Глаголы широкой семантики в русском и английском языках

Contents:

Introduction 3

 

Chapter I. Verbs of general semantics in the English language 4

1.1 Phrasal verbs 4

1.2 Modal verbs 8

1.3 “Make” and “Get” as verbs of general semantics 14

 

Chapter II. Verbs of general semantics in the Russian language 19

2.1 Verbs of general semantics in the Russian language 19

2.2 “Бить” and “Брать” as verbs of general semantics 21

 

Conclusion 28

Bibliography 29

 

 

 

Introduction

The system of verb is rightly considered to be the most complex grammatical structure of the language. The most troublesome problems are, indeed, concentrated in the area of the finite verb, and include, in particular, questions tense, aspect and modal auxiliary usage. This seems to be an area of grammar which has always gained the greatest interest in language learning. We can say with little fear of exaggeration that learning a language is to a very large degree learning how to operate the verbal forms of that language.

In Modern English, as well as in many other languages, verbal forms imply not only subtle shades of time distinction but serve for other purposes, too; they are also often marked for person and number, for mood, voice and aspect.

The grammatical categories of the English verb find their expression in synthetical and analytical forms. The formative elements expressing these categories are: grammatical affixes, inner inflection and function words. Some categories have only synthetical forms (person, number), others —only analytical (voice distinction). There are also categories expressed by both synthetical and analytical forms (mood, time, aspect).

The topicality of the course paper is in the fact that the theme is very interesting and actual for today youth, who deals with English language, linguistic and is interested in English grammar.

The main aim of the course paper is to tell about the verb of general semantics in the English and Russian languages. There are the following tasks to reach the given aim:

• To give information about verbs of general semantics in the English and Russian languages;
• To tell about the notion of phrasal and modal verbs;
• To analyze “Make” and “Get” as verbs of general semantics;
• To discover “Бить” and “Брать” as verbs of general semantics.

The course paper consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion and bibliography.

 

Chapter I. Verbs of general semantics in the English language

1.1 Phrasal verbs

The term phrasal verb is commonly applied to two or three distinct but related constructions in English: a verb and a particle and/or a preposition co-occur forming a single semantic unit. This semantic unit cannot be understood based upon the meanings of the individual parts in isolation, but rather it must be taken as a whole. In other words, the meaning is non-compositional and thus unpredictable. Phrasal verbs that include a preposition are known as prepositional verbs and phrasal verbs that include a particle are also known as particle verbs. Additional alternative terms for phrasal verb are compound verb, verb-adverb combination, verb-particle construction, two-part word/verb, and three-part word/verb (depending on the number of particles), and multi-word verb.

One can discern at least three main types of phrasal verb constructions depending upon whether the verb combines with a preposition, a particle, or both. The words constituting the phrasal verb constructions in the following examples are in bold:

Verb + preposition (prepositional phrasal verbs)

a. Who is looking after the kids? - after is a preposition that introduces the prepositional phrase after the kids.

b. They pick on Billy. - on is a preposition that introduces the prepositional phrase on Billy.

c. I ran into an old friend. - into is a preposition that introduces the prepositional phrase into an old friend.

d. She takes after her mother. - after is a preposition that introduces the prepositional phrase after her mother.

e. Sam passes for a linguist. - for is a preposition that introduces the prepositional phrase for a linguist.

f. You should stand by your friend. - by is a preposition that introduces the prepositional phrase by your friend.

Verb + particle (particle phrasal verbs)

a. They brought that up twice. - up is a particle, not a preposition.

b. You should think it over. - over is a particle, not a preposition.

c. Why does he always dress down? - down is a particle, not a preposition.

d. You should not give in so quickly. in is a particle, not a preposition.

e. Where do they want to hang out? - out is a particle, not a preposition.

f. She handed it in. - in is a particle, not a preposition.

