Людмила Михайловна, оставляю вам свое эссе в виде комментария к вашей презентации. Прошу вас проверить и оценить. Спасибо. С уважением, Муллаянова Регина, 27Л1217 First of all, the mood is characterized as a category of the verb or verbal inflections that expresses semantic and grammatical differences, including such forms as the indicative, subjunctive, and imperative. In fact, the category of mood in verbs has been a very disputable issue, which was developed by a lot of linguists, such as soviet scholars B.A. Ilyish, Prof. Smirnitsky, O.S.Akhmanova, M.Gashina, G.N.Vorontsova, N.Vasilevskaya, L.S.Barhudarov, M.Y. Blokh, and foreign scientist as well, M.Deutschbein, D.A. Shteling. The category of mood defines the features concerning the process devoted to the actual reality, presenting a fact that happened, happens or will happen in real life, or corresponding to an imaginary process. To begin with, it is common to differentiate semantic approach, formal and formal- semantic approaches. Thus, scholars shared their opinions in a different ways, describing various grammatical forms of the mood in English. This number begins from two (in Barkhudarov's interpretation) to sixteeen (in Deutchbein's interpretation). According to Professor Barkhudarov, he distinguished only two moods: Imperative and Indicative, for example, “Do not forget your lunchbox” and “My sister have a daughter” respectively. It is thought that Subjunctive Mood and Imperative are put together. Barhudarov, there are no oblique Moods as should/would + Infinitive is not an analytical form because the second element can function independently. As for the forms of the Past Indefinite and the Past Perfect used to express unreality, these forms are of the indicative Mood used in specific syntactical environment. In contrast, Academician V.Vinogradov outlined the mood as an expression of human being’s attitude to the reality. Needless to say that it can be expressed by lexical means of modality, such as may, can, must, have to and modal words perhaps, probably. For instance, “If I were a teacher, I would give students only good marks”, we can see that his idea belongs to unreal situation or a desirable action of Subjunctive Mood. On the other hand, Blokh, he coincides in meaning and in form with the spective mood (a variety of the subjunctive mood), which expresses suggestion, recommendation, and inducement. Taking into consideration this example “Do be careful with the papers”, in other words, “My request is that you do be careful with the papers”. We can see that “Be” has a special finite oblique mood form. With reference to Professor Smirnitsky, he distinguished 4 oblique moods: Subjunctive I, Subjunctive II, the Conditional and the Suppositional. Each of them differs in modal meaning and in form. At first, Subjunctive I expresses synthetically a problematic action, which doesn’t contradict reality “ He gave orders that we be present” or Subjunctive II expresses synthetically and analytically an unreal action. “I wish you went to the school”. The Conditional mood expresses analytically depended unreality: the realization of the action depends on some condition, which may not be expressed: “It would be good to be here”. The Suppositional mood expresses analytically a problematic action, not contradicting reality. The realization of the action may depend on certain circumstances “Should you meet him, tell him to come” The Suppositional and Subjunctive I almost coincide in meaning but differ in style and usage. Taking these points into consideration, I would say that it is traditionally distinct three types of the mood, while some scientists suggested more or less number of mood. The category of mood presents the interpretation of the action by the speaker from the point of view of its relation to reality, as a result, we cannot refute who is right or wrong in their approaches.
