The origin of the names of parts of speech. Classifications of parts of speech

Chapter 1. Background……………………………………………………………...page 2-6

Chapter 2. Principles of classification of parts of speech………………………...page 7-11

Chapter 3. Tradition and innovation in the classification of parts of speech ... pp. 12-13

CHAPTER 1

Background

Parts of speech are grammatical classes of words characterized by a combination of the following features:

the presence of a generalized meaning, abstracted from the lexical and morphological meanings of all words of this class;

a complex of certain morphological categories;

· a common system (identical organization) of paradigms and commonality of basic syntactic functions.

In traditional Russian grammar, reflecting the influence of ancient and Western European grammars, at first there were eight, then nine, but now - with the inclusion of particles - ten parts of speech are usually distinguished:

· Noun

· Adjective

· Numeral

Pronoun

· Adverb

· Preposition

Particle

· Interjection.

First 6 parts of speech this is significant(full-valued or independent) words, i.e. words are lexically independent, naming objects and signs or pointing to them, and capable of functioning as members of a sentence. Prepositions, conjunctions and particles are official , i.e. lexically independent, the words, which serve to express various syntactic relations, as well as to form analytical forms or to express the syntactic and modal meanings of a sentence. Interjection constitute a special group of words: they do not name anything and serve to express an emotional attitude and subjective assessments.

In addition, participles and gerunds are sometimes considered as part of the verb forms, sometimes they belong to mixed, transitional parts of speech, sometimes they are considered special parts of speech (in this case, the number of parts of speech increases to twelve).

The number of parts of speech in the Russian language in the teachings of some linguists either increases even more, or decreases exorbitantly. So, academician Shakhmatov introduced a prefix into the circle of parts of speech (for example, pre-, most- etc.) and a bundle. He had fourteen parts of speech. If this list is supplemented with various other contenders for the role of parts of speech (for example, categories of the state recognized in words it is possible, it is impossible, it is necessary, it is a pity etc., with interrogative words and particles, secluded particles, like and - and, neither - neither, or - or, relative words, etc.), then the number of parts of speech in Russian will exceed twenty. Many grammarians (Potebnya, Fortunatov, Peshkovsky) denied that numerals and pronouns have grammatical features of special parts of speech, pointing out that numerals and pronouns, in their syntactic features, are close to such grammatical categories as nouns, adjectives and adverbs. With this point of view, the number of basic, independent parts of speech is already reduced by two and reduced to eight. However, among these eight parts of speech there are also doubtful, incomplete ones. It is easiest to dispute the right to be called a part of speech in interjections, pointing out that it is a special form of speech - affective, emotional speech or sometimes active, effective speech, which in any case remains outside the structure of intellectual speech. In addition to interjections, auxiliary words easily fall out of the group of parts of speech as exponents of purely grammatical relations (Vandries).

Researchers (for example, Prof. Kudryavsky), who adhered to Potebnya's view of the complete semantic parallelism of parts of speech and sentence members, always denied the title of parts of speech to service, connective words, that is, preposition, conjunction and particle. For such researchers, the number of parts of speech is limited to four main ones: noun, adjective, verb and adverb. If linguistic skepticism extends further, then the right of adverbs to be called an independent part of speech is questioned. Indeed, some categories of adverbs are in close connection with adjectives (cf. the inclusion of qualitative adverbs in -o in the system of adjective names by Professor Kurilovich), others - with nouns, others do not have pronounced morphological features special category. At the heart of the once accepted by the followers of Acad. Fortunatov's grammatical division of words according to inflection differences into:

· Case ( fun)

Generic ( cheerful, oh, oh, merry, - oh, oh)

Personal ( have fun, have fun)

It was precisely such a distrustful attitude towards the “grammaticality” of the dialect that lay. Thus, only three parts of speech will survive: the noun, the adjective and the verb. But even in the ancient grammatical tradition, nouns and adjectives were brought under the same category of the name. And in modern languages, they often change roles. Vandries concludes: “Continuing this selection, we come to the conclusion that there are only two parts of speech: the verb and the name. All other parts of speech are reduced to them.

Of the Russian grammarians, no one has yet reached such a limitation of parts of speech, but in the Fortunatov school the opinion was expressed that the verb is not correlated with nouns and adjectives and that morphology can be managed without the category of the verb. Prof. Peterson, in his early works on Russian grammar, in the presentation of inflection, did without the doctrine of the verb as a special grammatical class. Only in the later "Lectures on the Modern Russian Literary Language" was he forced to recognize the verb as a category "denoting a sign extended in time."

Such are the fluctuations in the doctrine of the parts of speech. Between the different views of linguists on this issue - "a huge distance." Meanwhile, one has to resort to some kind of word classification system when presenting the grammar of any language. Therefore, in grammars, it is not uncommon for a statement like the following: “The doctrine of the parts of speech is one of the least developed parts of grammar. The traditional interpretation of parts of speech is considered unsatisfactory in modern linguistics. However, the absence of any established scientifically substantiated new points of view on this issue forces us to keep within the framework of tradition in this respect.

Isolation of the main structural-semantic types of words helps to bring some clarity to the doctrine of parts of speech. Neither modal words, nor interjections, nor connective words or particles of speech belong to parts of speech. The range of parts of speech is limited by the limits of words that can perform a nominative function or be demonstrative equivalents of names.

Parts of speech are primarily divided into two large series of words, differing from one another in the degree of nominative independence, systems of grammatical forms, and the nature of syntactic use.

In one series are the categories of names, the category of pronouns and the category of the verb, in the other - the category of adverbs. In modern Russian, adverbs are correlated with the main categories of names and verbs. But the connection of adverbs with names is closer than with the forms of verb words. In modern Russian, there is an incessant movement of nominal forms into the system of adverbs.

Changes in the structure of the Russian language associated with the history of the link (auxiliary verb) led to the formation of a special part of speech - the category of state. This part of speech arose on the basis of the grammatical transformation of a number of forms, which began to be used exclusively or mainly as a linking predicate. Under this category of state, “predicative adverbs” (it’s possible, ashamed, ashamed, etc.), short forms that have broken away from the category of adjectives (glad, much), some forms of nouns that have undergone rethinking (it’s impossible, it’s time, etc.) ).

Since the copula retained some of the formal properties of the verb word, the development of the category of state was noticeably affected by the influence of the category of the verb.

As for the category of names, the differences between nouns and adjectives are clearly marked in Russian. From these categories in the history of the Russian language (especially from the twelfth - thirteenth centuries) the category of quantitative words - the category of the numeral - stood apart. On the contrary, the ancient rich class of demonstrative words, pronouns in the history of the Russian language has undergone disintegration, decomposition. Most of the pronominal words have merged with the categories of adjectives and adverbs or turned into particles of the furnace, into the grammatical means of the language. In the system of the modern language, only relics of pronouns as a special part of speech (subject-personal pronouns) have been preserved.

Vinogradov presents the system of the main parts of speech characteristic of the modern Russian language as follows:

1) noun

2) adjective,

3) numeral.

4) pronoun (in a state of decomposition)

6) adverb

The system of parts of speech in the structure of a sentence is combined with a system of particles of speech:

Particles in proper sense

Particles-bundles

· Prepositions

Vinogradov classifies modal words as particles of speech, separating them into a special structural-semantic type of words.

