Video lesson “Nominative sentences. Nominative (nominative) sentences are one-part, segmentable sentences in which the semantic subject and its

Sentences whose grammatical basis consists of two main members (subject and predicate) are called two-part.

Sentences whose grammatical basis consists of one main member are called one-part sentences. One-piece sentences have a complete meaning, and therefore the second main member is sometimes not needed or even impossible.

For example: In the summer I will go to the sea. Dark. It's time to go. magical night.

One-part sentences, unlike incomplete ones, are understandable out of context.

There are several types of one-part sentences:

Definitely personal
vaguely personal,
generalized personal,
impersonal,
naming (nominative).

Each of the types of one-component sentences differs in the features of the meaning and the form of expression of the main member.

Definitely personal suggestions- these are one-part sentences with the main member of the predicate, conveying the actions of a certain person (the speaker or the interlocutor).

In definite personal sentences the main member is expressed by the verb in the form of 1 and 2 persons of the singular and plural of the indicative mood(in present and future tense) and in the imperative mood ; the producer of the action is defined and can be called personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person I , You , We , You .

For example: I love thunderstorm in early May(Tyutchev); We will endure trials patiently(Chekhov); go, take a bow fish(Pushkin).

In definite personal offers the predicate cannot be expressed by a verb in the 3rd person singular and a verb in the past tense. In such cases, the proposal does not indicate a specific person and the proposal itself is incomplete.

Compare: Do you also know Greek? - Studied a little(Ostrovsky).

Indefinitely personal sentences- these are one-part sentences with the main member of the predicate, conveying the actions of an indefinite subject.

In indefinite personal sentences the main member is expressed by the verb in the form of the 3rd person plural (present and future tenses in the indicative mood and in the imperative mood), the plural form of the past tense of the indicative mood and the analogous form of the conditional mood of the verb.

The producer of the action in these sentences is unknown or unimportant.

For example: In the house knocked stove doors(A. Tolstoy); On the streets somewhere far away shoot (Bulgakov); Would give man relax in front of the road(Sholokhov).

Generalized personal sentences

Generalized personal sentences- these are one-part sentences with the main member of the predicate, conveying the actions of a generalized subject (the action is attributed to everyone and everyone individually).

The main member in a generalized personal sentence can have the same ways of expression as in definite personal and indefinite personal sentences, but most often expressed by a 2nd person singular and plural present and future tense verb or a 3rd person plural verb.

For example: Good for bad do not change (proverb); Not very much older now respect (Ostrovsky); What sow, then and reap (proverb).

Generalized personal sentences are usually presented in proverbs, sayings, catch phrases, aphorisms.

Generalized-personal sentences also include sentences containing the author's generalization. To give a generalized meaning, instead of the 1st person verb, the speaker uses the 2nd person verb.

For example: you go out sometimes outside and wonder air transparency.

impersonal proposals

impersonal proposals- these are one-part sentences with the main member of the predicate, conveying actions or states that occur regardless of the producer of the action.

In such proposals it is impossible to substitute the subject .

The main member of an impersonal sentence may be similar in structure to a simple verbal predicate and is expressed:

1) an impersonal verb, the only syntactic function of which is to be the main member of impersonal one-part sentences:

For example: It's getting cold / getting colder /it will get colder .

2) a personal verb in an impersonal form:

For example: It's getting dark .

3) the verb to be and the word no in negative sentences:

For example: Winds did not have / No .

The main member, similar in structure to the compound verb predicate , may have the following expression:

1) modal or phase verb in impersonal form + infinitive:
For example: Outside the window it began to get dark .

2) the linking verb to be in the impersonal form (in the present tense in the zero form) + adverb + infinitive:
For example: It's a pity / it was a pity to leave with friends.
It's time to get ready on the road.

The main member, similar in structure to the compound nominal predicate , is expressed:

1) linking verb in impersonal form + adverb:
For example: It was a pity old man.

On the street. became freshly.

2) linking verb in impersonal form + short passive participle:

For example: In the room it was smoky .

A special group among impersonal sentences is formed by infinitive sentences .

The main member of a one-part sentence can be expressed by an infinitive that does not depend on any other member of the sentence and denotes an action that is possible or impossible, necessary, inevitable. Such sentences are called infinitive.

For example: him tomorrow be on duty. Everyone get up! I would like to go to Moscow!

Infinitive sentences have different modal meanings: obligation, necessity, possibility or impossibility, inevitability of action; as well as an incentive to action, a command, an order.

Infinitive sentences are divided into unconditional (Be silent!) And conditionally desirable (to read).

Denominative (nominative) sentences- these are one-part sentences that convey the meaning of being (existence, presence) of the subject of speech (thought).

The main member in the nominative sentence can be expressed by a noun in the nominative case and a quantitative-nominal combination .

For example: Night, Street, flashlight, pharmacy .Senseless and dull light (Block); Three wars, three hungry pores, what the century has awarded(Soloukhin).

Descriptive sentences may include demonstrative particles out , Here , and for the introduction of emotional evaluation - exclamation particles WellAnd , Which , like this :

For example: Which weather! Well rain! Like this storm!

The distributors of the nominal sentence can be agreed and inconsistent definitions:
For example: Late autumn .

If the distributor is a circumstance of place, time, then such sentences can be interpreted as two-part incomplete:
For example: Soon autumn . (Compare: Soon autumn will come .)
On the street rain . (Compare: On the street it's raining .)

Denominative (nominative) sentences can have the following subspecies:

1) Self-existential sentences expressing the idea of ​​the existence of a phenomenon, object, time.
For example: April 22 years old. blue. The snow melted.

2) Demonstrative existential sentences. The basic meaning of beingness is complicated by the meaning of indication.
For example: Here mill.

3) Estimated-existential (Dominance of assessment).
For example: Well day! Ah yes...! And character! + particles well, then, also to me, but also.

An evaluative noun can act as the main member ( beauty . Nonsense .)

4) desirable-existential (particles only, if only).
For example: If only health. Not just death. If happiness.

5) incentive (incentive-desirable: Attention ! Good afternoon ! and incentive-imperative: Fire ! and so on.).

It is necessary to distinguish constructions from nominative sentences that coincide in form with them.

The nominative case in the role of a simple name (name, inscription). They can be called properly-named - there is absolutely no meaning of beingness.
For example: "War and Peace".

The nominative case in the function of a predicate two-part sentence ( Who is he? Familiar.)

The nominative case of the topic can be attributed to isolated nominative ones, but in terms of content they do not have the meaning of beingness, they do not perform a communicative function, they form a syntactic unity only in combination with a subsequent construction.
For example: Moscow. How much has merged in this sound for the Russian heart ... Autumn. I especially love this time of year.

There is such an expressive stylistic device in artistic and poetic works as the use of one-component sentences in the text.

1. It's getting light... 2. It's cool. 3. Morning. 4. And here are the guests to us!

May be with the main member expressed in the verb form (1) or adverb (2). But one-part nominal sentences differ in that they consist only of the main member, resembling the subject in form (3, 4).

Most often, this member is expressed by a noun in the nominative case or by a noun with dependent words. For example:

1. War. 2. Year 1941. 3. Burnt villages. 4. Ruin and desolation. 5. Sobbing over the corpses of children inconsolable mothers.

From the examples presented, it can be seen that denominative sentences can consist of a one-word main member (1, 4), but also the main member sometimes carries dependent words. (2, 3, 5) Although often personal pronouns can also act as the main member.

1. And here he is! 2. Our kind Santa Claus!

Also, from the example, we conclude that the use of the word "here" in the nominal sentence does not change its classification at all.

Nominative sentences affirm the existence of some phenomena at the present time. There are four main categories of them: existential, indicative, evaluative-existential, and desirable-existential.

Existential denominative sentences are most often narrative, which simply name existing objects or phenomena, stating the fact of their existence. The subject is present in such sentences in the nominative case. For example:

1. Five twenty in the evening. 2. Unsuccessful experiment.

Demonstrative nominal sentences contain in their composition "here", "here", "out", "out and".