Verb + particle + preposition (particle-prepositional phrasal verbs)

a. Who can put up with that? - up is a particle and with is a preposition.

b. She is looking forward to a rest. - forward is a particle and to is a preposition.

c. The other tanks were bearing down on my panther. - down is a particle and on is a preposition.

d. They were really teeing off on me. - off is a particle and on is a preposition.

e. We loaded up on Mountain Dew and chips. - up is a particle and on is a preposition

f. Susan has been sitting in for me. - in is a particle and for is a preposition.

The difference between these types of phrasal verbs lies with the status of the element(s) that appear in addition to the verb. When the element is a preposition, it is the head of a full prepositional phrase and the phrasal verb is a thus a prepositional phrasal verb. When the element is a particle, it can not (or no longer) be construed as a preposition, but rather it is a particle by virtue of the fact that it does not take a complement. Finally, many phrasal verbs are combined with both a preposition and a particle.

The aspect of these types of phrasal verbs that unifies them under the single banner phrasal verb is the fact that their meaning cannot be understood based upon the meaning of their parts taken in isolation. When one picks on someone, one is not selecting that person for something, but rather one is harassing them. When one hangs out, one is in no way actually hanging from anything. The meaning of the two or more words together is often drastically different from what one might guess it to be based upon the meanings of the individual parts in isolation.

As a class, particle phrasal verbs belong to the same category as the so-called separable verbs of other Germanic languages. They are commonly found in everyday, informal speech as opposed to more formal English and Latinate verbs, such as to get together rather than to congregate, to put off rather than to postpone (or to deter), or to do up rather than to fasten.

The terminology of phrasal verbs is inconsistent. Modern theories of syntax tend to use the term phrasal verb to denote particle verbs only; they do not view prepositional verbs as phrasal verbs. The ESL literature (English as a second language), in contrast, tends to employ the term phrasal verb to encompass both prepositional and particle verbs. The terminology used to denote the particle is also inconsistent. Sometimes it is called an adverb, and at other times an intransitive prepositional phrase. The inconsistent use of terminology in these areas is a source of confusion about what does and does not qualify as a phrasal verb and about the status of the particle.

Concerning the history of the term phrasal verb, Tom McArthur writes:

"...the term phrasal verb was first used by Logan Pearsall Smith, in Words and Idioms (1925), in which he states that the OED Editor Henry Bradley suggested the term to him."

The value of this choice and its alternatives (including separable verb for Germanic languages) is debatable. In origin the concept is based on translation linguistics; as many single-word English and Latinate words are translatable by a phrasal verb complex in English, therefore the logic is that the phrasal verb complex must be a complete semantic unit in itself. One should consider in this regard that the the actual term phrasal verb suggests that such constructions should form phrases. In most cases however, they clearly do NOT form phrases. Hence the very term phrasal verb is misleading and a source of confusion, which has motivated some to reject the term outright. The term is nevertheless employed here because that is what the underlying constructions are commonly called in linguistics and language pedagogy in general ¹.

Phrasal verbs of general semantics

• come along - идти вместе, сопровождать; приходить, появляться
• come over – приходить, подходить, заезжать
• come down - спускаться, опускаться; падать;
• come up – появляться, возникать; подниматься, приближаться
• come on – давай!, пошли!; кончай!, брось!; проходить, приходить
• come back – возвращаться
• come out - выходить; появляться, возникать; получаться
• come in - входить; приходить, прибывать

 

• get out – уходить, уезжать; выходить; вынимать, вытаскивать
• get up – вставать, подниматься; просыпаться
• get back – вернуть ся
• get off - выходить, покидать; уносить, удалять; уходи!
• get away - удрать, ускользнуть; уходить
• get in – войти, забраться в, проникнуть, попасть в
• get on - садиться на в ; приступить к; продолжить
• get down - опустить ся
• get over - справиться; понять; добраться до; перейти, перелезть
• get through – проходить, проникать через; выдержать, справиться
• get around – обойти, преодолеть; справиться; перехитрить
• get along - уживаться, ладить; поживать; справляться с делами

 

