with some kind of magical reward.
Coordinating double conjunctions are characterized by semantic inequality of conjuncts: usually the second conjunct is more unexpected for the Speaker: He wasn't so much tired as he was upset; He was more angry than offended. In this way, double coordinating conjunctions differ from repeating ones, which assume equality of parts: He was both tired and upset(for more details, see Coordinating conjunctions / clause 3.2. Double conjunctions, Coordinating conjunctions / clause 2.1. Repeating conjunctions: Semantics, Coordinating conjunctions / clause 2.3. Repeating vs. double coordinating conjunctions).
Coordinating and subordinating double conjunctions have their own characteristics.
Double coordinating conjunctions usually connect not entire 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 good at both the theoretical and practical sides 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 stood up and left.
List of double unions: enough...that, barely...how..., if...then, if...then, if we talk about... (then), if not...then, how...so and, not only that... (also), not... ah, not... but, not to say that... (but), not as much... as, 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. Repeating conjunctions
Repeating conjunctions are found only among coordinating conjunctions. They are formed by reproducing the same or, less commonly, functionally similar 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 will give or will give Spivakov a real violin for lifelong use. [WITH. Spivakova. Not everything (2002)]
The exception is the union whether... whether, parts of which are located in the position of the Wackernagel clitic, i.e. after the first full-stressed word:
(13) First of all, your peace is open, think about it; suddenly someone sees us, a dwarf whether, full-length whether household member (T. Mann, trans. S. Apta)
At the union either... or the first part is located in the position of the Wackernagel clitic, the second - in front of the conjunct:
(14) First of all, your peace is open, think about it; suddenly someone sees us, a dwarf whether, or full-sized household member
List of repeating conjunctions: And ... And ... And; neither ... neither ... neither; whether ... whether... whether; or ... or ... or; That ... That ... That; either... or... or,not that ... not that ... not that; or ... or ... or; be ... be, though ... though; That ... That ... otherwise; That ... That ... or even; or ... or ... either; or ... or ... or; either ... either ... or; either ... 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 repeating conjunction from a formally similar unit - a repeated single conjunction. The main formal difference between them is that a repeating conjunction is repeated before each, including the first, conjunct, while a single conjunction can only be located between conjunctions, thereby not affecting the position before the first conjunct. Wed. examples with repeating and... and and repeat single And, respectively:
(15) Sounded And requirements, And criticism … ["Weekly Magazine" (2003)]
(16) So that inside you there is peace, and outside there is a lively life, cultural values And boutiques, And trams, And pedestrians with shopping, And small cafes with the aroma of sweet cheesecakes. ["Brownie" (2002)]
2. Semantic-syntactic classes of conjunctions
This section examines two types of conjunctions - coordinating and subordinating, in accordance with the two types of relationships between syntactic units that the conjunction expresses - coordination and subordination.
2.1. Essay vs. subordination
Composition and subordination are two fundamental types of syntactic relations that have varied manifestations in different languages.
For example, in German, composed clauses require different word orders:
(17) Er geht nach Hause, denn er ist krank – ‘He’s going home because he’s sick, lit. there is a patient’
(18) Er geht nach Hause, weil er crank ist– ‘He’s going home because he’s sick, literally. the patient is’
Although composition and subordination are basic concepts in grammar, there is no single generally accepted approach to defining them (see Composition, Subordination, Composition and Subordination). 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 a subordinating construction are characterized by different syntactic functions [Beloshapkova 1977], there are also semantic and pragmatic-communicative approaches.
Despite all the differences in approaches, the generally accepted idea is that coordinating relationships are characterized by symmetry, and subordinating relationships are characterized by asymmetry. The symmetry of the composition manifests itself at different levels of language: morphological (cf. * smoking and reading while lying down are harmful; *he was handsome and smart), syntactic (usually identical parts of the sentence are composed), lexical-semantic (cf. when and where did this 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 questions. But the difference is significant, first of all, for those languages where the conjunction is not the main means of polypredicative communication. For the Russian language, where the conjunctive method of forming dependent predication dominates, this difference, somewhat coarseningly, can be neglected. Typical examples of coordinating conjunctions in Russian are: and, but, or, either, typical examples of subordinating conjunctions are since, when, so that, due to which, if, although.