1. Here is the willow. 2. And here is the house. 3. There is a bath nearby. 4. And there is a haystack.

Evaluative-existential sentences are usually pronounced with an exclamatory or interrogative intonation, which is indicated by the corresponding and expressive-emotional particles “what”, “what”, “well”. The following suggestions are examples:

1. What a beautiful day! 2. What a meeting! 3. And the secret? 4. Well, let the mystery!

Sentences expressing a strong desire or dream, in addition to the nominal subject in the nominative case, often include particles "if only", "if only", "if only". These are the so-called desirable-existential nominal sentences. Examples:

1. Ah, just one call! 2. Only her ringing voice!

Very often nominal sentences are used in everyday speech and, as a result, in direct speech or in scenarios of dramatic works.

1. - said the girl, pointing to the side. 2. "A lady in a hat with a bouquet, sitting near a tub of ficus," the man nodded in response.

1. Curtain. 2. A long, long spiral staircase going right up to the ceiling. 3. Background: a rock, a lone pine tree on it.

Some linguists also include the names of literary, musical and visual works, books, magazines, films, TV shows, inscriptions on signs, and the like as nominal sentences. But in this case, the opinions of linguists differ.

1. "Elusive Avengers". 2. "Girl with peaches." 3. Entrance to the third floor. 4. "Blue light".

Some works, most often poetic, are original, consisting exclusively of nominal sentences. The peculiarity of such a presentation is fundamentality, stopping in action. Indeed, without predicates it is quite difficult to show the development of the plot, the movement.

1. The question of nominatives (from the Latin word nominativus, which means - the nominative case ) sentences in Russian syntactic science are among the “old”, insufficiently developed, although the presence of sentences of this type is beyond doubt and is recognized by the authors of all academic grammars of the Russian language, university textbooks, and school textbooks. Special studies are devoted to nominative sentences, the subject of which is the grammatical nature of the nominative sentence and the syntactic function of its main member. In recent decades, the structural scheme of the nominative sentence, the reasons for its selection, the genetic nature of the nominative sentence have been of scientific interest. A way of expressing predicativity.

In modern syntactic science, there are two approaches to nominative sentences: broad and narrow.

In a narrow approach, nominatives are understood as “single-component sentences that affirm the presence, existence of an object or phenomenon, called the main member of the sentence, which can be expressed by a noun in the nominative case or by a quantitative-nominal combination (less often, by a numeral or personal pronoun)” . For example: Noise, laughter, running around, bows, gallop, mazurka, waltz... (Pushkin); Tatars, Mamai, Mitka... (Bunin); Wind, wind! (Block); Height. Clouds. Water. Brody. Rivers. Years and centuries. (Parsnip); Spring. Fourth hour of the day.(Kuprin); The twentieth century… Even more homeless, Even more terrible than life's darkness (Even blacker and more huge Shadow of Lucifer's wing). (A. Blok).

This is the so-called traditional approach. When allocating nominative sentences into a special group, linguists take into account the semantic and grammatical features inherent in these sentences and distinguishing them from other types of Russian sentences.

The constitutive feature of nominative sentences is the feature beingness, or existentiality. The dictum component of the content structure of these sentences states existence, existence objects and phenomena as objects located in a certain space, observed and perceived through one or another perceptual channel of a thinking being, a person, for whom the term “observer” is assigned in grammar. So, for example, presented in a non-union complex sentence Night, street, lantern, pharmacy, Senseless and dim light(Block) phenomena and objects of the surrounding world are perceived by the observer visually. In a statement Needle frost, shaggy paws, dark snow(Bulgakov) the lexeme "frost" nominates a phenomenon perceived through its touch by the skin, the same objects as tree branches (paws), snow are perceived visually.

However, unlike other semantic varieties of existential sentences with lexically represented beingness, for example, In the courtyardcosts neighbors car(the being of an object is represented by the lexeme costs), the beingness of sentences with a single main member, expressed in the nominative case, is implicit, i.e., a special lexical indicator, not expressed. According to Alexander Vladimirovich Bondarko“It is only implied. This or that phenomenon, presented as a substance, is called - the season, the day of the week, part of the day, the state of nature, the environment (including objects and dynamic manifestations of the elements of the described situation) - and it is understood that all this ( Winter; Sunday; Night; Cool; Silence; A park; Yearning; Boredom; Laughter; Noise etc.) exists at the period or moment of time in question, but it is not specifically, explicitly expressed” .

Nevertheless, beingness in sentences of this type has its own forms of expression: it is represented morphologicallyand syntactically. Morphological the way of expressing beingness lies in the substantive, which verbalizes not only objects proper, but phenomena as objects of perception, as substances. Syntactic the way of designating beingness lies in the independent syntactic position of the nominative form of the name.

The temporal plan of nominative sentences is also specific, in which there is one nominative case of a noun with or without verbal distributors. It is formed by the time of perception of the surrounding world by the observer and the time of information about the observed. The time of perception of the surrounding fragment of the world by the observer and the time of information about this fragment coincide. The coincidence in time of perception and information about the perceived determined the meaning of the temporal component in the content structure of nominative sentences, the form of the present tense.

The specifics of the modal-temporal plan determined the opinion of a number of linguists that the paradigm of nominative sentences is represented by only one temporary form - the present tense form and the real modality. It is the constant modal-temporal meaning of the traditionally distinguished nominative sentences, and this is their constitutive feature, that does not allow paradigmatic changes in moods and tenses. Suggestions like It was winter; It was Sunday, according to, for example, A. V. Bondarko, are "a special type of sentence, and not an element of the same syntactic paradigm, which includes constructions like Winter". In support of his position, the scientist draws attention to the lack of regular correlation of constructions “without a verb be and with this verb in the past tense. Wed artificiality of speech There was a steppe; There was a park; There was longing and so on.". Hence his summary: “As for proposals was winter, it will be frost, then they should be recognized as two-part sentences: winter, freezing- subject, was, will be- predicates, and the verb means cash in the past or future " .

The same approach to sentences like It was winter was previously expressed Alexey Alexandrovich Shakhmatov in his famous Syntax of the Russian Language. Justifying his point of view, he wrote: “Suggestions, how winter, frost, fire expressing the presence of these phenomena or objects at the present time, at the present moment, we recognized one-piece and, moreover, complete, since we have no reason to define them as broken two-part sentences (with the omission of one or another predicate). As for suggestions, how it was winter, it will be winter, then they must be recognized as sentences two-part: winter, frost- subject, was, will be- predicates, and the verb means cash in the past or future.<…>if the historically indicated proposals even went back to there is winter, there is frost, then at present they can still be considered as one-part sentences, because for the completeness of their meaning it is not required to insert the 3rd person singular of the verb There is; secondly, the very grammatical form of these sentences, their stress, their pronunciation accompanied by emphasis * clearly separates them, as one-part sentences, from two-part sentences like such as it was winter, it will be frost; to express cash in the present tense, apparently, the original name was accompanied by an emphase, which made its division superfluous; to express cash in the past or future, it was necessary to divide the word sentence into a two-part sentence ... " .

A similar point of view on these varieties of sentences is also presented by the authors of the academic “Grammar of the Russian Language” of 1954, it is also offered in university and school textbooks.

However, in Russian linguistics, the generally accepted qualification of sentences like It was winter have not received.

The approach to the linguistic status of the sentences under consideration is inconsistent, for example, Natalia Yulievna Shvedova. So, in the theoretical "Fundamentals of constructing a descriptive grammar of the modern Russian language" sentences like It was winter she relates to two-part mixed paradigm, explaining it as follows: "To sentences with mixed complete paradigm include all so-called nominative sentences<…>In the form of the present indicative, these sentences act as the original member of the paradigm; in the forms of the past and future tenses and unreal moods, the role of members of the paradigm here is played by two-part sentences with the forms be as a predicate: Winter - It was winter - There will be winter . In the "Grammar of the modern Russian literary language" when describing the block diagram N N 1 type Night, Silence N. Yu. Shvedova actually recognizes the status of one-component sentences for sentences that verbalize the specified structural scheme. “In the past. and bud. tenses and in surreal moods as part of the sentences of the N N 1 scheme, – she writes – auxiliary verb forms appear be, and in implementations with semi-coupling verbs - the forms of these verbs: There was, there will be night, Silence is made and so on. However, such changes Not do these two-part sentences(our italics. - V.K.), because between the name and the verb, the relationship between the attribute and its carrier is not established, and the verb is a service syntactic formant - an indicator of temporal reference or temporal changes " . In the "Russian Grammar" nominative sentences are also considered as one-part, built according to the structural scheme N 1, with an eight-term paradigm, including the forms of the syntactic indicative and syntactic irreal moods , thus, according to N. Yu. Shvedova, sentences like It was night; There will be a night are included in the paradigm of the nominative sentence as a variant of the block diagram N 1.