Dear Mrs.Osinovskaya, I have already left my commet upon this presentation on SlideShare, but I decided to post it here too. To my mind, the category of tense one of the most important and underrated categories in English grammar. Since the time of speaking is designated as present time and is the starting point for the whole scale of time measuring, the category of tense is important for a speaker as well as for a listener. By the way, we should not forget that the category of tense in English expresses the relationship between the time of the action and the time of speaking The time that follows the time of speaking is designated as future time; the time that precedes the time of speaking is designated as past time. However there are three tenses in the English language (present, past and future), the existence of future tense is quite disputable. Each tense is represented by four verb forms involving such categories as aspect and perfect. Thus there are four present tense forms: the present indefinite, the present continuous, the present perfect, the present perfect continuous; four past tense forms: the past indefinite, the past continuous, the past perfect and the past perfect continuous; four future tense forms: the future indefinite, the future continuous, the future perfect and the future perfect continuous; and four future in the past tense forms: the future in the past indefinite, the future in the past continuous, the future in the past perfect, the future in the past perfect continuous. However is so-called opposition of past and present is not the opposition of just 2 verbal forms but the opposition of 2 systems of forms. For instance: works/worked, he is working/he was working, he has work/he had worked and so on. As we can see from the examples functionally all the forms, entering these two systems, are the same. They’re used in the syntactic function of the predicate in the sentence. However, as one can notice in speech in the plane of communication the present forms reveal their specific character: they reflect facts and evens as actual, immediately related to the participants of the speech act. On the contrary, the forms of the past reflect something that is already the past, history, not immediately related to the participants of the speech act. What is represented by the past forms is of some cognitive interest to the addressee. For example: I have just seen him. I saw him just now. To sum up if we admit that the tense forms of the present express reality and make the information actual for the participants of the speech act, it is possible then to account for the rule ‘in clauses of time and condition forms of the present are used instead of the future’ (though the verb expresses a future action). The same is relevant for the use of the forms of the present in object clauses after the verbs with the meaning know, learn, find, imagine, see (that), look, take care, mind, etc. So the category of tense is quite important category, which make speech, its understanding and building clear.
Dear Mrs.Osinovskaya, thank you for the information given in the presentation! I've written the commentary on the topic of the category of aspect and ask you to check it. Thank you in advance! Stukalova Anastasia
The concept of aspect in English is not easy to understand. That is why it is important to give a definition of this verbal category. Aspect is a grammatical category that expresses how an action, event or state, denoted by a verb, relates to the flow of time. Moreover, the realization of the category of aspect is closely connected with the lexical meaning of verbs. To begin with, we should mention that the aspective meaning of the verb reflects the realization of the process of opposition. On the one hand, Professor M.Y. Blokh distinguished 2-member opposition: the continuous forms of the verb and non-continuous or indefinite form. Where continuous form denotes an action proceeding continuously at a definite period of time, within certain time limits and non-continuous form denotes an action not limited but either occurring repeatedly or everlasting, without any notion of lasting duration at a given moment. Examples: write-is writing; wrote – was writing; will write – will be writing. Unfortunately, there are some verbs in English that do not normally occur with continuous aspect, even in those contexts in which the majority of verbs necessarily take the continuous or progressive form. Among the so-called “non-progressive” verbs are think, understand, know, hate, love, see, taste, feel, possess, own, etc. The most striking characteristic that they have in common is the fact that they are “stative” - they refer to a state of affairs, rather than to an action, event or process. It should be observed, however, that all the “non-progressive” verbs take the progressive aspect under particular circumstances. As the result of internal transposition verbs of non-progressive nature can be found in the Continuous form: Now I'm knowing you. On the other hand, according to B. Ylyish continuous forms are relatively new. In Anglo-Saxon such forms did not exist. The first instances of the progressive aspect appear in Middle English(1100-1500). More than that, some scholars like O.Jesperson, N.V. Yartseva either treat aspect forms as tense forms or assert that the English verb is neutral to aspects, while others speak of 9 various aspects. In conclusion, certain aspectual distinctions express a relation in time between the event and the time of reference. The progressive forms are quite new in English language. The category of aspect is a point for discussion among scholars. I personally prefer M.Y. Blokh’s theory because it seems to be logical and easy to understand.