A. Belich thinks that modal words should be combined with particles, prepositions, conjunctions in the category of relational words-particles.

In a living language there is no ideal system with monotonous, sharp and deep lines between different types of words. Grammatical facts move and move from one category to another, often adjoining different categories on different sides.

Conclusions:

In order to classify parts of speech, it is necessary to clearly identify and justify the principles for separating a certain group of words into a separate part of speech;

The problem of isolating parts of speech is the problem of isolating word forms. If we imagine parts of speech as a classification of lexemes, then the lexemes themselves should be obtained as a result of a morphological analysis of word forms;

The semantic criterion in its most generalized meanings distinguishes four classes of full-valued word forms - a noun, an adjective, a verb and an adverb;

The morphological criterion singles out nine classes of formed word forms and unformed word forms;

The syntactic criterion makes it possible to single out nouns, adjectives, adverbs, comporative, category of state and modal words among unformed word forms.

CHAPTER 2

Principles of classification of parts of speech

Morphology is that part of the grammatical structure of a language that unites the grammatical classes of words, the grammatical categories and forms of words belonging to these classes.

In the process of developing the science of the Russian language over the past two and a half centuries (from Lomonosov to the present day), when describing parts of speech, scientists proceeded from different classifications. The most important of them: semantic, formal-grammatical, structural-semantic . Representatives of the semantic direction (Lomonosov, Vostokov, Potebnya, Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky) when classifying parts of speech came from the content, from the meaning of words to their grammatical form, representatives of the formal grammatical direction (Peterson, Peshkovsky, Ushakov) - from the grammatical form of words to their meaning , which eventually gave not a partial classification of words, but their division into changeable and unchangeable. The third group of linguists (Vinogradov, Galkina-Fedoruk, Gvozdev, Pospelov) proceeded from the internal unity of the content (meaning) and form of the word. Their classification, called lexico-grammatical and now traditional, has received wide recognition in the scientific world. However, she has a very significant disadvantage: not all words (in particular, pronouns, interjections, modal and functional words) are recognized as nominative.

The structural-semantic direction, reflected in the "Russian Grammar" (AN USSR, 1980), is based on the interdependence of the form and content, structure and semantics of the classified words. Similar - functional-semantic - the approach to the allocation of parts of speech in the Russian language was previously carried out by A. M. Peshkovsky. And Peshkovsky tended to single out four independent parts of speech in Russian: the noun, the adjective, the verb, and the adverb. However, M. V. Panov, based on the consideration of the semantic-functional categories of lexemes he singled out, managed to find a tense place in the system of Russian parts of speech distinguished in this way. He considers phrases run a race and race run. The first phrase is natural both lexically and grammatically. The second phrase is also lexically natural. But it's grammatically incorrect: race- an adverb, that is, a sign of a sign, but run- a noun, that is, grammatically not a sign and not a process. phrase run fast- both lexically and grammatically. phrase fast run grammatically also regular, but lexically - no, because lexically run is not something objective. Thus, the opposition of adjectives and adverbs in this aspect is somewhat blurred. According to some researchers (M.F. Lukin), a purely morphologization of parts of speech is unnecessary here, that is, an extremely narrow understanding of parts of speech, which leads to the fact that numerals are significantly impoverished (for example, fractional and ordinal numbers fall out of their system, and the words thousand, million, billion are wrongly considered as nouns), most of the pronouns are split up and included in other parts of speech (nouns and adjectives), the system of adjectives is unreasonably expanded, etc.

The classification of lexemes can be based on the expression of the same morphological categories. In this case, lexemes house, animal, winter form one group, because all their word forms express the morphological categories of number, case, and only these categories. On the other hand, all these lexemes will be opposed to lexemes kind, old, big, since all the word forms of the latter express such morphological categories as gender, number, case, brevity-completeness. However, the classification according to the principle “the expression of the same set of morphological categories” does not always lead to such clear results as in the case of opposition of nouns and adjectives described above. Fundamental difficulties arise when different word forms of one lexeme express different sets of morphological categories. In this regard, the word forms that are traditionally included in the verb are arranged in the most difficult way in the Russian language. Another circumstance complicates the application of this criterion: among Russian lexemes there are many such that consist of one word form and, therefore, do not express a single morphological category.

If the only feature, the presence of common morphological features expressed in the word form itself, were taken as the basis for the selection of independent parts of speech, it would look like this:

Nouns (express case and number), quantitative and collective numbers also got here.

· Adjectives (express case, number, gender and brevity / completeness).

· Infinitives (express aspect and voice).

· Participles (kind).

Participles (case, number, gender, brevity-completeness, aspect, pledge, tense)

· Verbs of the indicative mood of the present-future tense (number, type, voice, tense, person, mood).

· Verbs of the indicative mood of the past tense (number, gender, type, voice, tense, mood).

Subjunctive verbs (number, gender, type, pledge, mood).

· Imperative verbs (number, type, pledge, person, mood).

· Grammatically uncharacterized word forms: indeclinable nouns and adjectives, comparative degree and adverbs.

Within the morphological approach to the allocation of parts of speech, another classification is also possible. It can be based on the structural features of the paradigm. It is clear that in this case nouns, for example, would be opposed to adjectives. After all, the paradigm of the latter includes the opposition of word forms according to gender, which is absent in nouns. In this case, neither nouns nor adjectives would be able to maintain their unity. Such fragmentation would occur not only at the expense of unchangeable nouns and adjectives. For example, in the category of lexemes like youth numerals should also be included - collective and quantitative, as well as personal and interrogative pronouns, because all these lexemes have word forms of only one number.

With regard to immutable words, that is, to lexemes consisting of one word form, it turns out to be very effective syntactic principle .

The essence of this principle is to determine those types of lexemes that may or may not be combined with the words of interest to us, as well as to clarify the functions that these words perform in a sentence. And the semantic criterion easily singles out adverbs among the invariable words. However, only the use of a syntactic criterion introduces various gradations among adverbs.

However, within the same lexeme, word forms differently designed morphologically coexist. In exactly the same way, different word forms of the same lexeme can perform different syntactically functions. Therefore, classification according to the principle of "syntactic function" for lexemes is impossible in principle, just as it is impossible for lexemes to classify on the basis of a homogeneous morphological arrangement.

Thus, the semantic criterion in its most generalized meanings distinguishes four classes of full-valued word forms - a noun, an adjective, a verb and an adverb. The morphological criterion distinguishes nine classes of formed word forms and unformed word forms. The syntactic criterion applied to a morphologically uncharacterized group makes it possible to distinguish among the latter nouns, adjectives, adverbs, a comparative (comparative degree), a state category and modal words. In principle, it is possible to apply the syntactic criterion to word forms, but its results will conflict with the results of morphological and semantic analysis. Morphological and syntactic criteria are in principle inapplicable to lexemes.

As you can see, when classifying parts of speech, there was a persistent desire to group parts of speech according to one single-aspect principle, as a result of which the content was separated from the form or the form from the content, which inevitably led scientists to failure. Therefore, to look for any one principle of partial classification is a hopeless business.