Within the class of subordinating conjunctions, the following distinction is also significant: conjunctions that usually introduce actant (subject or object) clauses, and conjunctions that usually introduce circonstant clauses. In Russian terminology, the first roughly correspond to explanatory conjunctions (what, to, as if etc.), and the second – all other subordinating conjunctions ( because, although, if, when and etc.). In the typological literature, the term is adopted for conjunctions heading an actant clause complementizer, for conjunctions heading a constant clause - the term adverbial subordinator. English term complementizer broader than the Russian term explanatory union: complementizers include, in particular, the interrogative particle whether, heading an actant clause.
It should be borne in mind that conjunctions introducing actant and sirconstant clauses do not necessarily form two non-overlapping groups. So, in Russian the conjunctions so that, as if, as if can act in both functions. Wed:
(19) <…>Kazbich imagined as if Azamat, with the consent of his father, stole his horse from him, at least I think so. [M. Yu. Lermontov. Hero of Our Time (1839-1841)] – the subordinate clause fills the objective valency of the main predicate
(20) The snakes busily studied the situation, as if were wondering where to start... ["Crime Chronicle" (2003)] - the subordinate clause does not fill the valency of the main predicate
The distinction between actant and circonstant clauses - and in the case when both types of clauses can be introduced by the same conjunction, as in (18)–(19), and the distinction between conjunctions - 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 clause, but not from a circonstant clause, cf. examples (20) and (21) respectively:
(21) a. Do you want to be paid a million?
b. How many do you want to get paid?
(22) a. Have you come to be paid a million?
b. ??? How many did you come to get paid?
2.2. Coordinating Conjunctions
Coordinating conjunctions are traditionally divided into three semantic groups:
- connecting conjunctions: and, yes, and also; both... and, not only that... also, not... but, not... but, not to say that... but, not so much... as, 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 even; either... or... or; either... or... or; either... or... or; be it... or; or... or... or maybe; maybe... maybe... maybe; perhaps... perhaps; maybe... or maybe;
- adversative conjunctions: but yes in meaning but, however, and, on the other hand, and that;
- dividing unions: or, or, or else, not that, not that; or... or, either... or; whether... whether, whether... or, at least... at least, what... what, be it... or; and then, and maybe (maybe) and; not... so, if (and) not... then; maybe (be), maybe (be)... maybe (be), maybe (be)... and maybe (be); not that... not that, or... or; then... then.
2.3. Subordinating conjunctions
Subordinating conjunctions are divided into the following semantic groups:
(1) causal conjunctions ( since, because, since, because, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, for, then that);
(2) consequence unions ( so, or else, or else);
(3) target unions ( so that, in order to, in order to, then in order to, in order to);
(4) conditional conjunctions ( if, if, if, once, if, as soon as, if (would), if, if only);
(5) concessionary 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, whereas; it would be good, let it be; only truth);
(6) temporary unions ( barely, barely, as soon as, as, when, only, only, as, after, since, until, until, while, until, until, until, before, before than, just, just, just, barely, barely, before, while);
(7) comparative unions ( how, what, as if, as if, as if, as if, as if (as), likewise, exactly, exactly (as), than, rather than).
(8) explanatory conjunctions ( what, in order, as if, how);
3. Illocutionary use of conjunctions
The use of a conjunction is called illocutionary when it expresses the connection between the propositional content of one clause in a complex sentence and the illocutionary modality of another:
(23) Yes, and not yet I forgot, give them a coin. [A. Belyanin. The Fierce Landgrave (1999)]
Bye expresses here the temporary 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 use of the conjunction Bye(see Subordinating conjunctions / clause 7.1. Temporary conjunctions) :
(24) Knead the dough until Bye it Not will become shiny 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, otherwise, 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, what should we test combines on? [A. Azolsky. Lopushok (1998)]
(27) You, brat, turn around, otherwise you should lie in your grave! [M. Gigolashvili. Ferris Wheel (2007)]
(28) Rejoice, you didn’t ask anything, So Rest! [SMS messages from high school students (2004)]
4. Statistics
Statistics of groups of unions are given for the Main Corpus with homonymy not removed, because the check shows that in the Corpus with the homonymy removed, the homonymy of conjunctions with particles and pronouns is not removed. Thus, the data for the much smaller Corpus with the homonymy removed are not more accurate. In addition, many conjunctions are multi-valued and belong to several classes at once. Any accurate statistics of many conjunctions, especially frequent, polysemantic, double ones, often turns out to be completely impossible. The data below reflects, therefore, a far from complete picture. In general, conjunctions, like other auxiliary parts of speech, quite evenly permeate a variety of speech registers, so that their diachronic analysis, as well as analysis in different linguistic registers, is relatively uninformative, especially in relation to entire classes and subclasses of conjunctions.