On the indivisibility of sentences of the type It was winter previously said and Victor Vladimirovich Vinogradov:"Offer It was winter- for modern consciousness it is just as monomial (i.e., one-component. - V.K.), as Winter. This is a simple name for a phenomenon related to the past, a simple statement of a phenomenon in the past. Wed: Evening was. Stars sparkled. Frost crackled outside", he wrote. According to V. V. Vinogradov, in such sentences “nothing says anything about syntactic dismemberment into subject and predicate” .

The foregoing allows a group of linguists to recognize the verb form in sentences like There was frost a syntactic formant, a delexicalized lexeme that expresses only the grammatical categories of tense and mood, without adding anything to the nominative meaning of the sentence. "In the statement There was frost the verb plays the same role as in the sentence It was frosty. In both cases, its function is equal to the function of the past tense morpheme in the sentence Freezer”, - say the authors of the fundamental academic work “General Linguistics. The internal structure of the language" .

2. One of the questions that has attracted the attention of researchers throughout the history of the study of nominative sentences, but has not found a generally accepted solution, is the question of the syntactic function of the nominative case.

At the dawn of isolating this type of sentences Alexander Afanasyevich Potebnya in his historical work "From Notes on Russian Grammar" recommended to determine the syntactic function of the only nominative case based on the context that would qualify it either as subject, either as predicate. He wrote: “Thus, in cases where only the nominative of the noun is on the face of the sentence, we distinguish by context whether this case is worth it as subject with an unfinished predicate (for example, in Novg. l. P, 38: “in the summer of 6917. A miracle is terrible in the church of St. Michael on Skovorodki in the monastery: a sound in poppy, November 30, two days and two nights”)<…>or how predicative attribute, part of a compound predicate with implied subject and verb (copy). The latter case includes the exclamations “fire!” and titles" (our italics. - V.K.).

Philip Fedorovich Fortunatov, approaching the sentence as an expression of "psychological judgment in speech", he considered the nominative sentences to be incomplete, and also considered the word form that forms them to be a predicate. He wrote: "For example, the word fire, and moreover, not only in an exclamation, under the influence of the feelings I experience, but also in calm speech, it can be used as a sentence, precisely as an incomplete sentence; in the psychological judgment expressed in this sentence in speech, the psychological subject is, for example, the representation of that flame, smoke that I just saw, and the psychological predicate, in the second part of the same thought, includes the representation of the word fire. In exactly the same way, of course, other words can be an expression in speech of psychological predicates in those psychological judgments, or sentences in thought, which have as psychological subjects direct representations of known objects; for example, each of the words like house, lamp, tree, bird etc. can be a sentence in speech, namely a sentence incomplete in the indicated sense of this term ” .

Konstantin Sergeevich Aksakov opposed the qualification of a nominative nominative sentence by a predicate, believing that “the idea of ​​being here is included in the very concept of an object, does not stand out from it; hence the word implied in this case is false. “It's the same,” he continues his thought, “as if, looking out the window and seeing the falling rain, you simply said: rain. What? The verb here is There is or not? We think not. About yesterday (about the past), you can and should use the verb and say it was raining; about tomorrow (about the future): will rain, because here you do not simply call the object by its name, because the object itself is not in front of you, but indicate the relation of the existence of the object to the minute in which you are: you are in one case remember, in a different - imagine his. The verb obviously becomes necessary here,” he concludes. .

The twentieth century also did not lead to a uniform interpretation of the syntactic function of the structure-forming component of nominative sentences.

Dmitry Nikolaevich Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskiy nominative of nominative sentences qualified as subject. Analyzing the lines of the poem by A. A. Fet

« Whisper, timid breath,

trill nightingale,

Silver and flutter

sleepy creek…»,

he wrote: “Without inserting verbs (which would spoil the whole poem), we, however, accompany these nouns with the mental sensation of a verbal predicate - because they are given to us as subject» (our italics. - V.K.).

How the subject determines the syntactic function of the nominative sentence Vasily Alekseevich Bogoroditsky, Leonard Arsenievich Bulakhovsky and etc.

Russian philologist Innokenty Fedorovich Annensky, on the contrary, considered the nominative of the nominative sentence predicate. In an article devoted to the “Syntax of the Russian language” by D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky, when interpreting the same poem, he wrote: “I consider the subject not named, but a living sensation of the night. The poet understands it little by little, and as this predicts your feeling. If we had subjects in front of us, they would be given for predication, and the poem would lose not only charm, but also meaning. (our italics. - V.K.).

Alexander Matveevich Peshkovsky, recognizing nominative sentences as an independent structural type of one-component sentences, the nominative terminated predicate, pointing out the impossibility of the presence in these sentences, already “by their very nature”, “neither subject, nor verbal predicate» .

Evdokia Mikhailovna Galkina-Fedoruk in the monographic work Judgment and Proposal, he distinguishes between two types of nominative sentences: subject And predicative pointing to the difficulty of their differentiation. “It is not always easy to distinguish between the nominative subject and the nominative predicate. But is it possible to refuse analysis just because it is difficult? - the author sums up . In the university textbook “Modern Russian language. Syntax" she confirms her position by stating that "the main member of a nominative sentence can be either the subject or the predicate." At the same time, in the section “Nominative predicate-non-subjective sentences”, heterogeneous groups of sentences are combined that are difficult to attribute to nominative ones. For example, along with sentences “containing the answer to some modally colored question” such as Who's there? – Girls! – What girls? That's right, girls, "which were formed from incomplete ones," and sentences in which the main member predicates the subject of thought as a perceived phenomenon that is not called by a word. Her example : Here ... they did not guess, they ended up in the rear of the German. Well thenwar (Simonov). The nominative predicate-non-subject includes sentences expressing “an assessment, a description of what was said in the previous sentence or is being said now about the subject of the judgment, but is not expressed verbally. For example: It was difficult to see who they were at such a distance, but judging by the fact that the horses were galloping at random, Yakovenko immediately decided that they were locals. -fists he said contemptuously.... (Kremlev, Soldiers of the Revolution)" .

Natalia Yulievna Shvedova, the author of the corresponding section of the academic “Grammar of the Russian language”, calls the nominative case of nominative sentences the main member without differentiating it into subject and predicate . In the "Grammar of the Modern Russian Literary Language", the same scientist singled out a structural scheme as a marker of nominative sentences, symbolically designated as N N 1 with principal member– nominative case of a noun, illustrated by examples Night; Silence; Creek; Call! Summer; War! and in the "Russian Grammar" - as N 1 with examples: Night; Silence; Argument; Fainting .

Elena Sergeevna Skoblikova also considers it appropriate to assign to the nominative of nominative sentences "an undifferentiated terminological designation -" the main member "", arguing that he, the nominative of nominative sentences, "turns out in these conditions as an exponent of a special meaning - the meaning subject, being essential sign the whole situation. This determines its specificity. It has the same form as the subject, but denotes not a carrier sign(as in two-part sentences), but a special kind of sign (our italics. - V.K.). At the same time, due to the peculiarity of its indicative semantics, the main member of a denominative sentence does not have the properties of a predicate: it is not able to be used with a bunch and be an exponent of modal-temporal meanings: the speaker conveys the relation of the object or phenomenon he calls to reality with the help of intonation, cf .: Fire! And Fire?; Cossacks! And Cossacks? and under." .