Dear Mrs Osinovskaya, thank you for your presentation. There are a lot of definitions of the verb. According to the Merriam Webster dictionary A verb is a word that characteristically is the grammatical center of a predicate and expresses an act, occurrence, or mode of being, that in various languages is inflected for agreement with the subject, for tense, for voice, for mood, or for aspect, and that typically has rather full descriptive meaning and characterizing quality but is sometimes nearly devoid of these especially when used as an auxiliary or linking verb. All English verbs start with a “base” form. This is the form you look up to learn about the verb in the dictionary. If you look up one of the other forms, you will be referred back to the base form. The base form is always uninflected, because it hasn’t been changed. Inflection means they change form. In the usual description of English, the basic form, with or without the particle to, is the infinitive. In many languages, verbs are inflected (modified in form) to encode tense, aspect, mood, and voice. A verb may also agree with the person, gender, and/or number of some of its arguments, such as its subject, or object. Verbs have tenses: present, to indicate that an action is being carried out; past, to indicate that an action has been done; future, to indicate that an action will be done. Most dictionaries, including online ones, will mark exceptions to form rules. Whenever a verb form is slightly different than the general pattern (in other words there is an exception to the form rule), the verb or the form is called irregular. As it was mentioned before depending on the language, verbs may express grammatical tense, aspect, or modality. Grammatical tense is the use of auxiliary verbs or inflections to convey whether the action or state is before, or after some reference point. The reference point could be the time of utterance, in which case the verb expresses absolute tense, or it could be a past, present, or future time of reference previously established in the sentence, in which case the verb expresses relative tense. Aspect can either be lexical, in which case the aspect is embedded in the verb's meaning (as in "the sun shines," where "shines" is lexically stative), or it can be grammatically expressed, as in "I am running." Modality expresses the speaker's attitude toward the action or state given by the verb, especially with regard to degree of necessity, obligation, or permission ("You must go", "You should go", "You may go"), determination or willingness ("I will do this no matter what"), degree of probability ("It must be raining by now", "It may be raining", "It might be raining"), or ability ("I can speak French"). All languages can express modality with adverbs, but some also use verbal forms as in the given examples. If the verbal expression of modality involves the use of an auxiliary verb, that auxiliary is called a modal verb. If the verbal expression of modality involves inflection, we have the special case of mood; moods include the indicative (as in "I am there"), the subjunctive (as in "I wish I were there"), and the imperative("Be there!"). The voice of a verb expresses whether the subject of the verb is performing the action of the verb or whether the action is being performed on the subject. The two most common voices are the active voice (as in "I saw the car") and the passive voice (as in "The car was seen by me" or simply "The car was seen"). There are a lot of scientists all around the world making researchers this part of speech as O.Jesperson, N.V. Yartseva, M. Y. Bloch, V.N. Zhigadlo, I.Y. Ivanova and others. And I agree with them that this part of speech is the hardest one, and it worth learning.
Dear Mrs.Osinovskaya! I've written the commentary concerning will/shall+Infinitive construction and I will be really satisfied to get your assessment. Thank you in advance! Nowadays a great number of issues concerning grammar are widely discussed. The verb and its peculiarities are not exceptions. To be more precise, the usage of the combinations of verbs shall and will with the infinitive is going to be considered in this essay. First of all, it is necessary to mention about meaning of these combinations. According to the representative of the twentieth century linguistics, O. Jespersen, they have modal meanings, but not every today`s scholar considers these verbs as part of the general set of modal verbs, expressing the meanings of capability, probability, permission, obligation, etc. Secondly, there is an objection against the inclusion of the shall/will + Infinitive construction in the tense system of the verb. L. S. Barkhudarov`s objection is based on the double marking of this would-be tense form by one and the same category. It implies the fact that the combinations in question can express both past and future forms at the same time which does not any important sense in terms of a grammatical category. However, there are some evidences to do this. It can be easily proved by the statement that the modal verbs shall and will have been used in the past, and continue to be used, in a variety of meanings. The verb will (but not shall) is used to express habitual action, often (but not exclusively) action that the speaker finds annoying. For instance: He will bite his nails, whatever I say; He will often stand on his head; Boys will be boys. Similarly, will is used to express something that can be expected to happen in a general case, or something that is highly likely at the present time: A coat will last two years when properly cared for; That will be Mo at the door. The other main specific implication of will is to express willingness, desire or intention. This blends with its usage in expressing futurity. What is more, Both shall and will can be used to mark a circumstance as occurring in future time; this construction is often referred to as the future tense of English. For example: Will they be here tomorrow? An influential proponent of the prescriptive rule that shall is to be used as the usual future marker in the first person was John Wallis. In Grammatica Linguae Anglicanae (1653) he wrote: "The rule is [...] to express a future event without emotional overtones, one should say I shall, we shall, but you/he/she/they will; conversely, for emphasis, willfulness, or insistence, one should say I/we will, but you/he/she/they shall". Taking these points into consideration, I would say that this question demands further discussions to find a decision which will be true, but controversial and disputable. As for me personally, there is no point in the inclusion of this construction in the tense system of the verb since it is just a way to express futurity and modality, not a form itself.
Людмила Михайловна, оставляю вам свое эссе в виде комментария к вашей презентации. Прошу вас проверить и оценить. Спасибо.
