М. В. Ломоносова Филологический факультет Кафедра английского языкознания Когезия и когеренция в философском дискурсе на материале эссе Бертрана Расселла "О природе знакомства". Курсовая
 Скачать 1 Mb.
|
Substitution.The concept of substitution.Substitution in English is a grammatical phenomenon, whereas reference is a semantic one. The substitute item does not introduce the same item once again, but rather stands instead of it in a necessary syntactic position, functionin structurally in precisely the same manner: substituted verbal groups operate in the same way, as the referents do, substitution of nominal groups function like the “original” ones. The exception is clausal ellipsis which is of different nature, pertaining to the realm of discourse rather than syntax. Exophoric substitution is rather rare and has to do with anaphoric presupposition whatever the case: substitution may be exophoric if the substituted element was already the topic of speech before. Types of substitution.There are three types of substitution in the English language: nominal (by one, ones, same), verbal (do), and clausal substitution (so, not). The classification is introduced in accordance with the grammatical function of the elements which are substituted. Nominal substitution.Substitution being a grammatical relation between the two elements, these are its grammatical features which come first. Most importantly, the substitute can only be a head of a nominal group if there is any. Moreover, the presupposing and the presupposed elements do not necessarily “have the same function in clause” [1]. Furthermore, the two elements may be different in number, but the presupposed noun has to be a countable one. Otherwise, it is substituted by zero, and this type of cohesion is called ellipsis. Nominal substitute one/ones.Nominal substitute has to do with a construction where the nominal group consists of the substituted head and its modifier. The presupposing element is a basis for a certain type of contrast, and, to be more exact, negation: “Don’t use leaden bullets, use the ones made of platinum”. Here the repudiation may be expressed as “don’t use any bullets other than the ones made of platinum”. However, not all of the modifiers of the initial head are necessarily repudiated. The extent to which they belong to the head which follows is deducible from the context only. More often than not there is a new, defining modifier in the nominal group with the substitute element. This, however, does not mean to say that all the initial modifiers are not relevant any longer. In any case, at least some slight meaning of contrast being introduced into the relations between the elements, it is this meaning which makes nominal substitution so different from reference, which is a second occurrence of an entirely identical notion. Nominal substitute same (say the same, be the same, do the same).Nominal substitute same is more closely connected with reference, because “unlike one which presupposes only the noun Head, the same presupposes an entire nominal group including any modifying elements, except such as are explicitly repudiated”. Say the same The same can substitute for the fact which is laid out in the previous context. It can be negated with the help of substitution, or at least a part of the modifiers introduced in the fact-statement can be repudiated, for instance: “Smith is very reliable. I wish I could say the same of his partner” [1]. Do the same The construction do the same always constitutes for a certain process, but this does not mean to say that the verbal part do is a kind of verbal substitute and thus this type of substitution is a “compound” verbal-nominal one. In fact, the do is merely a link-verb, and the whole group illustrates the tendency of the English language to express the meaning of process “by means of an “empty” verb plus its object”, which is meaningful in the way that it is a presupposing element, ‘transplanting’ a process from the previous context. Be the same Be the same may substitute either a noun or an adjective functioning as a head of a nominal group. It is worth mentioning that this construction has a potential for ambiguity (being similar with a type of reference relations). |