Ірина Грачова
(Вінницький державний педагогічний університет імені Михайла Коцюбинського)
CONCEPTUAL PRINCIPLES OF STUDYING QUANTIFIERS
IN MODERN LINGUISTIC STUDIOS
The achievements of the XXth and early XXIst centuries in the field of syntactic research are associated with the names of scientists who work in various theoretical dimensions, including traditional, structural, generative, functional, and some others. The high level of generalizations is largely based not only on advanced theories but also on the involvement of a wide range of data from language families.
The category of quantity belongs to the basic categories of human existence and is one of the universal categories of humanity. It has been the subject of research since the time of Aristotle, who was the first to provide its definition and is the object of many scientific disciplines, in particular, mathematics, logic, philosophy and others. In language, this category is expressed by various grammatical and lexical means and is represented by a number of meanings; in linguistics, it opposes two concepts: definite quantity – indefinite quantity. The class of quantifier denotes an undifferentiated quantity, which is one of representatives of indefinite quantity.
In linguistic studios, there is a certain number of different terms to denote the studied class of words, in particular, counting words, quantifiers, numeratives, and quantifiers. However, in the English grammatical tradition, the term “quantifier” is used, the etymology of which fully reflects the semantics of the given units. This term refers to words whose semantics denote a non-specific number, namely such units as all, any, both, each, either, (a) few, half, (a) little, many, more, most, much, none, some , several, which are included in the lexical-grammatical group for indicating quantity. It should be mentioned, the question of parts of speech classifications is still relevant. Semantic, morphological, and syntactic characteristics, which separate quantifiers into an independent class against the background of other parts of speech, turned out to be insufficiently clear, which causes the debatability of their status in traditional grammars. These units are often counted among quantitative numerals, indefinite pronouns, adjectives, and determinatives. We should also note that the principles of traditional grammar are sometimes insufficient for the full disclosure of the genesis of quantifiers, and therefore we consider it appropriate to turn to other grammatical paradigms, in particular generative, where the studied units are considered as a separate lexical-grammatical class of words.
The concept of radical reinterpretation by D. Lightfoot, a representative of the generative grammar, can serve as a theoretical basis. This mechanism allows us to explain why the language system undergoes changes over time, forming such categories as modal operators, quantifiers, and others. Quantifiers underwent categorical changes as a result of the mechanism of radical reinterpretation. Over time, they lost the properties of other parts of speech and were separated into a unique category due to their syntactic distributions. Quantifiers are a single homogeneous system, specialized means of expressing quantitative relations and the indefinite quantity and that is a characteristic feature of each member of this group and its distributions are the main principles for separating these words into a class. As a rule, quantifiers are divided into precise and imprecise, universal and existential, indefinite, negative, multiple, closed, and open. The so-called floating quantifiers attract special interest as their units can be separated from their NPs. This distribution is recorded in Old English and later in Modern English, the Middle and Early Modern English periods are characterized by the absence of such a position.
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ
- Буніятова І.Р. Становлення складнопідрядного речення в давньогерманських мовах (IV-XIII ст.): Дис. … доктора філол. наук: 10.02.04; Захищена 13.05.2004. К., 2004.404 с.
- Lightfoot D. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: University Press, 1979. 430