This point of view goes back to the teachings of Acad. A. A. Shakhmatova, who wrote: “Like any other sentence, one-part sentences correspond to communication that combined the idea of ​​the subject with the idea of ​​the predicate; such a correspondence is found between the composition of the entire sentence and communication; but it follows that the main member of a one-part sentence in itself corresponds to the same combination of subject and predicate.<…>Compared with the ways of verbal expression of the main members in two-part sentences, the main member of a one-part sentence can be identified formally either with the subject or with the predicate, and, of course, one should not forget that such a “predicate” differs from the predicate of a two-part sentence in that it causes an idea of ​​both the predicate and the subject, while the predicate of a two-part sentence corresponds only to the predicate, and also that the “subject” of a one-part sentence evokes the idea of ​​both the subject and the predicate, while the subject of two-part sentences corresponds only to the subject” (our italics. - V.K.). Therefore, “the member of the sentence, corresponding in its meaning to the combination of the subject with the predicate, we will call the main member, the main member of a one-part sentence; in one-component sentences, therefore, the dismemberment that is undoubtedly found in communication itself did not find verbal expression; two-term communication corresponds to a one-part (often one-part, one-part) sentence " . However, the noted specificity of the main member of one-component sentences did not prevent A. A. Shakhmatov from describing nominative sentences in the section “invariably subject”, which suggests that he still considers the nominative case of nominative sentences subject, formal, but subject, although he does not use this term when characterizing the main member of the nominative sentence. In his opinion, nominative sentences are “a combination of a subject with such a predicate that corresponds to the idea of ​​being, presence, appearance of a given subject” .

Vera Arsenievna Beloshapkova behind the structure-forming component of nominative sentences, he also assigns the term “the main member of a one-part sentence”, qualifying it “ third main member offers" (our italics. - V.K.).

Vera Vasilievna Babaitseva, noting multifunctionality of the nominative case in the nominative sentence, and hence its syntactic ambiguity and the impossibility of determining its syntactic role, “based only on grammatical indicators”, considers it necessary “to take into account the nature of the thought expressed and the communicative tasks of the sentence”. "In some cases he getting closer with the subject, in others - with the predicate. In addition, - according to V. V. Babaitseva, - the main member cannot be qualified if the sentence does not have a clear logical and syntactic articulation " (our italics. - V.K.). However, the recognition of the paradigmatic series Heat. - It was hot. - It will be hot. - It would be hot. - Let it be hot allowed her to consider this series “as one of the confirmations of the “subject” role of the noun” .

3. The second half of the 20th century brought the doctrine of syntactic paradigmatics and the doctrine of syntactic zero to the syntactic arena, which made it possible to single out nominative sentences from the group of one-part sentences and qualify them as two-part sentences. For example, E. A. Sedelnikov, examining the structure of a simple sentence from the point of view of syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations, comes to the conclusion that in “the present tense form of the sentence It was hot that member of the syntagma that forms the sentence, which performs the function of distinction (predicate), is expressed by zero: Heat... This is possible because in other forms, opposed in the paradigmatic series to this form of the sentence, FR*- member receives verbal expression. Heat, there was heat, there will be heat, there would be heat, Let there be heat etc. - different forms of the sentence, representing the same model. Therefore, nominative sentences cannot be considered as one e ”(my italics. - V.K.). The learned linguist proposes to call them two-part sentences with the zero form of the present tense verb predicate There is .

The idea of ​​a zero predicate in a nominative sentence is widely reflected in the works of other researchers of Russian syntax.

Mikhail Viktorovich Panov, for example, claims that in the Russian nominative sentence "the predicative combination<…>expressed by a noun and a zero form of a full-valued verb be.(This zero form is not “omitted”, but, of course, is present). The meaning of this zero form is the same as that of all present tense forms; in particular, it can indicate the non-confinement of an action (here, being) to a certain time. Considering an offer It was a warm, clear night Warm, clear night, he comes to the conclusion that “the sentence is based on the predicative combination “noun in the nominative case + conjugated form of the verb“” .

V. A. Itskovich also disagrees that in sentences traditionally terminating nominatives, there is one main member and, based on the paradigm Night - There was a night - There will be a night - There would be a night - If there was a night! - Let it be night comes to the conclusion that in this paradigm “all forms (except the original one) are two-part sentences. And if all forms are two-part (in all forms there is also a subject night, and predicate - forms of the verb be), then, therefore, the present tense form contains the predicate - the zero form of the verb be". The researcher considers it necessary to write down the form of the present tense with an indication of the presence of a zero member: Night#. The paradigm of the nominative sentence should be presented as follows: Night# - There was a night - There will be a night - There would be a night - If there was a night!“This means that the so-called nominative sentences are the present tense form of such two-part sentences that have only a verb in the predicate be, not common in other words " .

The idea of ​​a zero predicate made it possible to recognize nominative sentences as two-part sentences with a zero predicate A. S. Popov and the authors of the Prague "Russian Grammar", who characterized nominative sentences as a special kind of "two-part two-component" sentence, in which " V f is implemented in all forms, with the exception of the present tense, which is presented in zero form " .

Yuri Trofimovich Dolin the approach to nominative sentences, taking into account the paradigmatic aspect, as two-part sentences with a zero predicate seems to be "convincing and logically consistent". He substantiates his point of view by the functioning of sentences of this type in the text. According to his observations, “in the text, nominative sentences are, as a rule, in the same syntagmatic row with such sentences in which the predicates are expressed by the form of the present tense of the indicative mood,” while sentences like It was winter; It will be winter accordingly, they always stand in the same syntagmatic row with such sentences in which the predicates are expressed in the forms of the past and future tenses. Wed examples of Yu. T. Dolina:

Winter. Peasant, triumphant,

On firewood, updates the path.

His horse, smelling snow,

Trotting somehow.

A. S. Pushkin

There will be a storm! We'll bet

And we will fight it.

N. M. Yazykov .

4. The composition of the classical nominative sentence, in addition to the nominative case, may include determiners of various forms, its determiners. For example: Whisper,timid breath, trillnightingale , Silver and sleepy ripplestream , Night light,night shadows, Shadows without end, A series of magical changes in a sweet face(A. Fet); Golden night! Silence, light, fragrance andbeneficial , revitalizing heat(Leskov); ANDeternal the battle! Rest only in our dreams. Through blood and dust ... The steppe mare flies, flies And crushes the feather grass... (A. Blok). Front,guerrilla edge, rear Evacuation, occupation, losses, searches, meetingsdecades later ... Stories of the war and post-war years, dramatic and almost detective stories. (A. Aleksin).

Sentences with included attributive word forms always coincide in form with phrases represented by one core component and the definition (definitions) related to it.

5. In addition to significant lexemes, nominative sentences represented by the nominative case of a noun may include particles and interjections. For example: Darkness.(L. Sobolev); - Well , Yalta... (M. Bulgakov); Well night! Fear! (L. Tolstoy); I met the wrong one at the entrance: I dropped my handkerchief - and one. no one. Only night and freedom . Only the silence is eerie. (A. Blok).

The presence of such distributors affects the semantics of the nominative sentence, determining its functional variety.

Taking into account the semantic-functional purpose, linguists usually distinguish the following varieties of the classical nominative sentence: 1) existential (properly existential and object-existential), 2) demonstrative; 3) evaluative-existential.

Under proper existential sentences are understood as such sentences in which the presence of a phenomenon conceivable in time is represented. For example: Night . Dark winter sky. In Novgorod there is a deep sleep, and everything is surrounded by silence.... (M. Lermontov); Black evening, White snow. Wind, wind! (A. Blok); one thousand nine hundred and sixteen year . October . Night . Rain, wind. trenches over the swamp , overgrown with alder. Ahead wirebarriers (M. Sholokhov); Drizzle. Twilight . Road steppe(M. Sholokhov); Goldennight ! Silence , light , fragrance and beneficent, revitalizingheat . (Leskov); Early morning , on the streetthaw , Light, fluffy snow falls(L. Oshin); - Rain, rain ! - Dasha shouted enthusiastically, running to the door(P. Proskurin).