• go on 1 продолжай те !; 2 продолжать ся ; 3 происходить
• go back – возвращаться
• go out – выходить
• go down - спускаться, идти, ехать вниз
• go up – подниматься
• go over - подойти, приехать; повторять, перепроверять
• go away – уходить, уезжать
• go off – уходить, уезжать; убегать, улетать
• go in – входить
• go through – пройти через, сквозь; повторять; тщательно изучать
• go by – проходить/проезжать мимо; проходить о времени
• go along – соглашаться, поддерживать; идти вместе, сопровождать
• go around – расхаживать повсюду; обойти вокруг; двигаться по кругу

 

1.2 Modal verbs

A modal verb (also modal, modal auxiliary verb, modal auxiliary) is a type of auxiliary verb that is used to indicate modality – that is, likelihood, ability, permission, and obligation. Examples include the English verbs can, must and should.

In English and other Germanic languages, modal verbs are often distinguished as a class based on certain of their grammatical properties.

A modal auxiliary verb gives more information about the function of the main verb that it governs. Modals have a wide variety of communicative functions, but these functions can generally be related to a scale ranging from possibility ("may") to necessity ("must"), in terms of one of the following types of modality:

• epistemic modality, concerned with the theoretical possibility of propositions being true or not true (including likelihood and certainty)
• deontic modality, concerned with possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act (including permission and duty)
• dynamic modality, which may be distinguished from deontic modality, in that with dynamic modality, the conditioning factors are internal – the subject's own ability or willingness to act

The following sentences illustrate epistemic and deontic uses of the English modal verb must:

• epistemic: You must be starving. ("It is necessarily the case that you are starving.")
• deontic: You must leave now. ("You are required to leave now.")

An ambiguous case is You must speak Spanish. This may be intended epistemically ("It is surely the case that you speak Spanish", e.g. after having lived in Spain for a long time), or deontically ("It is a requirement that you speak Spanish", e.g. if you want to get a job in Spain).

Epistemic modals can be analyzed as raising verbs, while deontic modals can be analyzed as control verbs.

Epistemic usages of modals tend to develop from deontic usages. For example, the inferred certainty sense of English must developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of should developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility senses of may and can developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are:

• internal mental ability → internal ability → root possibility (internal or external ability) → permission and epistemic possibility
• obligation → probability

Modal verbs of general semantics

Can and could

The modal verb can expresses possibility in either a dynamic, deontic or epistemic sense, that is, in terms of innate ability, permissibility, or possible circumstance. For example:

I can speak English means "I am able to speak English" or "I know how to speak English".

You can smoke here means "you may (are permitted to) smoke here" (in formal English may or might is sometimes considered more correct than can or could in these senses).

There can be strong rivalry between siblings means that such rivalry is possible.

The preterite form could is used as the past tense or conditional form of can in the above meanings (see Past forms above). It is also used to express possible circumstance: We could be in trouble here. It is preferable to use could, may or might rather than can when expressing possible circumstance in a particular situation (as opposed to the general case, as in the "rivalry" example above, where can or may is used).

Both can and could can be used to make requests: Can/could you pass me the cheese? means "Please pass me the cheese" (where could indicates greater politeness).

It is common to use can with verbs of perception such as see, hear, etc., as in I can see a tree. Aspectual distinctions can be made, such as I could see it (ongoing state) vs. I saw it (event).

The use of could with the perfect infinitive expresses past ability or possibility, either in some counterfactual circumstance (I could have told him if I had seen him), or in some real circumstance where the act in question was not in fact realized: I could have told him yesterday (but in fact I didn't). The use of can with the perfect infinitive, can have..., is a rarer alternative to may have... (for the negative see below).

The negation of can is the single word cannot, only occasionally written separately as "can not". Its contracted form is can't (pronounced /kɑːnt/ in RP and some other dialects). The negation of could is the regular could not, contracted to couldn't.