Another one interesting feature of the named part-of-speech classifications lies in the fact that they all proceed, first of all, from their specificity of the words themselves of the language system: either from their content, or from their form, or from the unity of content and form, as if the language system is immanent, that is, enclosed in itself and for itself, as if its object were only words and their relations with each other. The nomination is ignored or fades into the background.

Lukin offers a multifaceted nominative-grammatical principle. The essence of this principle lies in the fact that it is necessary to define, classify parts of speech not by content, not by form, not by their unity, but, first of all, by three reasons:

Nominations (naming not only objects, phenomena of objective reality, but also our inner world. six generic categories should be distinguished: lexical, grammatical, situational, modal, emotional-imperative, direct.

Part-of-speech object

Unity of content and form

Following the proposed principle, thirteen parts of speech can be distinguished.

However, the generally accepted number of parts of speech is reflected in the Russian Grammar-80. These are the ten parts of speech listed in the previous section, among which the first six are significant, that is, words are lexically independent, naming objects and signs or pointing to them, and capable of functioning as members of a sentence. Prepositions, conjunctions and particles are auxiliary, that is, lexically non-independent words that serve to express various syntactic relations, as well as to form analytical forms or to express the syntactic and modal meanings of a sentence. Interjections constitute a special group of words: they do not name anything and serve to express an emotional attitude and subjective assessments. Here the parts of speech are understood as grammatical classes of words, characterized by a combination of the following features:

· The presence of a generalized meaning, abstracted from the lexical and morphological meanings of all words of a given class.

· A complex of certain morphological categories.

· General system (identical organization) of paradigms.

· Generality of basic syntactic functions.

However, the change in the language and its grammatical standing is manifested in various transformational processes, including the transition of words from one lexico-grammatical category to another. The views of scientists on this phenomenon differ significantly even in the nomination of this phenomenon (some distinguish between complete and incomplete transitions, some call it lexico-grammatical substitution). Also distinguish between stable and unstable transition within the incomplete.

CHAPTER 3

Traditions and innovations in the classification of parts of speech

The 90s of the 20th century were marked in the history of modern Russian linguistics by the growing attention of researchers to the cognitive aspects of linguistic phenomena and means. The cognitive function of the language is its role in providing the thought process. Some provisions of cognitive grammar have much in common with the interpretation of the words of A.F. Losev, who explains parts of speech not only as a linguistic expression of logical categories, but also as a result of an interpretive act that turns the abstract conceivability of objects into communicated objectivity.

The theme of parts of speech “is by no means new” and parts of speech “belong to the most described categories of words” are considered from a cognitive point of view, and their nature and grounds for selection and development are analyzed. This is prompted by cardinal changes in the field of theoretical linguistics, primarily the achievements of the two main scientific paradigms of modern linguistics - communicative and cognitive. The methodological basis for explaining parts of speech created by Kubryakova is based on a cognitive approach to parts of speech as prototypical categories with all the properties inherent in these categories, primarily the presence of a core and diffuseness that arises as a result of subsequent transformations and semantic shifts.

A number of authors, known in modern linguistics for their latest research in the field of functional-semantic categories, remain true to traditional approaches to the system and criteria for identifying parts of speech. Mak, Maslov in his later works writes that the syntactic functions of parts of speech reveal greater similarity when comparing languages ​​than the types of form and word formation.

The principle of common grammatical meaning underlies the traditional system of parts of speech. Only this principle is not carried out in it consistently, not delimited different types common grammatical meanings, as a result of which some headings that actually intersect are located in this system in one line.

The classification of words from the functional point of view in one of Shvedova's recent works is presented as follows: “signifying words (pronouns), naming words (names, verbs, adverbs, predicatives), connecting words (prepositions, conjunctions) and proper qualifying words (particles, modal words, interjections). The author does not call this division a classification of parts of speech, he emphasizes that this is a classification of words, but as a result, the qualification of words almost completely coincides with the classification of parts of speech itself. It is noteworthy that in this system, consisting of four classes, the leading role is assigned to pronouns as the main exponents of linguistic meaning.

“New approaches to understanding what a part of speech is are found within the framework of the ontological-energetic concept of language,” Kamchatnov and Nikolina write in one of their teaching aids on the theory of language. Following Losev's concept, the authors put forward completely new approaches to understanding parts of speech. In their opinion, the nature of language is not in reflection, but in interpretation, interpretation of reality.

"Communicative Grammar of the Russian Language", published in 1998, is new approach to the language, follows the integrative trends of linguistic trends. Emphasizing the functionality and communicativeness as the essential properties of the language, the authors put the person as a person who speaks and writes and the text as a specific implementation of the language system at the center of grammar. Since the main object of study is the text, the sentence and various communications, the parts of speech are presented as ways of expressing various types offers.

!!! Each part of speech is characterized by a purpose to serve in a sentence or in a text, a purpose that is potential in the language system and is realized in the speech space.

A fundamentally important property is the destination inherent in each part of speech to serve in a sentence or in a text, a destination that is potential in the language system and is realized in the speech space.

The general pathos of splitting into parts of speech, according to Plungian, can be defined as a consistent classification of lexemes according to their grammatical and non-grammatical compatibility, based on the principle of “concentric decrease in grammaticality”.

Summarizing what has been said, it should be noted that parts of speech are considered as a projection into the world of language of objects of reality that are different in nature or in their perception by a person, that is, as a means of expressing thought.

In our opinion, despite certain differences in interpretation. The above theses about the new understanding of the parts of speech have much in common with the onomasiological and cognitive approaches to word classes. Parts of speech are considered as projections into the world of language that are different in their essence or according to the perception by a person of objects of reality, i.e. as a means of expressing thought. The desire to avoid the opposition of structural-systemic and functional-communicative approaches to language, a kind of "synthetic" concept, in our opinion, is one of the most undoubted advantages of modern linguistics, which allows in a new way and at the same time - in a sense - traditionally look at the eternal problem of parts of speech.

Traditional understanding parts of speech originated in the era of Antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, Diogenes) and first passed into the European, and then into the Russian grammar of M. Smotrytsky (1619, 1648): they singled out names("being") and verb("activity") ; also referred to as parts of speech union("non-case part of speech") and member. M. Smotrytsky, expressed the relationship of "being" (things) and "acts" (activities) and found that in relations "thing – act" established quality-quality relationship" .

Lomonosov's main object of study is "word in the totality of its properties and characteristics, not yet too differentiated and identified in a conscious way": saying"can be understood as word, And How sentence, however, attention is focused on the word as unit, which acts on any language level(both lexical and grammatical; synchronous and in development; both as a word and as a sentence, etc.)" . Name defined as "image of things" a verb how "image of deeds" , word – how communicative unit. Such a scientific hypothesis explains the terminological combination used by Lomonosov in the "Grammar Table" significant parts of the word, or "significant sayings".