IN subject-existential sentences named objects located in space. The speaker-observer sees these objects and invites the listener-reader to see them as well. For example: sunken toothlessmouth with a droopy lower lip(M. Bulgakov); illuminated againhighway – Street Kropotkin, thenlane , ThenOstozhenka and furtherlane , dull, ugly and dimly lit(M. Bulgakov); City. Corner. small houses on the outskirts, rareovercoats . (M. Bulgakov); Pines . narrowroad . (A. Fadeev); Field . Haystacks hay. (A. Fadeev); empty street . One fire in the window. Jewish pharmacist groans in his sleep(A. Blok)

IN index sentences of the seme of being, existence is complicated by the seme of indicating existing objects and phenomena. The structural feature of such sentences is the presence of pointing particles Here (that's), out, and here, in the semantics of which is an indication of the appearance, detection of an object. Demonstrative sentences are a clear fact of colloquial speech, and in literary texts they appear when the writer wants to imitate colloquial speech. For example: Won sun, blue sky ... what a clean air(Kuprin); Won , it seems, a passenger train. (I. Bunin); AHere and a little horse(A. Chekhov); The wind died down, and the glory roared Clothed over those ponds. Vaughn and the schemer . Closing the book, He humbly waits for the star. (A. Blok); Here it, my flock is red! (S. Yesenin); Here September, evening(I. Bunina); Here it, stupid happiness with white windows to the garden(S. Yesenin); Here is the sword . He was. But he is not needed. Who weakened my hand? - I remember: a small row of pearls One night, under the moon. (A. Blok). Here he is - Christ - in chains and roses Behind the bars of my prison.Here is the lamb meek in white robes , Came and looks out the prison window.(A. Blok)

However, there is no generally accepted approach to the qualification of these proposals in science. So, Igor Pavlovich Raspopov expresses doubts about the selection of demonstrative nominative sentences on the grounds that the demonstrative particles introduced into sentences Here And out have a pronominal character and in their function approach “with demonstrative pronouns This, That, and, therefore, can be considered as a kind of substitutes (substitutes) for the subject with a nominal predicate. Continuing his thought, he speaks of the functional-semantic similarity of pointing particles Here And out and locative adverbs Here And there. Based on this proximity, I.P. Raspopov comes to the conclusion that the analyzed sentences should be qualified as sentences “with the reduced predicate “location” (cf. Here is a mill, Here is a bream; There's a rainbow)» .

Under oh value-existential sentences usually include such nominative sentences in which, along with the statement of the existence of objects and phenomena represented by the nominative case, its emotional assessment is also given: the speaker not only sees the object he calls, but also experiences some emotions from what he sees. Structural features of evaluative-existential sentences are emotional-exclamatory particles what for, well, something, too, but also, yes and, and what, what, what, oh yes etc., interjections. For example: - Well , Yalta ...(M. Bulgakov); Well dirt!(L. Sobolev); Well night! Fear! (L. Tolstoy); Which distant days (I. Bunin); A night! heavenly powers! what a night is made in the sky! (N. Gogol); Eh , horses, horses,what the horses! (N. Gogol); Eh , trio! bird troika! (N. Gogol); “Yes,” she said,which wonderful clouds! (I. Turgenev); Which hard days(F. Dostoevsky); - Which weird question! (I. Turgenev); Which fresh water(Sobolev); A thousand devils, a thousand witches and a thousand devils! Ekiy rain!Ekiy bad rain! Bad! Bad!(S. Yesenin).

Evaluative existential sentences include sentences with the particle Here, in the case when the indicative value is weakened and the value of the assessment (ironic, disapproving, etc.) in relation to some person, object, event present in this situation is brought to the fore. For example: Here comes the winter ! Cold and snow;So what is the suspicion ! And it's all because of one bracelet... (M. Lermontov) . “In sentences with complicated particles It is for you And here you go, also introducing a shade of evaluativeness, the dominant value is the negation of those properties that seem naturally expected, for example: Here is all his humanity(Letters); Yes, here's the right court for you(L.T.)" .

However, the attitude of linguists to evaluative-existential sentences is ambiguous. For example, Igor Pavlovich Raspopov does not agree with the inclusion of evaluative sentences, with particles in the composition of nominative sentences, because this, in his opinion, “deprives these sentences of their qualitative certainty” . At Alexei Grigorievich Rudnev there is no doubt about the status of evaluative as a nominative sentence. He calls them semi-predicative and notes that these sentences “not only state the presence of one or another fact, but also have an element of utterance, a modal assessment, an expression of attitude towards this or that phenomenon, person, object.” Here are some of his examples: Emergency! (G); What a day! What passions! (P); See what a glorious longing! Sophia exclaimed.(M. G.) and others. A. G. Rudnev recommends distinguishing semi-predicative sentences from two-part sentences with a nominal predicate. " What a grief! - the sentence is one-part, nominative, semi-predicative. Which in this sentence, - writes the author of the textbook, - is a definition. But the offer What a grief? - two-part, since here which is predicate. What kind of person! is a complex amplifying particle what the performs a special function for the design of exclamatory sentences. This compound particle is followed by the nominative case, and the nominative case is not used with a preposition. That's why what the cannot be considered as a suggestion" .

6. In accordance with a broad understanding of nominative sentences, they include sentences that include, in addition to the nominative with or without word forms, circumstantial and object word forms of the type I have longing; The apartment is cold; Today's solemn meeting. However, the history of syntactic science has not given an unambiguous decision on the status of these sentences. Let's look at the history of this issue.

7 In accordance with the point of view that goes back to the syntactic works A. M. Peshkovsky And A. A. Shakhmatova, these sentences qualify as two-part incomplete elliptic type.

A. M. Peshkovsky, for example, he believed that a characteristic feature of nominative sentences is the "obligatory" absence of specifically "verbal" word forms ("members"), the presence of " adverbs or indirect noun, unless these members are thought of with the nominative itself, serves<…>a sign of an incomplete offer" .

In "Syntax of the Russian language" A. A. Shakhmatova“the formal difference between two-part from one-part” is called “the presence in two-part circumstances<…>or such an object that does not depend on the noun that constitutes the main member of the one-part sentence. His examples: And in the house there is a knock, walking, sweeping and cleaning. (Griboyedov); Big ship - big voyage(last). It's day! … tell them(Griboyedov) - "the sentence is two-part, because it states that the day has already come, has come, and not that it exists at all" . He believes that “secondary members of the sentence are found as a result of the division of the sentence”, therefore “in a one-part sentence without a predicate there cannot be a circumstance; based on this, recognizing freezing one-part offer, we offer now frost must be recognized as two-part and allow the omission of the predicate in it " . This type of sentence is described by him in the section of two-part incomplete broken sentences with an omitted predicate. .

8This approach to the qualification of sentences with the nominative of an existing object and adverbial or objective word form has found its supporters among modern syntaxists as well.

Yes, according to Elena Sergeevna Skoblikova, “the attachment of the expressed objective details of the situation to a certain place (or time) can be expressed in denominative sentences only through postpositive adverbial adverbs. For example: Steppes. Mounds ... Huge villages onslopes of the chalk hills . Kites in the blue sky (A. N. Tolstoy) = “…villages spread out – which are spread out on the slopes”; "the kites, soaring - which soar in the sky." The use of circumstances (circumstantial determinants) is incompatible with the preservation of the specifics of a denominative sentence. So, the following sentences are not nominal: In the light damp pine forest snow somewhere else(Sladkov); At the foot piles of flowers(Kozhukhova); Now autumn(Peskov). Unlike denominative sentences, sentences with circumstances are characterized by free paradigmatic variability in tenses and moods. Wed: There was still snow in the pine forest - there will be snow - there would be snow» . Sentences like the above, according to E. S. Skoblikova, two-part with null predicate expression .

Nina Sergeevna Valgina also qualifies them as two-part ellipticals, approaching incomplete ones due to the absence of a predicate in them, which, however, they do not need . Taking into account the presence of the seme `existence` in the semantics of these sentences, she focuses on the fact that the existence of sentences represented only by the nominative case with the meaning of an existing object is static, while the existence in constructions Store around the corner; Again misfortune; hike again“the process of the emergence of an object or phenomenon is emphasized”, therefore, in sentences with adverbial word forms, the being of an object is dynamic .

The special dynamic nature of sentences with an adverbial component was noted I. A. Popova, which qualifies these sentences as incomplete, close "to one-part ones - nominal, but not existential, depicting the static being of an object, but a special kind of nominal, representing the object dynamically, at the moment of its appearance, in the process of its emergence and appearance" .

