GRAMMAR OF GERMAN-LANGUAGE WORD COMBINATIONS: REFLECTIONS ON STRUCTURAL-SEMANTIC MODELING
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of the structural and semantic features of the "word combination" phenomenon in the modern German language with a focus on its nominative nature. A list of coordinative and subordinative word combination models is given and analyzed. Both types of models represent a closed (sub)system. A coordinative word combination appears as a pattern "main word – link – dependent word" and is a structural-semantic combination of two words with different syntactic (main word vs dependent word), but with the same morphological status (belonging to autosemantic parts of speech). The downward modeling of subordinative word combinations cedes on the following parameters: speech part of the main word (verb, noun, adjective, adverb) and the type of a link (coordination, control, adjacency), which in total gives 11 models (out of a potential 24) and 21 submodels within the limits of the proposed theoretical approach. A coherent word combination is coined according to the algorithm "Word A – link– word B" and represents the unity of two or more words with the same grammatical status. The general principle of their formation is the monofunctionality of the components and the homogeneity of their parts. Their main features are as follows: the type of connection (open vs closed), the number of combined components (bi- vs poly-component), and the part of speech expressing the main word, which also gives 10 models, but only 18 sub-models. It was found that when using word combinations models, mechanisms that give "permission" for the implementation of some and/or impose a "ban" on the implementation of other models when forming real sentences are activated. It is proved that both word combinations and sentences are characterized by a fractal nature because, according to their main features, they belong either to coordinative or subordinative formations. At the same time, the sentence, using the "formation material" of the word combination, repeats its structural and semantic algorithm in its main features, unfolding either according to the model of coordination, subordination, or the model of combined hybridity (sentence-period).
References
2. Admoni W. G. Der deutsche Sprachbau. M. : Proswestschenie 1986. 336 с.
3. Charitonowa I.J. Theoretische Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. Syntax. Kiew : Вища школа, 1976. 179 с.
4. Eisenberg P. Grundriß der deutschen Grammatik. Stuttgart; Weimar: Metzler. 1998. 489 s.
5. Heidolph K.E. u.a. Grundzüge einer deutschen Grammatik. B. : Akademie. 1984. 1028 s.
6. Helbig G. Deutsche Grammatik. B. : Langenscheidt. 2002. 654 s.
7. Miller G.A. Human Memory and the Storage of Information. Transactions on Information Theory. 1956. Vol. IT. 2. № 3. P. 129–137.
8. Moskalskaja O. I. Grammatik der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. M. : Vysča škola. 1971. 384 s.
9. Thomson S. A. "Subordination" and narrative event structure. Coherence and grounding in discourse. Amsterdam; Philadelphia : John Benjamins, 1987. Vol. 2. P. 435–454.
10. Verspoor M. English Sentence Analysis : An Introduction Course. Amsterdam; Philadelphia : John Benjamins. 2000. 245 p.
11. Yngve V.H. The depth hypothesis. Structure of language and its mathematical aspect. Proceedings of the Symposia in Applied Mathematics. N. Y. : Providence R.I.: American Mathematical Society. 1961. Vol. XII. P. 130–138.
12. Zifonun G. u.a. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache (in 3 Bdn). B., N.Y. : Walter de Gruyter. 1997. 2569 s.
ISSN 
.png)