In the "Russian Grammar" parts of speech are divided into main and official. As the first Lomonosov singles out names and Verbs, which is due to the consideration of parts of speech in relation to reality and his statement: “Looking at the visible light, we find in it two kinds of being. things, the second kind, the essence of these things are different deeds". Accordingly, "two kinds of being" are reflected in "verbal images" - names and verbs. In contrast to the "main parts of the word" (name and verb), "necessarily needed in the image of our most important concepts", "service parts of the word" (pronoun, participle, adverb, preposition, union and interjection) "they serve in intercourse and in reduction of these"... Thus, the distinction between parts of speech into main and official is based on the distinction between linguistic signs that reflect extralinguistic reality, and linguistic signs that are related to the reflection of the relationship already between main parts of speech. For example, participles "serve to reduce the human word, containing the name and the verb power," and the union serves "to depict the reciprocity of our concepts," etc.

distinction major and official parts of speech associated with their functional heterogeneity in relation to each other: if the name and the verb are functionally homogeneous and are used to refer to some phenomena of reality, then the group of service parts of speech is not functionally homogeneous. So, the adverb serves to briefly depict circumstances, thus its function is close to the function of the significant parts of the word (speech), while the function of prepositions and conjunctions is closer to grammatical functions so that significant parts of speech "have correspondence with each other"; and the interjection is identical in function to the sentence ("speech", in Lomonosov's terminology).

Based on Lomonosov's postulate that names and verbs are images of things and deeds, then the definition of adjectives as "the quality of the signifiers" contrary to understanding things as "any object of the surrounding reality". Existence qualities towards things explains the relationship between thing and deed:"Things are not necessarily attached to qualities; qualities cannot exist without a thing itself."

logical view of relations subsequently became a grammatical tradition and served as the basis for determining the categorical meaning of parts of speech. Modern scientific grammarians note that "the most generalized meanings for parts of speech are subject matter(substances) and sign– procedural(presented as action or condition) and non-procedural(presented as quality or property)" . Exactly generalized meanings that characterize all words of any part of speech are present in the lexical and morphological meanings of specific words of a certain class.

Relations between adjectives and verbs reveal the status communion. The distinction between adjectives and participles in Lomonosov is not connected with their functional load, but with way of education- Nominal or verbal. So, characterizing "the order of speeches and their completeness", Lomonosov notes that "the freedom of human thoughts transforms the order of these and excludes from speech what should have been by nature", for example: "... the earth is fat with dew"– "off" verb happens. Respectively, full names adjectives used in an attributive function, in the aspect of Lomonosov's theory, should have been considered to reduce speech (ie, sentences with a predicate expressed by the adjective) and spread the name. In addition, Lomonosov defines the relationship between noun and verb in a sentence where the personal verb is recognized as more important, since on it "the whole speech" (i.e. the sentence) "consists of power" .

Thus, in the "Russian Grammar" a twofold approach to the status of the verb in the system of parts of speech is found: 1) in logical aspect, the noun is recognized as more important; 2) in linguistic aspect, on the contrary, the verb is the basis of speech, its "strength".

The subsequent development of Russian grammatical thought was largely determined by the influence of "Russian Grammar" by M. V. Lomonosov, therefore, the period in the history of the development of Russian grammar up to the 1820-1830s. named Lomonosov. So, if in relation to semantics verb, its functional load and morphological outline, there are still some clarifications, comments, then regarding composition of parts of speech of the Russian language and their relationship with each other, in essence, no changes are noted. The exception is selection "adjective name as an independent category", or part of speech, in the "Slavic Grammar". Accordingly, participle excluded from the number of independent parts of speech.

Based on the material of the Russian language, an analysis of this composition of parts of speech is given in "Russian Grammar" (1831) by A. Kh. Vostokov. In Vostokov, the logical aspect is largely combined with grammar, which makes it possible to recognize adjective as an independent part of speech, and participle include in one of the groups of adjectives - dual. Vostokov's participles are considered not in the chapter on the adjective, but in the chapter on the verb, which indicates the inconsistency of the status of the participle in the system of relationships between the verb and the adjective.

Definition subject grammar and the content of its main sections - morphology and syntax, as well as the relationship between the noun and the verb are further developed in the work of N. Konoplev: "Verbs make up life, the soul of Grammar, which is a true picture of the whole nature" .

The studies of A. G. Glagolev reflect logical-psychological a look at the parts of speech: "... the very order in which these parts follow one after the other is explained by observation alone the gradual development of mental faculties person". The relationship between the noun and the verb is not specified, and the adverb is defined as "the quality of the verb, or, in other words, the predicate of the predicate, so that in the sentence containing the adverb, after the verb, there are two thoughts: home and adnexal"; for example, in a sentence Pleasure flies fast which the author uses as an illustration, "first thought: pleasures fly by second: their flight is swift. In this reasoning, a very interesting and important thought is formulated: adverbs perform the same function verb quality) which is complete adjectives in relation to a noun ( noun quality) and contribute to the reduction of two predicative syntagmas into one.

The use of a logical-psychological approach in explaining the order of parts of speech, the time of their appearance in human speech, as well as an attempt to analyze categories(universal and specific (for example, categories comparability – gradients of justice )) were a development logical classification of M. V. Lomonosov.

In the works of N. I. Grech, words are divided into parts of speech and particles; "parts of speech- words expressing creature and quality or action it", and "particles of speech- words meaning relation of beings, qualities or judgments between themselves" .

Period 1840-1860s characterized by the linguistic works of F. I. Buslaev, in which ideas were developed

A. X. Vostokov, N. I. Grech, J. Grimm and V. Humboldt. Essence main parts of speech(i.e. verbs, nouns, adjectives) Buslaev saw not only that "they mean or action, or object, or property, but also in what they get the meaning in the sentence, changing according to conjugations and declensions ". In the first place in attributing one or another language formation to parts of speech is its grammatical characteristic. For example, it is argued that the "indefinite mood" (infinitive) and participle, although "refer to names derived from the verb ", however, changing according to pledges, types and times must be treated with verbs.

Scientific discussion

F. I. Buslaev’s arguments about the relation words to the Dictionary and Grammar: "In Dictionary contains substance tongue;); Grammar this substance gives an image and meaning; the property of the Dictionary is only one fixed names of objects; Grammar defines them general meaning and indicates their live rotation in the language ". In this respect, Buslaev's parts of speech are distributed as follows: nouns, adjectives and verbs belong to the Dictionary, and other parts of speech to Grammar, "with the exception of derivative adverbs and various repetitions in the formation of names numerals ". Place, or position, determines the form of existence of parts of speech: "The subject and predicate can be expressed various forms; subject - noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, etc., but always in the form of the nominative case; the predicate is a verb, an adjective, a noun, etc., but always in the form of a verb.

In the work of K. S. Aksakov "The Experience of Russian Grammar" (1860), for the first time in the history of Russian science, the approach to parts of speech as to language categories:"... the separation of words should be not according to the inner meaning they express - then it would be the separation of the concepts and objects themselves - but but the form that is given to them by the word itself. The basis of division for a word must be the word, and nothing else" .

The beginning of the next stage in the study of the theory of parts of speech is associated with the works of A. A. Potebnya (the work "From Notes on Russian Grammar" (1873)): his teaching on parts of speech reflected "the deepening of the doctrine of the word, grammatical form and grammatical category ..." Describing verb in the system of parts of speech, Potebnya spoke of language as activities and noticed that "it is impossible to look at grammatical categories, what are the verb, noun, adjective, adverb, as something invariable, once and for all deduced from the eternal properties of human thought. On the contrary, even in relatively short periods, these categories noticeably change" . Potebnya installed influence of parts of speech on the proposal, its structure and content, claiming that "with the change grammatical categories the whole in which they arise and change, namely the sentence, also inevitably changes.

