Introduction

The theory of functional syntax suggests the approach "from the meaning (of semantic structures) to the form (language means)". In functional syntax developed by A. Mustajoki the initial point for description are common semantic categories reflecting the scope of similar propositions [1].

The relevance of research

Functional syntax assigns primary importance to the role of the speaker in a communicative situation. When we produce an utterance we go "from the meaning to the form": first we decide what we want to say and then we express it in compliance with our intentions, communicative situation [2].

Subject and methods

Semantic structure as one of the means of interpretation by the speaker of real situation includes the proposition (the model of real situation interpreted by the speaker) and commentaries expressing the attitude of the speaker to the proposition. Simple semantic structure includes the main body (predicate, actants), modifiers and specifiers.

Complex semantic structures consist of two or more simple semantic structures that are connected with meta-conjunction: {[P₁], META-CONJUNCTION [P₁]}. Between the propositions in complex semantic structures there are connective, taxis and logic relations.

The subject of our research consists in complex semantic structures with connective relations, and means of their expression.

We resorted to the following research methods and techniques: the analysis of superficial structures of different languages, the experiment with informants, and testing with the help of possible context.

Results and discussion

Among connective relations we defined: connection of unimodal propositions; connection of heterogeneous propositions; disjunctive connection of propositions; connection of comparing propositions.

I. Complex semantic structures with the meaning of "unimodal propositions connection" include the following semantic types: 1) connection of equivalent; 2) identical propositions; 3) relevant propositions; 4) addition of non-defining propositions.

I.1 In such semantic structures the propositions are equivalent, they are united by the time of proposition realization "по ночам": По ночам ни трамваи не ходят, ни метро не работает (meta-conjunction "И").

I.2 In such semantic structures the proposition (Р₂), which is added to the proposition (Р₁) as identical by some feature, moves forward and occupies an underlined position of rheme, with Р₁ occupying the second position (meta-conjunction "А ТАКЖЕ"): По обе стороны улицы зажглись фонари, и в окнах показались огни.

This meaning is expressed with the help of composite sentences; sentences with homogeneous parts; sentences with prepositional case constructions.

I.3 These complex semantic structures include the semantic component "relevance" that expresses consistency, equality in some relation of two propositions (meta-conjunction "РАВНО"). If in identical propositions some features coincide, relevant propositions are equal to each other, while the speaker selects for Р₁ the analogous Р₂, disclosing essential characteristics of Р₁.

While in (1) one proposition is expressed - identification, in (2) - two relevant propositions are expressed: Р₁ РАВНО Р₂ and so on.

(1) Русский язык - язык индоевропейской семьи.

(2) Хорошая книга - искренний друг.

The meaning of identical propositions connection is expressed with the help of sentences "noun + noun", "infinitive + infinitive"; constructions with the words подобен, равен; composite sentences.

I.4 Adding to the proposition a non-defining proposition, which contains some additional explanation, comments. This meaning is expressed with the help of composite sentences with conjunctive relations. For example, in В Индии два миллиона богов, и все они почитаются. (M.Twain) the proposition Р₁ is made more concrete with additional information that Р₂.

II. In complex semantic structures with the meaning "connection of propositions that are non-relevant to each other" Р₂ does not correspond by some features to Р₁ (meta-conjunctions "А", "НЕ...А"). Among semantic structures with this meaning there are types, rendering the connection of opposite (Нужно быть правым, а не исправляемым (Aurelius)), comparable (Истинные слова не бывают приятны, приятные слова не бывают истинны), and non-relevant (Существует столько источников информации, а люди все еще не знают, как ими пользоваться) propositions.

III. Disjunctive connection of propositions

Disjunctive relations express the connection between incompatible propositions that eliminate each other or under certain conditions take place not simultaneously but alternately (meta-conjunction "ИЛИ"). Among them there are structures connecting alternative and alternating propositions.

III.1 Connection of alternative propositions supposes the possibility of real realization of one out of two propositions, selecting one out of mutually exclusive propositions: Я позвоню тебе или оставлю сообщение.

III.2 Connection of alternating propositions supposes their alternating realization, consecutive alternation one and another, for example, the proposition Р₁ gives way to the proposition Р₂: То падал туман, то вдруг шел дождь.

IV. Connection of comparing propositions

In this case the propositions are compared on the basis of associative links between them (meta-conjunction "КАК"). The example (3) describes comparing propositions with one common feature revealed in them: Р₁, КАК Р₂.

(3) Здесь переходить дорогу безопаснее, чем у парка.

Conclusion

Considering complex semantic structures with connective relations in terms of functional syntax is efficient while describing semantic interspace of language and the means of its language representation as well as while teaching language as foreign that supposes the orientation towards teaching to use language.

Parmenova T.V. Functional approach to the study of grammar at school (about one of the ways to modernization) // Russian. 2002. № 24