The negative forms reverse the meaning of the modal (to express inability, impermissibility or impossibliity). This differs from the case with may or might used to express possibility: it can't be true has a different meaning than it may not be true. Thus can't (or cannot) is often used to express disbelief in the possibility of something, as must expresses belief in the certainty of something. When the circumstance in question refers to the past, the form with the perfect infinitive is used: he can't (cannot) have done it means "I believe it impossible that he did it" (compare he must have done it).

Occasionally not is applied to the infinitive rather than to the modal (stress would then be applied to make the meaning clear): I could not do that, but I'm going to do it anyway.

May and might

The verb may expresses possibility in either an epistemic or deontic sense, that is, in terms of possible circumstance or permissibility. For example:

The mouse may be dead means that it is possible that the mouse is dead.

You may leave the room means that the listener is permitted to leave the room.

In expressing possible circumstance, may can have future as well as present reference (he may arrive means that it is possible that he will arrive; I may go to the mall means that I am considering going to the mall).

The preterite form might is used as a synonym for may when expressing possible circumstance (as can could – see above). It is sometimes said that might and could express a greater degree of doubt than may. For uses of might in conditional sentences, and as a past equivalent to may in such contexts as indirect speech, see Past forms above.

May (or might) can also express irrelevance in spite of certain or likely truth: He may be taller than I am, but he is certainly not stronger could mean "While it is (or may be) true that he is taller than I am, that does not make a difference, as he is certainly not stronger."

May can indicate presently given permission for present or future actions: You may go now. Might used in this way is milder: You might go now if you feel like it. Similarly May I use your phone? is a request for permission (might would be more hesitant or polite).

A less common use of may is to express wishes, as in May you live long and happy (see also English subjunctive).

When used with the perfect infinitive, may have indicates uncertainty about a past circumstance, whereas might have can have that meaning, but it can also refer to possibilities that did not occur but could have in other circumstances (see also conditional sentences above).

She may have eaten cake (the speaker does not know whether she ate cake).

She might have eaten cake (this means either the same as the above, or else means that she did not eat cake but that it was or would have been possible for her to eat cake).

Note that the above perfect forms refer to possibility, not permission (although the second sense of might have might sometimes imply permission).

The negated form of may is may not; this does not have a common contraction (mayn't is obsolete). The negation of might is might not; this is sometimes contracted to mightn't, mostly in tag questions and in other questions expressing doubt (Mightn't I come in if I took my boots off?).

The meaning of the negated form depends on the usage of the modal. When possibility is indicated, the negation effectively applies to the main verb rather than the modal: That may/might not be means "That may/might not-be", i.e. "That may fail to be true". But when permission is being expressed, the negation applies to the modal or entire verb phrase: You may not go now means "You are not permitted to go now" (except in rare cases where not and the main verb are both stressed to indicate that they go together: You may go or not go, whichever you wish).

Shall and should

The verb shall is used in some (particularly formal) varieties of English in place of will, indicating futurity, when the subject is first person (I shall, we shall). For discussion of this, as well as details of the other usages mentioned here, see shall and will.

With second- and third-person subjects, shall indicates an order, command or prophecy: Cinderella, you shall go to the ball! It is often used in writing laws and specifications: Those convicted of violating this law shall be imprisoned for a term of not less than three years; The electronics assembly shall be able to operate within a normal temperature range.

Shall is sometimes used in questions (in the first, or possibly third, person) to ask for advice or confirmation of a suggestion: Shall I read now?; What shall we wear? Overall, if one looks at its frequency across time, "shall" is used less and less and might drop out of English usage completely in a few generations.

Should is sometimes used as a first-person equivalent for would (in its conditional and "future-in-the-past" uses), in the same way that shall can replace will. Should is also used to form a replacement for the present subjunctive in some varieties of English, and also in some conditional sentences with hypothetical future reference – see English subjunctive.

Should is often used to describe an expected or recommended behavior or circumstance. It can be used to give advice or to describe normative behavior, though without such strong obligatory force as must or have to. Thus You should never lie describes a social or ethical norm. It can also express what will happen according to theory or expectations: This should work.