The dynamic approach to the parts of speech allowed L. L. Potebna to determine the nature of their relationship in the language, the significance of a particular part of speech in a particular period of language development; the main thing in the proposal is verb:

"The main (independent of the other) sentence is impossible (except when the verb is omitted) without verbum finitum(that is, a verb in the narrow sense, without being attributed to it participial forms)... by itself verbum finitum constitutes a sentence ... Therefore, by defining such a verb, we thereby determine the minimum of what should be contained in the sentence ... "

Thus, the significance of the verb as a grammatical category is determined by its role in revealing the structure and content of the sentence.

An important moment in the further development of the theory of parts of speech in the Russian language was the definition of the part-speech status pronouns and numerals, which were attributed by A. A. Potebnya to the number of significant words on the basis of their distinction between the concepts of "abstract" and "formality": "The number is one of the highest abstractions, but the numeral is not a formal word." The conclusion that "not every abstraction is a formality" seems to be very important and allows a different approach to the distinction between concepts. lexical and grammatical semantics: to see the peculiarities of considering grammatical and lexical semantics from the point of view of abstractness/abstractness.

The idea of ​​A. A. Potebnya about a certain parallelism of function words with morphemes is, in a sense, very relevant:

"The whole point of their [official words] is that they serve pointers to the functions of other words and sentences. Often these words are deprived even of sound independence ... so that they can be called words only in the sense in which suffixes and prepositions, considered merged, are words. Such words are called purely formal and grammatical" .

Among the official words of A. A. Potebnya included conjunctions, prepositions, particles and auxiliary verbs.

Thoughts about the system of parts of speech A. A. Potebnya attracted the attention of many prominent linguists. For example, the grammatical concept of D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskiy shares Potebnya’s point of view, excluding two fundamental questions: 1) about the relationship of grammatical thinking to logical thinking, which states that “the processes and forms of logical thought, on the one hand, and grammatical thought, on the other , are phenomena ... related" ; 2) about the attitude to the word, which qualifies as a unit of speech.

The composition of parts of speech in D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskiy is the same as in Potebnya, and is due to the approach to parts of speech as grammatical forms. As a "special grammatical category" Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky singles out infinitive, although Potebnya quite clearly saw the verbal nature of the infinitive, as evidenced by his reasoning about the differences between the infinitive ("indefinite mood") and verbal nouns.

D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky gives a classification taking into account celebrities, revealing a certain pattern: significance decreases - formality increases. In accordance with this, the author distinguishes four groups of words:

Awareness of the illegality of direct identification abstraction as a lexical meaning and formalities allows

Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky to establish certain correspondences between lexical and formal grammatical meaning and further consider the parts of speech not in one plane, but in some order. In this regard, the status numerals, which are recognized as a significant part of speech, but due to their abstract nature differ from the actual significant words, which is reflected in the syntax: numerals are combined with the actual significant words - nouns - and qualify them, making up one member of the sentence.

However, in the grammatical concept of Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky, the status of gerunds- it is considered as independent part of speech, and when describing adverbs qualifies as their variety(cf .: "The number of adverbs includes gerunds, which differ from ordinary adverbs in that in them the point of view of the adverb is complicated by the verb").

Unlike A. A. Potebnya, considering the words as independent entities, D.N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky did not deny that the word lives in the sentence, and distinguished between morphological forms of words and syntactic forms:

“If a word is taken outside of speech-thought (for example, in a dictionary), then it does not have a syntactic form. But this does not take away its grammatical form ...<...>the main feature of the syntactic form and the condition necessary for its implementation is the participation of the word in the act of speech-thought ... Grammatical forms are characterized by special suffixes and endings, by which they can be distinguished from one another and recognized outside the phrase ".

The word is an independent entity, "the value in itself is outside the sentence; the word, acting as a sentence or its predicating (rhematic) part, participates in speech as a member of another sentence, as its thematic part, which, in turn, allows fixing another word by predicating ".

In the future, this idea of ​​Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky allowed a person to create and fix more complex forms of thought, more complex logical figures, such as individual sentences and texts.

V. A. Bogoroditsky in the doctrine of parts of speech proceeded from methodological principles of I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, who noted that "the most appropriate characteristic of languages ​​would be their characteristic according to common morphological and semasiological features" . V. A. Bogoroditsky distinguished in grammar morphology and syntax as independent sections and believed that "morphology groups ... words according to the nature of their meaning and form into those largest categories that are known as parts of speech" . He paid attention to subordination some parts of speech to others, and when distributing parts of speech, he "mixed" the principles of classifications: 1) morphological; 2) syntactic; 3) semasiological.

The classification of V. A. Bogoroditsky gives the distribution of words in unity of form and content and is a classification of parts of speech in interaction grammar and semantics. Words are divided into "words from eigenvalue" (that is, denoting certain concepts: nouns, personal pronouns, adjectives, participles, numerals, demonstrative pronouns, adverbs, adverbs) and " words without their own meanings"(i.e., in themselves not denoting concepts: prepositions, conjunctions and particles). This distinction has a meaningful feature - variability, which is understood quite broadly. For example, the adverb smart is considered as a word with its own meaning, the carrier of which is the stem, connected with the corresponding ending. Thus, some suffixes are interpreted as endings due to their formative nature. In addition, the content of "words with their own meaning" and "words without their own meaning" reveals a difference in syntax.

Another feature that establishes "rank" relationships between parts of speech is the feature " independence - subordination, which acts, is relevant in the group of significant parts of speech: "... some words are more independent, while others are subordinate to them, since they serve as their definition" . In terms of content, this difference is manifested in the fact that " independent words with their own meaning" reflect the world in the form of thought, and "subordinates words with their own meaning" contribute to the spread of independent words, thereby reflecting reality, but only in combination with the basic elements of thought.

Formal syntactic differences are manifested in the fact that "independent words with their own meaning" are the main members of the sentence, between which a special connection is established - coordination, and "subordinate words with their own meaning" function as minor members and are in a subordinate relationship with the main members of the sentence. Among the "independent words" are the noun, personal pronoun and verb; the number of "subordinate words" includes adjectives, participles, numerals, demonstrative pronouns, adverbs and participles.

The distinction within the group of "independent words with their own meaning" determines the corresponding division in the group of "subordinate words with their own meaning".

AT semasiological words are opposed to items(or "personal indications of subjects") and actions

AT morphological in terms of differences are manifested in the nature of inflection: the names "nouns, as the names of objects, and pronouns, as personal indications of objects ... change to show the relationship of objects to actions and among themselves, and such a change is called declension; the verb changes to show the way and time actions, as well as to show the relationship of the action to the subject of a known person and number, and such a change is called conjugation.

AT syntactic respect, the distinction between the noun and the verb determines the coordination relationship between them. "Subordinate words" fall into two groups: pertaining to a noun and related to the verb. Parts of speech that are subordinate to a noun serve to determine the latter: a) relatively quality; b) relatively numbers; c) relatively instructions. Accordingly, "subordinate words" fall into adjectives (as well as participles), numerals and demonstrative pronouns. As a formal feature, agreement with nouns is singled out. In morphological terms, they are characterized as changeable (inclined), since adverbs are considered by Bogoroditsky as "similar, but invariable definitions" to the verb. In syntactical terms, the difference between a verb and an adverb (and a participle) is manifested in special form subordinating relationship, adjoining due to morphological immutability.