ОтветитьУдалитьС уважением, Муллаянова Регина, 27Л1217
First of all, the mood is characterized as a category of the verb or verbal inflections that expresses semantic and grammatical differences, including such forms as the indicative, subjunctive, and imperative. In fact, the category of mood in verbs has been a very disputable issue, which was developed by a lot of linguists, such as soviet scholars B.A. Ilyish, Prof. Smirnitsky, O.S.Akhmanova, M.Gashina, G.N.Vorontsova, N.Vasilevskaya, L.S.Barhudarov, M.Y. Blokh, and foreign scientist as well, M.Deutschbein, D.A. Shteling. The category of mood defines the features concerning the process devoted to the actual reality, presenting a fact that happened, happens or will happen in real life, or corresponding to an imaginary process.
To begin with, it is common to differentiate semantic approach, formal and formal- semantic approaches. Thus, scholars shared their opinions in a different ways, describing various grammatical forms of the mood in English. This number begins from two (in Barkhudarov's interpretation) to sixteeen (in Deutchbein's interpretation).
According to Professor Barkhudarov, he distinguished only two moods: Imperative and Indicative, for example, “Do not forget your lunchbox” and “My sister have a daughter” respectively. It is thought that Subjunctive Mood and Imperative are put together. Barhudarov, there are no oblique Moods as should/would + Infinitive is not an analytical form because the second element can function independently. As for the forms of the Past Indefinite and the Past Perfect used to express unreality, these forms are of the indicative Mood used in specific syntactical environment.
In contrast, Academician V.Vinogradov outlined the mood as an expression of human being’s attitude to the reality. Needless to say that it can be expressed by lexical means of modality, such as may, can, must, have to and modal words perhaps, probably. For instance, “If I were a teacher, I would give students only good marks”, we can see that his idea belongs to unreal situation or a desirable action of Subjunctive Mood.
On the other hand, Blokh, he coincides in meaning and in form with the spective mood (a variety of the subjunctive mood), which expresses suggestion, recommendation, and inducement. Taking into consideration this example “Do be careful with the papers”, in other words, “My request is that you do be careful with the papers”. We can see that “Be” has a special finite oblique mood form.
With reference to Professor Smirnitsky, he distinguished 4 oblique moods: Subjunctive I, Subjunctive II, the Conditional and the Suppositional. Each of them differs in modal meaning and in form. At first, Subjunctive I expresses synthetically a problematic action, which doesn’t contradict reality “ He gave orders that we be present” or Subjunctive II expresses synthetically and analytically an unreal action. “I wish you went to the school”. The Conditional mood expresses analytically depended unreality: the realization of the action depends on some condition, which may not be expressed: “It would be good to be here”. The Suppositional mood expresses analytically a problematic action, not contradicting reality. The realization of the action may depend on certain circumstances “Should you meet him, tell him to come” The Suppositional and Subjunctive I almost coincide in meaning but differ in style and usage.
Taking these points into consideration, I would say that it is traditionally distinct three types of the mood, while some scientists suggested more or less number of mood. The category of mood presents the interpretation of the action by the speaker from the point of view of its relation to reality, as a result, we cannot refute who is right or wrong in their approaches.
Dear Mrs.Osinovskaya, I have already left my commet upon this presentation on SlideShare, but I decided to post it here too.