Both shall and should can be used with the perfect infinitive (shall/should have (done)) in their role as first-person equivalents of will and would (thus to form future perfect or conditional perfect structures). Also shall have may express an order with perfect aspect (you shall have finished your duties by nine o'clock). When should is used in this way it usually expresses something which would have been expected, or normatively required, at some time in the past, but which did not in fact happen (or is not known to have happened): I should have done that yesterday ("it would have been expedient, or expected of me, to do that yesterday").

The negative forms are shall not and should not, contracted to shan't and shouldn't. The negation effectively applies to the main verb rather than the auxiliary: you should not do this implies not merely that there is no need to do it, but that there is a need not to do it.

 

Must

The modal must expresses obligation or necessity: You must use this form; We must try to escape. It can also express a confident assumption (the epistemic rather than deontic use), such as in It must be here somewhere.

An alternative to must is the expression have to (in the present tense sometimes have got to), which is often more idiomatic in informal English when referring to obligation. This also provides other forms in which must is defective (see Replacements for defective forms above) and enables simple negation (see below).

Whe used with the perfect infinitive, must expresses only assumption: Sue must have left means that the speaker confidently assumes that Sue has left. To express obligation or necessity in the past, had to or some other synonym must be used.

The formal negation of must is must not (contracted to mustn't). However the negation effectively applies to the main verb, not the modality: You must not do this means that you are required not to do it, not just that you are not required to do it. To express the lack of requirement or obligation, the negative of have to or need (see below) can be used: You don't have to do it; You needn't do it.

The above negative forms are not usually used in the sense of confident assumption; here it is common to use can't to express confidence that something is not the case (as in It can't be here or, with the perfect, Sue can't have left).

Mustn't can nonetheless be used as a simple negative of must in tag questions and other questions expressing doubt: We must do it, mustn't we? Mustn't he be in the operating room by this stage?

 

1.3 “Make” and “Get” as verbs of general semantics

Make

There are English words that are used in many senses, in other words, in English, a large number of homonyms and polysemous words, which is not the same. Ambiguous words are synonymous with each other.

Verb make is an ambiguous word and hear it in different cases. Translation Make, as everyone knows, делать, but it is also готовить, составлять, издавать звук, устанавливать, вводить, приписывать, равняться, являться, стать, зарабатывать, выиграть etc. This verb can even act as a noun and mean physique or stock character, and style, but in America it is also information on the identity, obtained from police files.

- We've got a make on Ruth; she's on our files. - Мы установили личность Руфи, она есть в наших картотеках - said the police agent Kate investigator John.

He meets with the approval of:

- OK, you made it good. - Все в порядке, молодец.

- He will make a good manager! - Он станет хорошим менеджером! - The head of the trade department, Nick Thompson, at a meeting dedicated to the reorganization of the department, with approval despite the newfound Supervisor Steve, who according to his instructions evaluated the work of other employees. Стив почувствовал, что как менеджер наконец достиг своей цели. Но начальник, a huge man, with the make and muscles of a prize-fighter - a man with a healthy body and muscles professional boxer, no stopping and wanting to show other employees how his protege asked Steve to tell you what he did last week . - Steve, tell us, what did you make last week. He sees that in the hands of Steve's thick file and thinks it's reports for the past week. Employees laugh. Then they are well aware that in this folder. Because before that Steve asked them приготовить отчёты - Steve asked them to make reports.

They are well aware that for the past week, Steve занимался  любовью to the chief secretary (Steve was making love with the secretary of the boss.)

Make - it's not just заниматься любовью, но и заключать брак in a formal speech. He made her his wife - он женился на ней.

- Made in China. - Cделано в Китае, reluctantly said John, trying priladit back down, bounced off PC keyboard ...

Make - набирать вес:

- Two of them made twenty stones each in sixteen week. - Два из них набрали за шестнадцать недель двадцать стоунов (280 фунтов).