In the semasiological aspect, the differences between a noun and a personal pronoun have a formal justification: "... the absence of the category of gender in personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person and some special case endings" .

Thus, the classification of parts of speech by V. A. Bogoroditsky takes into account unity of semasiological and grammatical characteristics of parts of speech; concepts of parts of speech become more complete, containing, in addition to semantic differences, also formal ones.

Formal-grammatical the concept of F. F. Fortunatov was the result of research comparative linguistics and determined by commitment to form. Fortunatov refuses the term itself "parts of speech" and replaces it with the term "class of words". The classification of parts of speech appears as semantic-grammatical(or grammatico-semantic) in two independent classes: in the form grammar, or formal, class whole full words and ungrammatical class whole individual words. concept "parts of speech" corresponds to the grammatical (formal) class of words.

Fortunatov's understanding of parts of speech as grammatical classes of words is also represented in the theories of modern scientists. For example, V. G. Rudelev formalized intuitive ideas about language and used grammatical meanings as distinguishing features: 1) inconsistency with a person; 2) case; 3) kind; 4) persons; 5) type; 6) numbers; 7) comparisons. As a result of this approach, he identified 16 grammar parts speech, or formal classes of words in the Russian language: 1) full participle; 2) full adjective: 3) numeral; 4) short communion; 5) short adjective; 6) gerund; 7) qualitative adverb; 8) adverb; 9) pronoun; 10) noun; 11) pseudo-pronoun; 12) perfect; 13) presence; 14) imperative; 15) infinitive; 16) interjection. Verb in this classification is presented not as a single part of speech, which has the corresponding (personal and non-personal) forms, but as conditional name, uniting different grammatical classes of words. Verb forms such as perfect(past tense verb), present(present tense verb), imperative, as well as special forms – participle(full or short), gerund, infinitive raised to the status independent words.

The synthesis of a formal classification of words with widespread theories of parts of speech is presented in the works of A. M. Peshkovsky, in which parts of speech are considered as "basic grammatical categories", "certain realities" that objectively exist in the language and play an important role in the construction of scientific grammar. As major parts of speech are highlighted noun, adjective, verb and adverb, which is determined by two reasons: 1) these categories, to one degree or another, exist in all human languages, regardless of the diversity language tools how they are expressed; 2) they are categories that condition all other categories.

In the overall grammatical picture, the most important are the noun, verb and adjective, the essence of which is different. Considering verb and adjective, A. M. Peshkovsky sees them homogeneity and opposition as in relation to noun, as well as among themselves. In relation to the noun, they are united and contrasted on the basis of lack of independence, those. designate for pas "something dependent, something that sends our thought in search of ... a noun. But noun stands for subject", a "adjective and verb denote what is attributed to objects - their signs" . opposition verb and adjective is based on differences specific content these signs:"... the category of the verb denotes action, and the category of the adjective is quality". That's exactly what quality the difference is reflected in the language.

Inheriting the linguistic past and developing scientific concepts A. A. Shakhmatova and L. V. Shcherba, academician V. V. Vinogradov established the following system of parts of speech, which became traditional: 1) noun; 2) adjective; 3) numeral; 4) pronoun - "special" part of speech; 5) adverb; 6) category of condition; 7) verb; 8) particles; 9) prepositions; 10) unions; 11) modal words; 12) interjections. The ideas expressed by him in the "Grammatical Doctrine of the Word" were further developed in modern theories (P. A. Lekant, M. V. Panov, E. S. Kubryakova, A. L. Sharandin and others).

• Wed, for example: Sharandin A. L. The verb in the history of Russian linguistics. On the question of the place of the verb in the system of parts of speech of the Russian language. Tambov. 2003; His own. Russian verb: complex description: monograph. Tambov, 2009.
• Wed: Kolesnikova S. M. Gradual vocabulary in modern Russian // Vesti. Moscow state region university Ser. "Russian Philology". Issue. 2. M., 2006. S. 63-69; Her own. Typology of Gradual Meaning in Different Parts of Speech of the Modern Russian Language // Functional Linguistics: Scientific, Journal. Issue. 1. T. 1. Simferopol, 2010. S. 322-324.
• Cm.: Lomonosov M.V. Russian grammar // Lomonosov M.V. Poly. coll. op. T. 7: Works on Philology (1739-1758). M.; L., 1952. S. 389-578.
• Wed: Shcherba L.V. About parts of speech in Russian // Shcherba L.V. Selected works on the Russian language. M., 1957; Vinogradov V.V. Russian language. The grammatical doctrine of the word. M., 1947; Russian grammar: in 2 volumes / ed. Η. Yu. Shvedova [i dr.]. M., 2005 (1st ed. - 1980). Vol. 1: Morphology; Lekant P. A. Grammatical categories of words and sentences. M., 2007; Babaitseva V. V. Phenomena of transitivity in the grammar of the Russian language. M., 2000; Babaitseva V. V. Favorites. 1955-2005: Sat. scientific and scientific method. Art. M.; Stavropol, 2005. See doi.: Modern Russian language. Theory. Analysis of language units: textbook: in 2 hours. Part 2: Morphology. Syntax / ed. E. I. Dibrova. M., 2001. S. 14-26 [Significant and non-significant parts of speech; Transitivity in the system of parts of speech and the phenomenon of syncretism; About primary and secondary parts of speech]; Modern Russian language: textbook / ed. V. G. Kostomarova, V. I. Maksimova. M., 2003; Modern Russian language: textbook / ed. S. M. Kolesnikova. M., 2008.
• Wed: Nikolaeva T. M. Qualitative adjectives and reflection of the "picture of the world" // Slavic and Balkan linguistics. [Issue. 7]: Problems of lexicology. M., 1983. 235-244.
• See for example: Zhuravlev V.K. Diachronic morphology. M., 2000.
• For an analysis of the history of teaching, see the works: Vinogradov V.V. Russian language. The grammatical doctrine of the word. M., 1972. S. 10 et seq.; Su nick O.P. General theory of parts of speech. M.; L., 1966. S. 14-19; Suprun A. E. Parts of speech in Russian. M., 1971, etc.
• See for example: Sharandin A. L. Russian verb: complex description: monograph. Tambov, 2009. S. 8-98.
• Cm.: Kareva N. V. Names of verbal categories in the "Russian Grammar" by M. V. Lomonosov: author. dis. ... cand. philol. Sciences. SPb., 2011.
• Lomonosov M.V. Russian grammar. P. 408. Hereinafter, the emphasis in the text belongs to the author of this manual.
• Kolesov V.V. Old Russian literary language. L., 1989. S. 126.
• Lomonosov M.V. Russian grammar. S. 406.
• Cm.: Lomonosov M.V.[Materials for Russian grammar] // Lomonosov M.V. Full coll. op. T. 7. S. 596b.
• Lomonosov M.V. Russian grammar. S. 405.
• Lomonosov M.V. Decree. op. S. 408.
• Lomonosov M.V. Decree. op. S. 409.
• Dictionary of the Russian language of the XVIII century. L., 1991. S. 101.
• Lomonosov M.V. Decree. op. S. 409.
• Russian grammar: in 2 volumes / ed. Η. Yu. Shvedova [i dr.]. T. 2: Syntax. S. 453.
• Russian Grammar / ed. N. Yu. Shvedova [i dr.]. T. 2. S. 453.
• For a detailed description of the grammar of the Russian participle, see: Zamyatina I.V. Grammar of the Russian participle: [monograph]. Penza, 2009.
• Lomonosov M.V. Decree. op. S. 419.
• Lomonosov M.V. Decree. op. S. 567.