More informative is the statistical analysis of some individual conjunctions, namely, those that are unambiguous and not homonymous with other parts of speech. This is usually typical for compound (see), but not double (see) and non-repeating (see) conjunctions, such as similar to. Such an analysis makes it possible to correct the descriptions of some conjunctions existing in dictionaries and grammars as bookish, outdated or rare. Compare, for example, unions so that, single or and some others that have returned to modern language as colloquial or frequent ones in newspaper texts. Statistics of some individual unions are given for the Main and Newspaper Corps.
Some conjunctions are given with homonymy not completely removed, but only in cases where their statistics are still relatively representative. For example, for the union And homonymy with the particle is not removed And. However, since the conjunction lexeme is significantly 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 the comparative union how only contexts were taken into account comparative degree.
Table 1. Frequency of the main semantic-syntactic classes of conjunctions
|
Main building |
||
|
coordinating conjunctions (% of all words) |
||
|
subordinating conjunctions (% of all words) |
||
|
Total |
||
|
classes of coordinating conjunctions (% of all conjunctions) |
||
|
connecting |
||
|
adversative |
||
|
dividing |
||
|
replacement |
statistics not possible |
|
|
classes of subordinating conjunctions (% of all conjunctions) |
||
|
causal |
||
|
consequences |
||
|
targeted |
||
|
conditional |
||
|
concessionary |
||
|
temporary |
||
|
explanatory |
||
|
comparative unions (% of all unions) |
||
Table 2. Frequency of main conjunctions as a percentage (of the total number of words)
|
Union |
Main body with unsolved homonymy |
Newspaper building |
||
|
essay unions |
connecting |
1. and 3. and...and(with a distance of three words) 4. both...and 5. not as much... as 6. not only but 7. not that...but<но> 8. not that...but 9. no no 10. rather than |
||
|
adversarial |
2.en(in combination with Not And No) 3.but 5.however |
|||
|
separating |
1.or even 2.be it... or 3.if not... then 4.or 5.or or 6.either...or 7.Lily 8.or 9.or either 10.maybe... maybe 11.not that... not that 12.then... then(with a distance of two words) 13.either... or |
|||
|
subordinating conjunctions |
causal conjunctions |
1.thanks to 2.due to the fact that 3.due to 4.due to the fact that 5.due to the fact that 6.then what 7.for 8.because of 9.because the 10.because 11.because |
||
|
investigation unions |
1.otherwise 2.otherwise 3.So |
|||
|
target alliances |
1.so that 2.in order to 3.then to 4.so as to 5.so that 6.to |
|||
|
conditional conjunctions |
1.if 2.If 3.if only 4.if 5.if only 6.if 7.as soon as 8.once |
|||
|
concessionary alliances |
1.while 2.for nothing that 3.it would be nice 4.if only 5.meanwhile 6.no matter what 7.although 8.whereas 9.Although |
|||
|
temporary unions |
1.barely 2.as soon as 3.When 4.just 5.Bye 6.not yet 7.not yet 8.as 9.after 10.before 11.earlier than 12.since |
|||
|
explanatory conjunctions |
1.as if 2.How 3.What 4.to |
|||
|
comparative unions |
1.as if 2.than 3.similar to 4.as if 5.how |
|||
Notes on Tables:
1) homonymy with particles and pronouns has not been removed;
2) the homonymy between single and double/repeating conjunctions has not been removed;
3) homonymy between unions of different groups has not been removed;
4) parts of double and repeating conjunctions are given with a distance of up to 4 words, unless another distance is indicated.
Bibliography
Main literature
For punctuation in compound subordinating conjunctions and the conditions for their division, see also [Rosenthal et al. 1999: section 108]. “The conditions for the dismemberment of a complex conjunction include: 1) the presence of a negation before the conjunction Not; 2) the presence of intensifying, restrictive and other particles in front of the union; 3) the presence of an introductory word before the conjunction, 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 and so on.). However, as can be seen from the examples, the very sign of “repetition”, i.e. the coincidence of parts of the union is not typologically significant.
/>One of the important elements of speech in everyday life is conjunctions. In Russian, it is very difficult to communicate without them: after all, they are connecting elements in any text. With them, speech becomes more beautiful and varied.
Let's figure out what is meant by this term in our language. What words can be attributed to them, what are their functions.
Let's look at the types and categories of this part of speech and find out the main features. Let's draw up a plan for analyzing these words as a specific category of speech and do the 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 is conjunctions.
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 is important to know: words of this category do not change and should not be elements (members) of a sentence!