ОтветитьУдалитьTo my mind, the category of tense one of the most important and underrated categories in English grammar. Since the time of speaking is designated as present time and is the starting point for the whole scale of time measuring, the category of tense is important for a speaker as well as for a listener. By the way, we should not forget that the category of tense in English expresses the relationship between the time of the action and the time of speaking The time that follows the time of speaking is designated as future time; the time that precedes the time of speaking is designated as past time. However there are three tenses in the English language (present, past and future), the existence of future tense is quite disputable. Each tense is represented by four verb forms involving such categories as aspect and perfect. Thus there are four present tense forms: the present indefinite, the present continuous, the present perfect, the present perfect continuous; four past tense forms: the past indefinite, the past continuous, the past perfect and the past perfect continuous; four future tense forms: the future indefinite, the future continuous, the future perfect and the future perfect continuous; and four future in the past tense forms: the future in the past indefinite, the future in the past continuous, the future in the past perfect, the future in the past perfect continuous. However is so-called opposition of past and present is not the opposition of just 2 verbal forms but the opposition of 2 systems of forms. For instance: works/worked, he is working/he was working, he has work/he had worked and so on. As we can see from the examples functionally all the forms, entering these two systems, are the same. They’re used in the syntactic function of the predicate in the sentence. However, as one can notice in speech in the plane of communication the present forms reveal their specific character: they reflect facts and evens as actual, immediately related to the participants of the speech act. On the contrary, the forms of the past reflect something that is already the past, history, not immediately related to the participants of the speech act. What is represented by the past forms is of some cognitive interest to the addressee. For example: I have just seen him. I saw him just now. To sum up if we admit that the tense forms of the present express reality and make the information actual for the participants of the speech act, it is possible then to account for the rule ‘in clauses of time and condition forms of the present are used instead of the future’ (though the verb expresses a future action). The same is relevant for the use of the forms of the present in object clauses after the verbs with the meaning know, learn, find, imagine, see (that), look, take care, mind, etc. So the category of tense is quite important category, which make speech, its understanding and building clear.
Dear Mrs.Osinovskaya, thank you for the information given in the presentation!
ОтветитьУдалитьI've written the commentary on the topic of the category of aspect and ask you to check it.
Thank you in advance!
Stukalova Anastasia
The concept of aspect in English is not easy to understand. That is why it is important to give a definition of this verbal category. Aspect is a grammatical category that expresses how an action, event or state, denoted by a verb, relates to the flow of time. Moreover, the realization of the category of aspect is closely connected with the lexical meaning of verbs.
To begin with, we should mention that the aspective meaning of the verb reflects the realization of the process of opposition. On the one hand, Professor M.Y. Blokh distinguished 2-member opposition: the continuous forms of the verb and non-continuous or indefinite form. Where continuous form denotes an action proceeding continuously at a definite period of time, within certain time limits and non-continuous form denotes an action not limited but either occurring repeatedly or everlasting, without any notion of lasting duration at a given moment. Examples: write-is writing; wrote – was writing; will write – will be writing. Unfortunately, there are some verbs in English that do not normally occur with continuous aspect, even in those contexts in which the majority of verbs necessarily take the continuous or progressive form. Among the so-called “non-progressive” verbs are think, understand, know, hate, love, see, taste, feel, possess, own, etc. The most striking characteristic that they have in common is the fact that they are “stative” - they refer to a state of affairs, rather than to an action, event or process. It should be observed, however, that all the “non-progressive” verbs take the progressive aspect under particular circumstances. As the result of internal transposition verbs of non-progressive nature can be found in the Continuous form: Now I'm knowing you.
On the other hand, according to B. Ylyish continuous forms are relatively new. In Anglo-Saxon such forms did not exist. The first instances of the progressive aspect appear in Middle English(1100-1500). More than that, some scholars like O.Jesperson, N.V. Yartseva either treat aspect forms as tense forms or assert that the English verb is neutral to aspects, while others speak of 9 various aspects.
In conclusion, certain aspectual distinctions express a relation in time between the event and the time of reference. The progressive forms are quite new in English language. The category of aspect is a point for discussion among scholars. I personally prefer M.Y. Blokh’s theory because it seems to be logical and easy to understand.
Dear Mrs Osinovskaya, thank you for your presentation.
ОтветитьУдалитьThere are a lot of definitions of the verb. According to the Merriam Webster dictionary A verb is a word that characteristically is the grammatical center of a predicate and expresses an act, occurrence, or mode of being, that in various languages is inflected for agreement with the subject, for tense, for voice, for mood, or for aspect, and that typically has rather full descriptive meaning and characterizing quality but is sometimes nearly devoid of these especially when used as an auxiliary or linking verb.
All English verbs start with a “base” form. This is the form you look up to learn about the verb in the dictionary. If you look up one of the other forms, you will be referred back to the base form. The base form is always uninflected, because it hasn’t been changed. Inflection means they change form. In the usual description of English, the basic form, with or without the particle to, is the infinitive. In many languages, verbs are inflected (modified in form) to encode tense, aspect, mood, and voice. A verb may also agree with the person, gender, and/or number of some of its arguments, such as its subject, or object. Verbs have tenses: present, to indicate that an action is being carried out; past, to indicate that an action has been done; future, to indicate that an action will be done. Most dictionaries, including online ones, will mark exceptions to form rules. Whenever a verb form is slightly different than the general pattern (in other words there is an exception to the form rule), the verb or the form is called irregular.