Vera Vasilievna Babaitseva in the monograph of 1968, the sentences of the type under consideration were classified as transitional, combining the properties of two-part and nominative sentences . Later, she assigns them the status of two-part incomplete sentences of an elliptical type with an unreplaced position of the verbal predicate. . In determinants (circumstances and additions), the preposition of which is due to their actualization, she notes a special syntactic connection, but, unlike N. Yu. Shvedova, she does not see in them special secondary members of the sentence .

Pavel Alexandrovich Lekant, the author of the relevant section of the university textbook on the modern Russian language, quite rightly notes the unmotivated and uncontrollable secondary members of the sentence by the nominative, considers “the omission of a predicate”, which allegedly indicates the incompleteness of the sentence, to be based on the ““implication” of a non-existent (and unnecessary) predicate”. Following the theoretical views on the determinants of N. Yu. Shvedova, given that the meaning of being in sentences of this type is “expressed by the main member of the sentence - the nominative”, he refers these sentences to “nominative one-part with secondary members of the primary type - determinants that have an independent (spatial) , temporal, subjective, etc.) meaning", different from nominative sentences with conditional members of the type Late autumn its dismemberment on the basis of “a pause between the determinant (determinant group) and the main member of the sentence (main member group), which separates the components of the actual articulation - the theme and the rheme: At your place / hysteria, Nikolai Ivanovich (A. T.); Beyond the dunes / vast swamps and low forests(Paust.); Morning / frost(Shishk.) " .

Against the "expanded understanding of nominative sentences", when they also include "constructions that include adverbial secondary members: Silence in the city; Outside the windows is a stuffy summer; Around the taiga" and the authors of "Fundamentals of Russian Grammar", but they did not give a more detailed description of these sentences . In a later work ("Typology of the Russian sentence") Anatoly Mikhailovich Lomov characterized sentences attributed to a wide and rather diverse class of single-component subject sentences with a nominative center .

9. In accordance with another approach, existential sentences with a zero predicate and an explicit localizer of an existing object are referred to as one-part sentences. So, N. Yu. Shvedova in locative word forms that occupy the position of the predicated component, he sees adverbial determinants - special secondary members of the sentence, which refer "to the entire composition of the sentence and are not associated with any of its individual members." Therefore, she refers sentences with a structure-forming nominative and determining word forms to nominative ones. .

We also believe that sentences like Behind the window is a bare birch - a twig that looks like a broom(L. Oshin) are also nominative. This conclusion can be reached by the presence of the seme `being` in the content structure of sentences. It is the presence of this seme that unites them with classical (traditionally singled out) nominative sentences and allows us to consider both named types as one of the varieties of a semantically numerous group of existential (existential) sentences. Characterized sentences differ from the traditionally qualified by nominative one in that they contain a locative construction that names space as a receptacle for an existing object. The presence of such a construction is a constitutive sign of an existential sentence: an object can be located, be available only in a certain space, being outside space is impossible. Therefore, the starting point of the message given in existential sentences should be recognized as a construction representing the area of ​​being.

Consequently, the subject of an existential sentence should be recognized as the image of some fragment of the world, some space, verbalized by a locative construction. The predicate is represented by an existential verb lexeme, and the object of being (object of presence) is represented by a non-referential name .

Thus, the presented logical-semantic approach to the organization of an existential sentence (we did not set ourselves the goal of producing an abstract-grammatical, or subject-predicate, analysis) allows us to recognize the scheme “ where is something". It is formed by three full-fledged word forms: a locative subject, marking the receptacle of certain objects, a verbal predicate, representing the seme of being, presence, and an objective in the form of a nominative case with the meaning of an existing object. Each of the components of the block diagrams represents a specific lexical material. The locative subjective is represented by nouns with a spatial or (rarely) temporal meaning in the corresponding prepositional-case forms or correlative adverbs. The position of an existential predicate can be represented by one of the components of a large number of verbs of being, highlighted Nina Davidovna Arutyunova And Evgeny Nikolaevich Shiryaev, with dominant There is in the meaning of `has`. The position of the third component of the scheme, the object of being, has the ability to replace two lexical groups of nouns. The first group includes names with the meaning of objects (living and inanimate) that have the ability to be located in space, such as table, chair, book, tree, school desk, house, institution, institute, father, brother and under. The second group includes abstract nouns denoting processes and phenomena occurring in time, time periods: winter, summer, day, meeting, meeting, conference, war, truce and under.

The signified of the structural scheme is a typical proposition, represented by the meanings: `locus` - `being` - `existing object`. Examples: in the middle of the hall stood oval dining roomtable , covered with yellow, marbled, oilcloth, andagainst the walls beds were placed between the columns ... (Kuprin);

On a high hill at the confluence of two rivers,

From gray-haired antiquity, from the Horde Khan,

Ancientcity ​​of Alatyr costs fifth century,

Remembering the Russians in battles with a horde of infidels

In sentences with a non-verbalized predicate of the type Crush at the train station(D. Furmanov); Around - lights, lights, lights ... Shoulder - gun belts(A. Blok); The whole area descends to the sea, like a geographical map. And then there is the sea! (A. Kuprin) locative word forms ( at the station, around, shoulder, there further) also designate a place, space as a receptacle of the named objectified processes ( crush) or items ( belts, sea); the predicate of being, presence is represented by the dominant of the verb series of existential verbs in the zero form, which means that the moment of perception of the drawn pictures coincides with the moment of speech, the time of perception and text time. Consequently, the construction of these proposals is based on the same structural scheme - “where is what”. Similar examples:

Again at home ... Humiliated, angry and happy.

Night, is it day there, in the window ?

Out the moon, like a clown, over the roofs of the masses

Makes a grimace at me...(A. Blok);

In the corner is a green lamp .

From her - golden rays .

Nanny, bent over the bed ...

“Let me wrap your little legs and little hands»

The grammatical modification of this scheme leads to the inclusion in the structure of the utterance of the verb form There is in the form of the past and future tenses, as well as in the forms of indirect mood. In this case, the position of the locative component can be replaced by a temporal component. For example :

Here once oldchurch was ,

On the steep bank the bell tower was white,

Among the oaks and birches, she seemed to float

Above Sura, which glittered under the steep

After yesterday's rain and storm was a clear sunny day, quiet and warm, and all of Marseille seemed to be washed anew(A. Kuprin).

Classical nominative sentences, being a kind of existential sentences with a non-verbalized position of an existential predicate and a locative subject - a receptacle for objects and phenomena of the surrounding real world, have the same three-component structural scheme “where is what”: being is impossible outside of space. The signified of the scheme is the same proposition "being", represented by the meanings `locative subject` - `being` - `existing object`.

10 The formation of statements with the meaning of the presence (being) of an object in a certain area of ​​the surrounding observer of the real world, represented by the only nominative case of an existing object (phenomenon), is a consequence of incomplete implementation (structural-semantic modification) of the structural scheme of an existential sentence, represented by an ellipsis of a locative subjective. The vacancy of the syntactic position of the subjective, however, does not affect the component composition of the structural scheme of the nominative sentence. As for the referent of statements, it is represented by a situation that has to be "here" and "now".

Consequently, statements informing about the presence of an object (phenomenon) with a verbalized and non-verbalized area of ​​being and an implicit predicate of being form one type of nominative sentences. Traditionally terminating nominative sentences are an incomplete secondary formation from complete existential sentences with explicit or implicit beingness and locative subjectivity. .

Sentences with a verbalized subjective and a zero predicate represent the invariant of the structural scheme “where is what”, sentences with a subjective ellipsis represent its incomplete version.

Justifying the derivative nature of the classical nominative sentence, N. D. Arutyunova and E. N. Shiryaev write: “Schemes of existential sentences with a localizer include a localizer as a constitutive member that determines the essence of the scheme itself. As a term with a concrete reference, the localizer links the concept of reality, called by the non-referential name of an existent object, with reality itself. Without such a connection, the very idea of ​​being in language would be simply impossible. This does not mean that there are no existential sentences in the language without a localizer expressed by a special word. Like any other sentences, existential sentences can be based on context or consituation, as a result of which so-called incomplete sentences are made possible. In them, the very structure of the existential sentence, they conclude, the unreplaced syntactic position of the localizer is given: if there is a name of an existing object, then there must be a localizer, and since the localizer is not verbally represented, it is legitimate to see its unreplaced syntactic position. The semantic meaning of the unreplaced position is extracted from the context or consituation" (our italics. - V.K.).

