LoginRegistration
For instance: Humanities and Science University Journal
About consortium subscription Contacts
(812) 4095300 Non-commercial partnership
St. Petersburg
university
consortium

Articles

Humanities and Science University Journal № 43 (Philology and Archaeology, World History, Art History), 2018

Logic Order Category in the Texts of Two Russian Constitutions. 1. И-Conjunction

M. Ya. Dymarsky
Price: 50 руб.
 DOI:https://doi.org/10.25807/PBH.22225064.2018.43.22.40
The work introduces and substantiates the concept of a semantic grammar category of logical order that determines a grammatical way of combining elements which do not form the predicative center of a sentence (including a composite predicate) within a certain syntactic structure. The core of the category, which has the fi eld structure, includes the basic meanings of traditional coordination and subordination, the periphery includes numerous meanings with features of the two core meanings in different proportions. The texts of the constitutions, 1918 and 1993, are considered from the point of implementing the logic order category (in this particular case, on the material of constructions with the Russian conjunction и ‘and’) compared to the text of the fragment from Leo Tolstoy’s “War and Peace”. It is shown that this analysis leads to some meaningful judgments about similarities and differences, sometimes paradoxical, of the texts under consideration. In particular, it is concluded that in a legal text certain means of expression are strictly attached to certain meanings, which leaves almost no choice to the authors of the constitution. It turns out that, though from the point of its content the 1918 constitution proclaims dictatorship and the 1993 constitution declares democracy, from the linguistic point of view the former text has a more natural mode of language functioning, familiar to the reader, allowing a variety of means of expression, than the latter. In other words, the fi rst text of the constitution, in terms of language, is democratic, whereas the second one is authoritarian.
Keywords: coordination, subordination, logic order category, homogeneous series, construction with an adverbialparticiple group, complex sentence, constitution.
REFERENCES
1. Apresyan Yu. D., Boguslavskiy I. M., Iomdin L. L., Sannikov V. Z. Teoreticheskie 
problemy russkogo sintaksisa: Vzaimodeystvie grammatiki i slovarya / otv. red. 
Yu. D. Apresyan. M., 2010. 408 s.
2. Babaytseva V. V. Yavleniya perekhodnosti v grammatike russkogo yazyka. M., 
2000. 640 s.
3. Grech N. I. Prakticheskaya russkaya grammatika. SPb.: Tipografiya Imp. 
Vospitatel’nogo doma, 1827. 579 s.
4. Dymarskiy M. Ya. Problemy tekstoobrazovaniya i khudozhestvennyi tekst 
(na materiale russkoy prozy XIX–XX vv.). SPb., 1999. 284 s. (2-e izd.: M., 2001; 
3-e izd.: M., 2006).
5. Zaliznyak A. A., Paducheva E. V. K tipologii otnositel’nogo predlozheniya // 
Semiotika i informatika. Vyp. 6. 1975. S. 51–101. (Pereizd.: Semiotika i informatika. 
Opera Selecta, 35. M.: Yazyki russkoy kul’tury, 1997.)
6. Kukushkin Yu. S., Chistyakov O. I. Ocherk istorii Sovetskoy Konstitutsii. M.: 
Politizdat, 1987. 367 s. URL: http://www.hist.msu.ru/ER/Etext/cnst1918.htm (data 
obrashcheniya: 02.11.2018).
7. Mel’chuk I. A. Opyt teorii lingvisticheskikh modeley «Smysl — Tekst». M., 
1974. 346 s.
8. Pekelis O. E. Podchinenie. Materialy dlya proekta korpusnogo opisaniya 
russkoy grammatiki. Na pravakh rukopisi. M., 2014. URL: http://rusgram.ru (data 
obrashcheniya: 02.11.2018).
9. Pekelis O. E. Sochinenie i podchinenie. Materialy dlya proekta korpusnogo 
opisaniya russkoy grammatiki. Na pravakh rukopisi. M., 2015. URL: http://rusgram.ru 
(data obrashcheniya: 02.11.2018). 
10. Pekelis O. E. Sochinenie. Materialy dlya proekta korpusnogo opisaniya 
russkoy grammatiki. Na pravakh rukopisi. M., 2013. URL: http://rusgram.ru (data 
obrashcheniya: 02.11.2018).
11. Peterson M. N. Ocherk sintaksisa russkogo yazyka. M.; Pg., 1923. 131 s.
12. Peshkovskiy A. M. Izbrannye trudy. M., 1959. 252 s.
13. Russkaya grammatika: v 2 t. / otv. red. N. Yu. Shvedova. T. 2. Sintaksis. M., 
1980. 712 s.
14. SinTagRus = Sintaksicheski razmechennyi korpus russkogo yazyka. Sintaksi-
cheskaya struktura // Natsional’nyi korpus russkogo yazyka. URL: http://www.ruscor-
pora.ru/instruction-syntax.html (data obrashcheniya: 02.11.18).
15. Smirnov I. N. Konkretnost’ / obobshchennost’ situatsii v semantike aspektual’no-
temporal’nykh kategoriy (na materiale sovremennogo russkogo yazyka): avtoref. dis. ... 
d-ra fi lol. nauk. SPb., 2011. 42 s.
16. Khudozhestvennyi tekst: Struktura. Yazyk. Stil’ / otv. red. K. A. Rogova. SPb., 
1993. 181 s.
17. Shiryaev E. N. Bessoyuznoe slozhnoe predlozhenie v sovremennom russkom 
yazyke. M., 1986. 224 s.
18. Haspelmath M. The converb as a cross-linguistically valid category // 
Haspelmath M., Kцnig E. (eds.) Converbs in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Berlin: 
Mouton de Gruyter, 1995. Pp. 1–55.
19. Langacker R. On pronominalization and the chain of command // Rebel D., 
Schane S. (eds.) Modern studies in English. New Jersey, 1969. Pp. 160–186.
20. Reinhart T. Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation. L.: Croom Helm, 1983. 223 p.
21. Ross J. R. Constraints on variables in syntax: Ph.D. Thesis. Cambridge: Mas-
sachusetts Institute of Technology, 1967. 500 p.
 
Price: 50 рублей
To order