The linguistic basis of the methodology for working on parts of speech in schools is the doctrine of parts of speech as categories of words, "united by common grammatical properties that reflect the commonality of their semantics."

The distribution of words according to lexico-grammatical categories (parts of speech) is carried out on the basis of three features: a) semantic (generalized meaning of an object, action or state, quality, etc.), b) morphological (morphological categories of a word) and c) syntactic ( syntactic functions of the word)3.

The work, therefore, should be aimed at students' awareness of the commonality in the language of certain groups of words, their role in people's communication.

The leading linguo-methodological provision that determines the sequence of studying parts of speech is the provision on the expediency of an interconnected study of similar linguistic phenomena in any respect. In the primary grades, such an order for studying nouns, adjectives and verbs has been adopted, according to which, from a general "familiarization with all parts of speech, students move on to studying each of the indicated lexical and grammatical groups. This approach creates favorable conditions for comparing parts of speech already at the initial stage their study and thus contributes to a clearer identification of the main aspects of the formed grammatical concepts.

Nouns, adjectives and verb learners primary school understand from five angles:

1) what the word means (an object, a sign of an object or an action of an object),

2) What questions does he answer?

3) how it changes or what are the constant categories,

4) which member of the proposal most often appears in the proposal,

5) what endings it has; how it is most often formed.

According to the indicated five parameters, students also compare the studied parts of speech.

As you study, knowledge of the grammatical features of each part of speech gradually deepens. Class I, according to the school curriculum, includes the classification of words, taking into account the morphological question they answer. Class II is central in the formation of the concept of "part of speech". Students get acquainted with a set of lexical and grammatical features characteristic of each part of speech: role in the language, generalized lexical meaning, category of gender, number, time (for verbs), function in a sentence. In grade III, knowledge about the morphological and syntactic side of each part of speech is deepened: changing nouns and adjectives by cases, verbs by persons. Also in 3rd grade great place takes the formation of spelling skills endings.

The following table shows the amount of knowledge of primary school students about parts of speech (in comparison):

The ability to recognize parts of speech is formed in students based on the possession of a set of features. For example, in order to find out what parts of speech are the words friendship, friendly, friendly, a student of grade II argues like this: what? - friendship, the word denotes an object, feminine, it is a noun; the word friendly answers the question which one?, denotes a sign of an object, changes by gender: friendly, friendly, friendly, in a sentence it is used with a noun: friendly class, friendly family, friendly link; it's an adjective; what have you been doing? - was friends, the word denotes the action of an object, changes at times: friends - the present, let's be friends - the future; it's a verb.

The program for elementary grades does not provide for special familiarization of students with the division of parts of speech into independent and service ones, but in practice the teacher draws the attention of children to the signs according to which parts of speech are divided into these two groups. So, students learn that a noun, an adjective, a verb, a pronoun, an adverb are always members of a sentence, and words such as a preposition and conjunction are not members of a sentence.

One of the leading tasks of studying parts of speech is the development of oral and written speech of students, including enrichment vocabulary children with new nouns, adjectives, verbs, clarifying the meaning of words that children used earlier, and developing the ability to accurately use words in coherent speech.

For a more successful solution of this problem, the program recommends that in the process of studying parts of speech, work on synonyms, antonyms (without terms), to acquaint students with the polysemy of words, the use of words in the literal and figurative sense. Wherein necessary condition is the connection of learning with the life experience of students, with what they directly see around them, hear on the radio, learn from books.

Forming in students the ability to observe, notice the essential, raising the level of students' knowledge about the world around them, the teacher simultaneously carries out the tasks of developing their speech.

The system of studying nouns in elementary grades

The system of work on the topic "Noun" (as well as on another grammatical topic) is a purposeful process that involves a strictly defined sequence of studying grammatical features and a generalized lexical meaning of a given part of speech, a scientifically based relationship of knowledge components, as well as a gradual complication of exercises that have its ultimate goal is the formation of skills for the exact use of nouns in speech and their correct spelling.

The volume of material in each class, the sequence of work on it are determined by the peculiarities of nouns as a linguistic phenomenon, the tasks of studying this part of speech and the age capabilities of younger students.

Tasks of studying nouns in grades I-III:

1) the formation of the grammatical concept of "noun";

2) mastering the ability to distinguish between animate and inanimate nouns (without a term);

3) the formation of the ability to capitalize the surnames, first names and patronymics of people, nicknames of animals, some geographical names;

4) familiarization with the gender of nouns, the use of ь in nouns with hissing at the end;

5) development of the ability to change nouns by numbers, to recognize the number;

6) developing the skill of spelling case endings of nouns (except for nouns in -myag -iya -iy -iet and also in addition to the instrumental case of nouns with a basis in hissing and c: a candle, a cloak, a cucumber);

7) enrichment of students' vocabulary with new nouns and development of skills for using them accurately in speech (in particular, observation of the polysemy of nouns, familiarization with nouns - synonyms and antonyms);

8) mastering the operations of analysis, comparison of words and generalization.

Each of the tasks is not solved in isolation, but in interconnection. However, at certain stages of work on the topic, much attention is paid to one of the tasks. So, for example, in grades I and II in the center is the assimilation of signs of nouns as parts of speech (what they mean, what questions they answer, gender, change in numbers), in grade III the main place is given to work on the spelling of case endings. But this does not mean a break in the work on the features of nouns as parts of speech and the spelling of endings. On the contrary, work in grades I and II on the grammatical features of nouns creates the basis of theoretical knowledge for the conscious formation of spelling skills. And in the formation of the spelling skill of case endings in grade III, knowledge about the gender, number and case of nouns is constantly deepened.

The third and fourth tasks (development of speech and thinking of students) are solved during all years of study. The whole process of studying grammatical material and developing spelling skills is aimed at enriching the vocabulary of students, at developing coherent speech skills and mental abilities.

A noun as a part of speech is characterized by a certain lexical meaning and grammatical features. Common to the lexical meaning of all nouns is objectivity. From the semantic point of view, nouns are very diverse. They can denote specific objects (book, cupboard, glass), living beings (brother, beetle, pilot), natural phenomena (thunderstorm, downpour, storm, hail, snowstorm), events (war, revolution), qualities (kindness, courage , whiteness), actions (running, walking, transition), state (sleep, joy), etc.

Grammatical signs of nouns: nouns are masculine, feminine or neuter, change in numbers and cases, can be animate or inanimate; in a sentence they are more often used as a subject or object, less often as a predicate or circumstance; an adjective agrees with a noun in gender, number and case, and a verb in number (a past tense verb in gender and number).

The semantic and grammatical features of nouns are quite complex, and therefore, gradually, in the process of performing practical tasks, students accumulate specific material for further generalizations of knowledge about a noun as a part of speech.