Types of unions
The classification of such terms occurs, as a rule, in 3 directions. Let's look at each one separately.
According to syntactic features
These words connect fragments of compound or complex sentences. Let's look at each type separately.
Essays
They are also called compound ones. These words can only be used when linking equal fragments of a complex sentence.
Groups of coordinating words are distinguished, some of them are given in the table.
Subordinates
They are used as follows - one fragment of a complex sentence is subordinate to another. These segments are considered subordinate clauses.
The following groups of such words are distinguished.
Sometimes elements of subtype 7 can easily be confused with explanatory and other categories of this service category of speech. To avoid confusion, clarifying questions should be asked.
According to morphological characteristics
They are divided as simply as the previous type into:
- simple (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 repeating. Most often, the second type is a subtype of the first.
Doubles can be attributed to: if...yes, when...then...; and for repeating ones - 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.
The following types of the latter variety of words are distinguished:
- a combination of several words of this category of type 1;
- decree. word ch. sentence member + simple conjunction;
- word of this category + generalizing link;
- historical education.
Algorithm for parsing a conjunction as a part of speech
How to find and determine the nature of conjunctions in any text is written either in a reference book, or in a textbook or collection.
An example of analysis according to the specified plan
We were preparing a scene to perform well at a regional theater competition. In order to there was variety, we included dance, literature, games in the concert program And musical numbers. Hope, What we will perform well.
For clarity, the search terms are highlighted.
- To
- Union – connects members of the SPP;
- Subordinating, simple, derivative.
- In order to
- Union – connects members of the SPP;
- Subordinating, compound, derivative.
- Union - connects one. SPP members;
- Cogent, simple, non-derivative.
- Union – connects members of the SPP;
- Subordinating, simple, non-derivative.
Conclusion
We learned what types of conjunctions are divided into, how coordinating and subordinating conjunctions differ, and what subtypes they are divided into. The result will be a table characterizing this part of speech.
Union- an auxiliary part of speech that serves to communicate between parts of a complex sentence, individual sentences of a text, as well as between words in a sentence.
Conjunctions do not change and are not members of the sentence.
Just like prepositions, conjunctions are:
non-derivative, that is, not related by origin to other parts of speech: or, yes and, but, but;
derivatives, that is, related by origin to other parts of speech:
-connection of non-derivative conjunctions: as if;
-connection of an indicative word from the main part and a simple conjunction: in order to;
-connecting a conjunction with a word with a generalized meaning: while, until;
-historically from other parts of speech: yet, so that, although.
There are also unions simple(without spaces): a, for; And composite(written with spaces): since, while.
According to the nature of syntactic relations, conjunctions are divided into essay And subordinates.
Coordinating Conjunctions- these are conjunctions that connect homogeneous members of a sentence, parts of a complex sentence, sentences in the text.
Coordinating conjunctions come in the following categories:
1) connecting(meaning “both this, and that”): and, yes (in the meaning of “and”), neither...nor, as...so and, and...and, not only...but also, as ... so and, too, also;
2) dividing(meaning “either this, or that”): or, either, that...that, not that...not that, or...or, either...or;
3) adversative(meaning “not this, but that”): a, but, yes (meaning “but”), however, but.
4) gradational: not only... but also, not so much... as, not that... but;
5) explanatory: that is, namely;
6) connecting: also, also, yes and, and, moreover, and.
Subordinating conjunctions- these are conjunctions that connect parts of a complex sentence,
They can also be used in a simple sentence to connect homogeneous and heterogeneous members. So, for example, the subordinating conjunction although connects homogeneous members of the sentence: The room was cozy, although a little cool; conjunctions as if, as if, which connects homogeneous and heterogeneous members of a sentence: In summer, the night is shorter than the day; head is like a computer.
Subordinating conjunctions come in the following categories:
1) temporary: only, while, when, while, barely;
2) causal: because, for, since,;
3) conditional: if, if, if;
4) targeted: in order to, for the purpose of, in order to, in order to;
5) concessionary: although, despite the fact that;
6) consequences: So;
7) comparative: how, exactly, with what, as if, as if, as if;
8) explanatory: what, how, to.
Note. Some conjunctions are multi-valued and can be classified into several categories, for example: so that (target and explanatory), when (temporary and conditional).
Publication date: 12/26/2011 10:40 UTC
- Practical grammar in Russian language lessons, Educational and methodological manual for working with students in grades 4-7, Part 4, Zikeev A.G., 2003
- Collection of exercises in the Russian language for schoolchildren and applicants, book 2, morphology and spelling, answers, Shklyarova T.V., 2007