Similar conclusions were reached by the results of the study by Stella Naumovna Tseitlin, who claims that nominative existential sentences of the type Silence; Yearning; Boredom arose as a result of the reduction of "two-part" sentences: Silence in the forest → Silence; I have longing → longing .

Zinaida Danilovna Popova and Galina Alexandrovna Volokhina consider nominative sentences with a single nominative as verbalizing one meaning of the proposition of the concept "being of an object", marked with a nominative case with the meaning of an object that is visible, sensually perceived, existing at the moment of speech in a spatial localizer .

However, this approach to the genetic nature of nominative sentences is not generally accepted. In the specialized scientific literature, some researchers traditionally see the distribution of the nominative sentence by secondary members in the distinguished structures. N. Yu. Shvedova, who was the first to draw attention to the very special role of constructions “freely attached to the core of the sentence”, called them determinants related to the entire sentence as a whole . This point of view allowed sentences like Winter; Silence; Stomp be considered as the primary and main structure of nominative sentences, and in constructions with locative distributors ( Dampness in the forest) to see the result of spreading the main structure.

V. Yu. Koprov also characterizes sentences with a localizer as a common variant of actless nominative sentences .

11 The verbal non-representation of the location of the object in the classical nominative sentence is due to its consituational redundancy: the existing object is located in a certain space, “here”, its perception coincides with the moment of speech, “now”. The duplicate nomination of the locus and time of perception does not carry new information, it is not stylistically justified. In addition, researchers note the stylistic marking and limitations of nominative sentences with an elliptical spatial localizer.

The specificity of nominative sentences represented by one nominative case lies in the fact that their inherent fragmentation, their laconism allow creating speech segments that are more capacious in content. “They name only individual details of the situation, but the details are important, expressive, designed for the experience and imagination of the listener or reader - such that he can imagine the overall picture of the situation or events being described” . A. S. Popov notes that such pictures are perceived faster than the usual, detailed description. . For example: Ruin. Hunger. Beggar life . Our thin-legged dolls had an exorbitant appetite(L. Tatyanicheva); Couch, grandmother, cat ... The grandmother sang something sad Steppe, Sometimes yawning And baptizing her mouth(S. Yesenin); Front , partisan region, rear . evacuation, occupation, losses, searchmeeting in decades... Stories of the war and post-war years, dramatic and almost detective plots. The fate of those whom the war caught in infancy, and those children of the wartime who themselves have already become parents, and through whose life its black trail stretches now(A. Aleksin); Spicyevening . Dawns go out. Fog creeps on the grass, By the wattle fence on the slope Your sundress turned white(Yesenin). “Laconism and at the same time, an orientation towards the transmission of a broad general content determine the expressiveness of nominal sentences” . If necessary, the receptacle of the existing object is easily restored from the consituation.

12Another matter of type sentences You are hysterical, Nikolai Ivanovich(A.T.), qualified by P. A. Lekant as nominative dissected along with sentences Behind the dunes are vast swamps and low forests(Paust.); Frost in the morning(Bump.) . Their assignment to the group of nominative existential ones is doubtful: the sentence with the meaning of the mental state of the subject represents a non-specialized phraseologized structural scheme " who has what condition”, historically correlated with the structural scheme of the concept “possession” (“possession”) “who has (has) what”: the subject of the scheme is represented by the word form “y + gives birth. pad.", predicative - a statutory noun in the form of name. pad. combined with a link There is . The same should be said about offers. Yearning; Boredom, fainting , representing an incomplete modification of the block diagram of the concept "state" "who has what state".

13 Thus, the approach to nominative sentences as a variety of existential sentences removes the question of qualifying sentences like The apartment is cold; In the audience there are tables, a pulpit, a board; Today the conference including word forms with adverbial meaning, territories - receptacles of an existing object. They should be recognized as nominative sentences of the full form, including, along with the nominative of a non-referential name with the meaning of the object of presence, adverbial word forms - a marker of the predicated subjective component. The structural scheme of these sentences is “where is what”. The schema invariant is represented by the adverbial subjective word form, the zero form of the verbal predicate, and the nominative objective with the meaning of an object existing in a marked space or an objectified phenomenon.

The speech implementation of the structural scheme “where is what” led to the formation of a nominative sentence representing the situation of being, the presence of an object (phenomenon) in a certain space in the form of a single nominative case with the meaning of an existing object. This structure should be recognized as a secondary formation, which was the result of reduction, incomplete implementation of the structural scheme of an existential sentence with a verbalized predicated component.

14 As for the ways of expressing predicativity in nominative sentences, our approach to the grammatical nature of sentences of this type allows us to recognize the verbal way of expressing predicativity, as in any other Russian verbal sentence, regardless of the form of implementation of the verb, material or zero. In the nominative sentence, it is the verb be, represented by the null or material form There is, as well as the forms was, will be, would be. The morphological way of expressing predicativity is accompanied by the intonation of the message.

15 Nominative sentences, both complete and reduced, are widely used in fiction texts, performing a compositional function, starting or completing a narrative.

The descriptive nature of the nominative sentences contributes to creating a background for the subsequent text. For example: Glow in the sky . Dead night is dead. A mass of forest trees crowds around me, But the rumor of a distant unknown city is clearly heard.(A. Blok); Rain and sleet outside Don't know what to grieve about. And bored, and I want to cry, And nowhere to put the strength(A. Blok); Late evening . The street is empty. One tramp stoops and the wind whistles... (A. Blok); In front of me is a bouquet of scarlet roses, I bought it on the way, at the Prokhladnaya station. The car was filled with fragrant beauty, The petals sparkle with the dew of pure tears.(L. Oshin); Misted window, Rain on the street. Quiet in the room, warm My companion(L. Oshin); Thaw. Ice and water underfoot, Blackened snow trampled into mud, Gusts of wind whistle between the branches, People grumble, angry at the weather(L. Oshin).

Nominative sentences perform the same function, which creates the background of what is happening, in the remarks of dramatic works. For example: At the Sorrini house.On the paper table Andbooks Andhourglass ; Garden . Twilight and the moon in the skyleft alcove ; Garden, day. Decoration of the last scene of the 2nd act;A room in the house of Pavel Grigoryevich Arbenin, a wardrobe with books and a bureau. The action takes place in Moscow(M. Lermontov); Outpost on Yaik, In the depths of the rampart and gates, Closer to the kuren. On the rampart the garrison is on alert; Large room in Ustinya's house. Morning. The Cossacks are sitting waiting for Ustinya to come out;Village street. Hut Marey, further - the widow Sidorovna and others.Behind the huts is high steep bank of a large river (K. Trenev); Well furnished apartment . On the wall is a large, full-length portrait of Perth the Great ( S. Yesenin).

Less commonly, nominative sentences conclude the narrative, as if summing up the reasoning, explain what is happening. For example: Today I have a special day in my life - I turned seventy-three years old. Trees naked sun shadow on gold foliage.Beautiful weather (L. Oshin); A ball rolls softly, Spokes flickering,cigarette smoke ANDsilence (L. Oshin); February ... They press, they twist the earth of cold. The sun rises in a white frosty glow. On the river under the arable land, the ice tinkles fragilely.February ... (Sholokhov).

Nominative sentences are a concise form of depicting pictures of nature, environment, and the inner state of a person. For example: City . Corner . small houses on the outskirts, rare overcoats. (M. Bulgakov.); Is it my side, side,Gorevaya streak . Only the forest , Yesstriped , Yesriver spit ... (S. Yesenin.); Height. Clouds. Water. Brody. Rivers. years Andcentury . (Parsnip); Blue sky, colored arc The shores of the steppe run quietly, The smoke stretches, near the crimson villages, The wedding of the crows covered the palisade. (S. Yesenin).