Make also means приводить в порядок, убирать, готовить; to make beds – убирать постели. Идти домой - make. We slowly made our way home. - We walked slowly home. The phrase'' You'll only make bad worse "is translated into Russian as: - Мы неторопливо шли домой. But it can be translated literally: - Вы только сделаете хорошее плохим. It will be clear, but the clumsy Russian. On the example of the use of the verb make, we see how much more, in this case Russian.

There are still ambiguous words that are used in the U.S. in a perverted sense of (distorted, from our point of view). This item - "пункт" и stuff - "штат сотрудников", which are often synonymous. Items may be your bag and shoes, and can of Coke, and English textbook. Items of your room - chairs, table, sofa ... All this can be called a "stuff." The meaning does not change. "Staff" can ever be anything.

- Did you put all the stuff in your gym bag? - Ты все сложил в свою сумку? - Mick asks John after a workout, knowing that his friend always forgets something in the locker room.

He nods

- OK, all items are here. - Все нормально, все на месте.

- Check all your items, boys! - Проверьте свои вещи, парни! - Shouts soldiers Sergeant Timothy Timpson, sitting in a helicopter and preparing for landing, it is critically looking at the most inexperienced young soldier. - I see you don't have all the stuff, guy. Guess, what did you forget? - Вижу, у тебя - неполный боекомплект. Ну-ка, прикинь, что ты забыл, приятель.

Get

The verb to get a number of things depending on the context. He is considered one of the 100 most common verbs in English. Experts say that the writing is not very good use of the verb to get, but it is so convenient that it is impossible not to use it.

The basic meaning of the verb to get – получать. For example: I get letters from this firm every day. She got a present from him yesterday.

To get + noun or pronoun usually has «получать», «приобретать», «зарабатывать» (if it is a cold)

For example: Did you get my postcard yesterday? Получили ли вы мою открытку вчера?

Do not get cold. Не простудись!

To get + adjective usually meaning " становиться "

For example: I’m getting tired. Я начинаю уставать Our dog is getting old. Наша собака стареет.

To get + preposition

If the verb is going to get an excuse, it means a change in the motion.

Why do not get in and have a drink? Почему бы тебе не зайти и не выпить чего-нибудь.

To get + participle 2 (past participle)

1) Very often this expression is used to value the fact that someone is doing something myself.

Get divorced развестись

Get lost           потеряться

Get dressed одеться

Get married пожениться

2) To get used where one would employ the verb to be.

He got caught by the police (was caught) Он был пойман полицией.

3) When, after the addition is to get 2 + participle (past participle) expression can be set to "закончить что-то делать "

Get your room tidied and we'll go to the park.

There are also other points of the verb to get, for example, in the sense of " убеждать "

I cannot get my students to do it. Я никак не могу убедить своих учеников сделать это.

The verb is to get more and phrasal verbs (phrasal verb). That is, it is such a verb, which, in combination with different particles have different values. This combination is idiomatic. That is, its value can not be derived from the meaning of the verb and the corresponding particle. For example: They got on each other. Means that they liked each other. I cannot get along with my boss. Я не могу ужиться с моим боссом. (This is most common in American English. In the British version of this value use the verb get on.

 

 

 

Chapter II. Verbs of general semantics in the Russian language

2.1 Verbs of general semantics in the Russian language

The term of verisimilar is proposed by N.N. Amoz, is not commonly used in Russian studies, but is widely used in relation to analytic languages. Verbs of general semantics call these words, the values ​​of which are characterized by a wide denotative relatedness and contextual conditioning (for example, English verbs to give, to get, to take, to put, and others, can, in combination with postpositions to form a set of values ​​that are semantically distant from each other). According to E. Belyaeva, explore the prototypical values ​​of English verbs, "the general semantics of words - words with a high degree of generalization. They have an extensive conceptual framework, so it is not possible to bring all the values ​​of these tokens to any single meaningful core"². S. Pesin also expressed doubts about the existence of a prototype verbs of general semantics words: "... the prototype lexical invariance is difficult to distinguish from the general semantics of the words, as in the case of verbs of general semantics we are dealing with an abstraction of a higher order, with some amorphous conceptual framework and the lack of clear reference relatedness"³. This is probably why the identification of mechanisms of semantic derivation words of general semantics is a problem for researchers.