As it was mentioned before depending on the language, verbs may express grammatical tense, aspect, or modality. Grammatical tense is the use of auxiliary verbs or inflections to convey whether the action or state is before, or after some reference point. The reference point could be the time of utterance, in which case the verb expresses absolute tense, or it could be a past, present, or future time of reference previously established in the sentence, in which case the verb expresses relative tense. Aspect can either be lexical, in which case the aspect is embedded in the verb's meaning (as in "the sun shines," where "shines" is lexically stative), or it can be grammatically expressed, as in "I am running." Modality expresses the speaker's attitude toward the action or state given by the verb, especially with regard to degree of necessity, obligation, or permission ("You must go", "You should go", "You may go"), determination or willingness ("I will do this no matter what"), degree of probability ("It must be raining by now", "It may be raining", "It might be raining"), or ability ("I can speak French"). All languages can express modality with adverbs, but some also use verbal forms as in the given examples. If the verbal expression of modality involves the use of an auxiliary verb, that auxiliary is called a modal verb. If the verbal expression of modality involves inflection, we have the special case of mood; moods include the indicative (as in "I am there"), the subjunctive (as in "I wish I were there"), and the imperative("Be there!"). The voice of a verb expresses whether the subject of the verb is performing the action of the verb or whether the action is being performed on the subject. The two most common voices are the active voice (as in "I saw the car") and the passive voice (as in "The car was seen by me" or simply "The car was seen").
There are a lot of scientists all around the world making researchers this part of speech as O.Jesperson, N.V. Yartseva, M. Y. Bloch, V.N. Zhigadlo, I.Y. Ivanova and others. And I agree with them that this part of speech is the hardest one, and it worth learning.
Dear Mrs.Osinovskaya!
ОтветитьУдалитьI've written the commentary concerning will/shall+Infinitive construction and I will be really satisfied to get your assessment.
Thank you in advance!
Nowadays a great number of issues concerning grammar are widely discussed. The verb and its peculiarities are not exceptions. To be more precise, the usage of the combinations of verbs shall and will with the infinitive is going to be considered in this essay.
First of all, it is necessary to mention about meaning of these combinations. According to the representative of the twentieth century linguistics, O. Jespersen, they have modal meanings, but not every today`s scholar considers these verbs as part of the general set of modal verbs, expressing the meanings of capability, probability, permission, obligation, etc.
Secondly, there is an objection against the inclusion of the shall/will + Infinitive construction in the tense system of the verb. L. S. Barkhudarov`s objection is based on the double marking of this would-be tense form by one and the same category. It implies the fact that the combinations in question can express both past and future forms at the same time which does not any important sense in terms of a grammatical category.
However, there are some evidences to do this. It can be easily proved by the statement that the modal verbs shall and will have been used in the past, and continue to be used, in a variety of meanings. The verb will (but not shall) is used to express habitual action, often (but not exclusively) action that the speaker finds annoying. For instance: He will bite his nails, whatever I say; He will often stand on his head; Boys will be boys. Similarly, will is used to express something that can be expected to happen in a general case, or something that is highly likely at the present time: A coat will last two years when properly cared for; That will be Mo at the door. The other main specific implication of will is to express willingness, desire or intention. This blends with its usage in expressing futurity.
What is more, Both shall and will can be used to mark a circumstance as occurring in future time; this construction is often referred to as the future tense of English. For example: Will they be here tomorrow? An influential proponent of the prescriptive rule that shall is to be used as the usual future marker in the first person was John Wallis. In Grammatica Linguae Anglicanae (1653) he wrote: "The rule is [...] to express a future event without emotional overtones, one should say I shall, we shall, but you/he/she/they will; conversely, for emphasis, willfulness, or insistence, one should say I/we will, but you/he/she/they shall".
Taking these points into consideration, I would say that this question demands further discussions to find a decision which will be true, but controversial and disputable. As for me personally, there is no point in the inclusion of this construction in the tense system of the verb since it is just a way to express futurity and modality, not a form itself.