Nominative sentences are a convenient form for conveying the hero's personal memories. For example, the use of nominative sentences in the story "A Boring Story" in the description of the area allowed A.P. Chekhov to highlight the details that seem to him the most important and help to recreate the picture as a whole:

At a quarter to ten, I must go to my dear boys to give a lecture.

I dress and walk along the road that has been familiar to me for 30 years and has its own history for me.Here big gray house with a pharmacy ; there once stood a little house, and in it was a dressing-room; in this porter room I pondered my dissertation and wrote my first love letter to Varya. Wrote in pencil, on a sheet with the title "Historia morbi".Here grocery bench ; once it was run by a liquid who sold me cigarettes on credit, then a fat woman who loved students because "each of them has a mother", now there is a red-haired merchant, a very indifferent person, drinking tea from a copper teapot. AHere gloomy long time not repaireduniversity gates ; bored street cleaner in a sheepskin coatbroom , heaps snow... On a fresh boy who has come from the provinces and imagines that the temple of science is really a temple, such a gate cannot make a healthy impression. In general, the dilapidation of university buildings, the gloom of the corridors, the soot of the walls, the lack of light, the dull appearance of steps, hangers and benches in the history of Russian pessimism occupy one of the first places among a number of predisposing causes ...Here and ourgarden . Since I was a student, he doesn't seem to get any better or worse. I do not like him. It would be much smarter if instead of consumptive lindens, yellow acacia and rare, sheared lilacs, tall pines and good oaks grew here.

During the lesson "Nominative sentences" the teacher will talk about this type of one-component sentences, their grammatical properties and features. You will learn about the distributors of such structures, you can easily find them in the text. Learn to distinguish nominal sentences from simple two-part sentences.

Subject: One-part sentences

Lesson: Nominative sentences

One-part sentences, the main member of which has a structure similar to the structure subject, are called nominal.

The main member of a nominal sentence is expressed in the form

* nominative case noun or

* phrase, including the word in the nominative case:

Summer. Sea. Shining stars.

Quiet street, several whitewashed huts.

The title sentences say

* about existence,

* the presence of an object or phenomenon.

In sentences of this type, the grammatical meaning of reality and the present tense is always expressed.

Descriptive particles may be included in denominative sentences to specify the meaning. out, here:

Here the familiar blue fence, Here a tall spruce behind him.

Exclamatory particles are used to introduce emotional evaluation. well, what, like this:

Which great holiday!

Well shower!

The distributors of a nominal sentence can be agreed and inconsistent definitions:

Dark pines, the breath of the sea.

The title sentence contains meaning of reality and present time:

Summer (it is now).

Note 1. Please note that denominative sentences must be distinguished from constructions

Nonsense. Good girl! Hero!

In this case, we are dealing with two-part incomplete sentences with an omitted subject,

It's all nonsense. You are hero!

It is quite simple to distinguish such constructions from denominative sentences: they do not report the existence of an object, as is done in denominative sentences, but characterize it. Therefore, it is impossible to substitute the verb to be (exist, have) into such a construction.

Stars in the sky - There are stars in the sky.

Fuck! - impossible to replace with There are impudent!

Note 2. Sentences that in the school tradition are usually referred to as nominal, in scientific grammar referred to as two-part with a zero form of the verb be(to take place) as a predicate.

The verb is used to express the grammatical meanings of the past and future tenses. be in its non-zero forms:

It was summer; It will be summer.

To indicate the conditional meaning, we choose the form of the conditional mood:

It would be summer!

All these proposals are considered two-part, including in school grammar.

The same applies to common denominative sentences, which can also be interpreted as two-part, in which the predicate is omitted:

Autumn is coming.- Autumn is coming soon.

1. Bagryantseva V.A., Bolycheva E.M., Galaktionova I.V. , Litnevskaya E.I. and others. Russian language.

2. Barkhudarov. S.G., Kryuchkov S.E., Maksimov L.Yu., Cheshko L.A. Russian language.

3. Tests. One-part sentences ().

2. Complete academic reference book edited by Lopatin ().

1. Write off. Indicate the main terms in each sentence and say how they are expressed. Define the types of offers.

Peaks of the Alps. A whole chain of steep ledges... The very core of the mountains. Above the mountains is a pale green, light, mute sky. Strong, hard frost; hard, sparkling snow; severe blocks of icy, weather-beaten rocks stick out from under the snow. (I.S. Turgenev)

2. Make a conclusion, are the highlighted sentences nominal?

A wonderful man, Ivan Ivanovich!.. What apple and pear trees he has right under his windows! He loves melons very much. This is his favorite food.

- Tell me, please, what do you need this gun that is exposed to weather along with the dress? .. Listen, give it to me!- How can you! This gun is expensive. You won't find these guns anywhere else. I, even as I was going to the police, bought it from a turchin ... How can I? This is a necessary thing...—Good gun!(N.V. Gogol)

§ 1 The concept of a denominative sentence

As you know, simple sentences by the presence of main members are two-part and one-part. One-part sentences are usually divided into two groups: with one main member - the predicate and with one main member - the subject. The first group includes definitely-personal, indefinitely-personal and impersonal sentences, and the second group includes nominal ones.

Let's take a closer look at the titles. These are such one-part sentences in which the main member is usually expressed by a noun in the nominative case or by a combination of a numeral with a noun.

For example, in the sentences Winter. The first snow - the subjects are expressed by nouns winter, snow. And the following sentence, March 23, is a nominal sentence with a subject, expressed by a combination of a numeral with a noun.

Name sentences show that events, phenomena, objects named by the main member exist in the present tense. Naming objects, indicating a place or time, denominative sentences immediately introduce the reader into the situation of the action. For example: Winter. Silence. Snow covered forest. Nominative sentences can be exclamatory. What a severe frost! What a beautiful birch!

Nominative sentences can include particles here, out, and then the sentence acquires a demonstrative meaning: Here is a stream. And there is a familiar path.

§ 2 Common and non-common denominative sentences

Name sentences can be non-common and common. Consider a few sentences with which Anna Akhmatova's poem begins: Twenty-first. Night. Monday. In all these sentences, there is only one main member - the subject and there are no secondary members. Therefore, these are denominative non-common sentences. In denominative common sentences, there are minor members that refer to the subject, for example, the First Winter Morning. In this sentence, the subject morning, with which two definitions are associated, what morning? First, winter.

It is important to remember that in one-part denominative sentences there are no such secondary members as circumstances and additions, because they cannot be connected in meaning and grammatically with the subject.

§ 3 Differences between denominative sentences and incomplete ones

It is necessary to distinguish one-part denominative sentences from incomplete sentences.

In incomplete sentences, the missing members of the sentence can be restored from the context, most often from the replicas of the conversation. Consider a dialogue

Who will meet you?

The first replica is a simple two-part sentence. The second remark is an incomplete sentence, because the necessary information for understanding the meaning of the statement can be restored from the previous remark: my mother will meet me. And in one-part denominative sentences, we are talking about specific events, phenomena, objects, which do not need to be explained from the context.

· Another rule for distinguishing one-part denominative sentences from incomplete sentences is the presence of such secondary members as a circumstance or addition that cannot relate to the subject. For example, in the sentence In the zoo, predatory animals have the circumstance where? in the zoo, it is associated with an omitted predicate, which is implied: there are, were, live, are. Therefore, this proposal cannot be considered a one-part naming proposal. The same can be said about the proposal Far away thundercloud. The circumstance in the distance refers to the omitted predicate is visible or appeared, therefore this sentence is not a one-part nominal, but a two-part incomplete one.

Nominative sentences are used mainly in works of art, in newspaper and magazine essays and articles. With their help, you can concisely and accurately draw the place and time of action, landscape, environment. For example, the beginning of a poem by Konstantin Balmont: Evening. Seaside. Sighs of the wind. The majestic cry of the waves. Only individual details are mentioned in the sentences, but from them the reader or listener can imagine the general picture of the situation or events being described.

Often denominative sentences are found in dramatic works to indicate the place and time of the action, to describe the scenery: Night. Garden. Fountain. This designates the time and place where the action of one of the scenes in the dramas of Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin "Boris Godunov" takes place.