The concept of "well-developed multiple meanings" and " verbs of general semantics " are not synonymous, since the former emphasizes the quantitative aspect of the phenomenon (the existence of a set of values), and the second - semantic (generalized nature of semantics, a broad reference, the dependence of the values ​​of the context, not explicitly expressed between values). According to EA Chudinova, the MAC has 619 verbs, with more than 7 values⁴. Of course, only a fraction of these verbs are verbs of general semantics.

By verbs of general semantics we include verbs with more than 7 values ​​that can be denoted as specific observable physical actions, and non-specific unobservable emotional, verbal, or social processes. Therefore, their main difference from verbs with more derived values ​​is that values ​​ verb of general semantics come in three semantic fields: "Action", "Status" and "attitude" - and represent the denotative situation with a different set of participants. Semantic relationship between the values verbs of general semantics may be lost, which makes the representation of such verbs as valued and brings them to the homonyms.

The study we have identified a body verbs of general semantics Russian: бежать (10); бить (11); брать (11); бросить (10); быть (12); вести (10); делать (8); держать (12); держаться (10); идти (30); крутить (9); лежать (9); лезть (11); оставить (12); падать (11); поднять (16); подняться (16); покрыть (11); положить (9); принять (19); пройти (16); пропустить (13); пустить (10); свести (16); сесть (13); сидеть (8); снять (13); стоять (23); тянуть (25); тянуться (19); ударить (20); ходить (17).

In the words of the underlying values ​​of the data refer to different semantic fields and lexical-semantic groups movement (run, walk, climb, fall, walk, walk), moving object (cast, lead, twist, lift, put, to reduce , remove, pull) of the object in a certain position or change its location (stay, lie down, sit, sitting, standing), physical impacts on the object (hit, hit), being in the order (to take, hold, receive), cover (cover), manifestations of quality (stretch). Verbs to be and to do, and are characterized by a generalized semantics are, in the terminology of A. Wierzbicki, the semantic primitives. Verbs leave, miss, are included in the basic values ​​of a few lexical-semantic groups: keep 'putting, putting, putting, etc. somewhere, forgotten or deliberately not take with you when you go away '(lexical-semantic groups space object displacement, lexical-semantic groups get at your disposal traffic) skip' give way to someone, smth., let go, drive somewhere l. '(lexical-semantic groups permission and prohibition, lexical-semantic groups movement relative to destination), and let' cease to hold power, to give to someone, smth. freedom.

Outside the context of the values ​​ verbs of general semantics are defined quite easily, for example, hit - hit smth., Hold - not to fall, fall, picking up, stand - in an upright position, not moving. Analysis of the context suggests that the compatibility of verbs with different types of referents are such significant modification of semantics, with which the connection with the main values ​​of the derivative becomes very obvious: the boy hits the ball, the wind slap in the face, the light strikes the eye, the driver hit the horse with his whip, the army hits the opponent, moose hunter has a gun, the gun has a hundred paces, the bully has lights in the stairwell, the duty has sounded the alarm, the clock strikes midnight, his trembling, etc. This is consistent with the well-known in semasiology regularity formulated in G. Kolshansky: "The wider meaning of the word, the greater the dependence on the context"⁵.

Some models of the semantic derivation verbs of general semantics certain words are represented in the works of O. Seliverstova, GI Sectional, EV Paducheva but comprehensive description of the class of units, as far as we know it, still do.

 

2.2 “Бить” and “Брать” as verbs of general semantics

If one accepts the view that the basis of all the values ​​of an ambiguous word is a cognitive model (in the papers on cognitive linguistics, it is called differently: prototypical scheme lexical prototype frame, cognitive script, etc.), you should determine what terms of the context and the mechanisms of values ​​gives rise to words of general semantics and how varied cognitive scenario verb of general semantics. Consider the features of semantic derivation verbs of general semantics beat and take.

