Download files
Abstract
This dissertation examines specific features of atypical coordinate structures (from now referred to as ACS) in both English and Russian languages: those features which differentiate ACS from typical coordinate structures, but nevertheless allow them to keep the status of coordinate structures. Comparing ACS with typical coordinate structures in terms of linguistic norms, this thesis provides a view of ACS as less standard, non-normative forms of syntactic representations of coordinate relations.
Most research on coordinate structures focuses either on syntax, or on semantics. This dissertation advocates the expediency of a functional-dynamic approach to ACS, applying the methods of linguistics, psycholinguistics, cognitive linguistics and social linguistics. It argues that coordination is a complex speech-thinking mechanism and that ACS should be analysed by taking into account the cognitive-pragmatic-emotive intentions of the speaker. This dissertation proposes the analysis of structure, semantics and pragmatics of ACS in correlation with their functioning in a text.
For the first time the thesis provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of ACS in English and Russian languages. This analysis demonstrates that the syntactically comparable translation of the majority of ACS from English to Russian and vice versa is possible due to the same factors involved in the process of ACS formation in both languages. It also shows that the absence of the same coordinate structure of idiomatic character in the other language makes the adequate translation impossible.
This dissertation argues that all types of coordinate structures have the same invariant meaning of MULTITUDE, but syntactically this meaning is represented differently by typical and atypical coordinate structures. The result of the comparative analysis is the proposal of a nucleus-peripheral structure of coordination which represents the diversity of coordinate structures. In the nucleus-peripheral structure typical coordinate structures represent the nucleus and have prototypical status, whereas ACS represent the periphery; different types of ACS are arranged at different distances from the nucleus depending on how many common properties they share with prototypical structures. The fact that this structure can be applied to both English and Russian languages advocates for the common principles of coordinate structures formation mechanism in these otherwise unrelated languages.