• Бить. The verb beat recorded 11 values ​​and a few shades. The values ​​of the verb belong to different lexical-semantic groups: 4 lexical-semantic variant are at the strike, 3 lexical-semantic variant - the group sound, the rest of lexical-semantic variant, who are at loss of life of the living entity, division, winning and lesions, physiological condition, traffic, applicable to different types of entities (the clock strikes, fountain beats) and sent to different objects (to beat the enemy, break the dishes.) Derivational slot with the top hit includes derivatives 468, 120 of them verbs.

The study of the semantic paradigm of verb of general semantics beat suggests the presence of cognitive scenario of physical effects on an object that varies in derivative values.

Cognitive scenario consists of several stages: 1) the subject makes any repetitive actions (for example, puts a hand, a stick, and another gun down on someone, something), and 2) the subject affects thus the object and discovers its power; 3) the impact of the subject is often subject to negative as a result of an inanimate object is destroyed, becomes unfit for use, and animate object experiencing physical and / or mental suffering.

The individual elements of the cognitive script programmed appearance derived values. For the development of the semantic structure of the verb to beat the most significant are the signs and multiple repetition of similar actions that are present in almost all of its values. For example: 'publish rhythmic, melodic sounds of blows in a certain amount to be reported at the time (of the hours with the battle)', 'blow, producing sound by repeatedly banging on the same place. " Some values ​​of the verb to beat (‘разделять что-л. на части’, ‘умерщвлять, убивать животных, рыбу на охоте’) also contains a sign of repeated action, which is manifested in the character of the object: the verb can be used in conjunction with multiple objects (бить посуду, но *бить тарелку; бить дичь, но *бить дикого волка). Sign of activity of the subject and focus of its efforts to damage the object is represented in many meanings of the verb, including in the lexical-semantic variant, representing the situation of victory (beating the opponent). Sign of movement that accompanies the action of the subject, comes to the fore in the meaning of the verb to beat, sold, for example, in the following contexts: a fountain shoots, it has a fever. Effective nature of the perceived pitch is found in a number of lexical-semantic variant sound (бить в колокол, бить в барабан).

In derived verb meaning выбить, отбить, разбить, сбить, etc. inherited component to motivating verb. The study of semantic relations between the values ​​of the generating and derived verbs can detect the components that are active in the semantic derivation of verbs.

Verb разбить has 10 values. The semantics of the prefix defines the conceptual idea of ​​the verb - a violation of the integrity of the object - and focuses on the action. In contrast to the verb to beat, the semantic derivation is largely determined by the presence of signs of repeated and repeatability action, meaning of the verb break profiled indicative of results: 1) as a result of physical effects on an object is its destruction, the destruction (разбить стакан, разбить противника, разбить надежды, разбить все обвинения), 2) as a result of physical pressure deforms the object (разбить затылок о камни, разбить сапоги), and 3) as a result of exposure to the object, it singles out any parts, creating a new object (разбить землю на участки, разбить туристов на группы, разбить парк).

Effective component determines the development of the values ​​of the verb выбить, in which the components of the physical impact on the object falls into the rank and acquire the status of propositions included. When clotting proposition in dictionary definitions verb appears an indication of the way of the 'attacks (strokes) do smth.': выбить ковер 'striking, clean'; выбить в стене нишу 'blow to deepen'; выбить медаль 'strikes produce'; выбить лист жести 'blows straighten'.

Derivation of values ​​verb сбить also assess the impact of component 'a blow to shift, to move an object. " This component is crucial for many values ​​of the verb: сбить яблоко с дерева 'strike, the impetus to move, make fall, separated from smth.'; сбить шляпу набекрень 'budge an abrupt movement, push', shoot down all in a heap ' сбить всех в кучу, to unite. " The basis of a metaphorical meaning as is the idea of ​​moving the object: сбить 'forward thinking, talking on what-l. subject; translate '(сбить разговор на другую тему)