I class (12 hours). Preparatory stage The sequence of work coincides with the period of teaching literacy by grade and precedes a special study of the topic in grade I. Preparing students to understand the concept of “noun” consists in the fact that children learn to distinguish between an object and a word as the name of this object, attention to the semantic meaning of a word develops (each word means something), the ability to classify words into groups, taking into account their meaning (words for birds, vegetables, fruits, shoes, clothes, etc.). The classification of words according to their semantic meaning develops the ability to compare words, establishing something similar, the ability to abstract.

However, for the formation of a grammatical concept, it is not enough for students to realize the specific meaning of the word - it is necessary to master the grammatical features of the word in unity with the awareness of its lexical meaning.

The next stage (the second half of the first grade) is characterized by special work on the lexical meaning of nouns and their grammatical features (they answer the question who? or what?, designate objects). Students learn to distinguish words that answer the question who? from words that answer the question what? At this stage, first-graders rise to a higher level of generalization than it was when classifying words only on a semantic basis. In grade I, children begin to develop the ability to capitalize some proper nouns.

II class (28 hours). In grade II, students' knowledge of the lexical meaning of nouns, proper and common nouns, animate and inanimate nouns (without a term) is deepened and systematized; Children learn about gender and number.

To form the concept of "noun", it is important to identify the main lexical groups of words that are combined into a given part of speech, indicate the features that are characteristic of all nouns, and reveal their role in our speech. To this end, already at the first lesson on the topic, the systematization of words denoting objects is carried out, groups of words denoting people, plants, animals, things, natural phenomena, events are distinguished. The signs common to all these words are established: they answer the question who? or what? designate objects.

Nouns denoting actions and qualities differ in their originality. In meaning, they are similar to verbs and adjectives (although nouns denote actions and qualities without connection with the subject, that is, actions and qualities are thought of as something independent). In order for students to distinguish between these parts of speech, it is necessary to draw the attention of children to the signs by which such nouns differ from adjectives and verbs, in particular to questions and endings. The most appropriate task for this is the formation of single-root words of different parts of speech. For example, a teacher writes words on the blackboard: runs, jumps, screams, knocks. Students explain that these words answer the question what does? and indicate the actions of objects. Then the task follows: name the same-root words that answer the question what ?, and write them together with the question (children write what? - run, move, jump, shout, knock). Similarly, work is carried out with the words kind, greedy, modest, cunning, white, from which students form single-root words that answer the question what? - kindness, greed, modesty, etc.

Students compare written verbs and nouns, adjectives and nouns, find out that they can be distinguished by questions, by endings.

In order for students to visualize how great the role of nouns is in our speech, the teacher can offer to find nouns in the text of the Book for Reading, then read the text without these words. Thought is impossible to understand. Nouns are the names of objects that surround us in life, and without these words we cannot convey our thoughts to each other.

As noted in the linguistic literature, for most nouns, the gender is determined by the end. It is naturally difficult for younger students to use endings to recognize the gender of nouns, since there are many words in Russian with unstressed endings (apple, log, dish); in addition, nouns of different kinds can have the same endings (piano, tulle - m. p.; lilac, carrot - f. p.).

In school practice, it has become a tradition to teach to recognize the gender of nouns by substituting the possessive pronouns my, my, or by replacing nouns with personal pronouns he, she, it. However, this technique does not guarantee students from mistakes. To determine the gender of a noun using pronouns, students must use pronouns correctly in their speech (portfolio - he, mine; report card - he, mine; furniture - she, mine; shoe - she, mine; apple - it, mine, etc. .). Therefore, it is advisable to carry out oral exercises to replace nouns with pronouns already during the period of literacy (especially when compiling oral stories).

In grade II, in the process of getting to know the gender of nouns, special attention is paid to the formation of the skill of spelling endings. The program sets the task of teaching how to correctly write the generic endings of neuter nouns (gold, swamp, dish, log, sun, heart, etc.).

As an example, we give a variant of work on the gender of nouns.

Teacher(takes the bag from the student). Whose portfolio?

Student. My portfolio. (Students write down the sentence: My portfolio.)

Teacher. Make another portfolio proposal. Name the first and second sentences. (Children call: My briefcase. The briefcase is black.)

Teacher. What word should be used in the second sentence so as not to repeat the same word portfolio? (Students write: He is black.)

Teacher. What other items can be added to the name of the word mine or replaced by the word he? (Students give examples of words.) Nouns that can be accompanied by the word my or replaced by the word he are masculine nouns.

Similar observations are made on the nouns notebook, pen. Children make a generalization about which nouns are feminine and which are neuter, give examples, perform a series of exercises that form the ability to use the substitution or substitution technique to recognize gender.

When selecting exercises, the teacher takes into account the clarity of the support of students' actions on landmarks: om, mine, she, mine, it, mine. For example, at the initial stage of work on the gender of nouns, children argue as follows: the surname is she, mine, which means feminine, the potato is he, mine, which means masculine, etc. Later, the need for such justification disappears.

The teacher also takes into account the complexity of the conditions in which the problem is solved. First, separate words in the nominative case are used to recognize the gender. Then it is proposed to work with a text in which nouns are naturally used in oblique cases, both in the singular and in the plural. The student says the noun in initial form and after that he recognizes the gender (for example: in the camp ... camp, he, mine - masculine).

When studying the gender of nouns, it is necessary to use words whose gender recognition causes difficulties for students and they make mistakes: report card (m.), furniture (f.), caramel "(f.), vermicelli (f.), tulle (m. ), film (m.), medal (female), tomato (m.), shoe (female), galosh (female), ice-hole (female), poplar (female), carrot (female).

Good to bring to class dictionary and show how, in cases of difficulty, using a dictionary, you can find out the gender of nouns. Special lessons are reserved for observing the generic endings of nouns and, in particular, for exercises in writing unstressed neuter endings (tree, swamp, jam, log, bedspread, heart, towel, etc.). Attention is drawn to the agreement of the noun and adjective: swampy swamp, deep lake, blue dish, etc.

The subject of special study are masculine and feminine nouns that end in hissing (reeds, wilderness)

Considering that students already know about the role of ь as an indicator of the softness of consonants and as a dividing one, they should be contrasted with the role of ь after hissing ( soft sign plays a grammatical role in these words: it shows that the noun is feminine). The rule about the use of ь after hissing is not particularly difficult, and students are able to independently deduce it by comparing two groups of words, for example:

1) knife, rook, raincoat, pencil;

2) rye, night, thing, mouse.

Having found out how all the written words are similar and on what basis they are divided into groups, the children conclude in which nouns the end is written ь. In order to prevent the erroneous spelling of ь for nouns (feminine) in the genitive case (tasks, clouds, etc.), it is advisable to note that ь is written after the hissing of feminine nouns answering the question who? or what? i.e. for nouns in the nominative case.

Introduction to the number of nouns.

In the process of working on the number of nouns in grade II, students develop skills:

1) to distinguish between words in the singular and plural in meaning and at the end;

2) to form from the singular form the plural form of the most common nouns in children's speech and from the plural form the singular form (city - cities; streams - stream);

3) use the noun correctly in speech, taking into account the connection of words in the sentence.

Students learn the essence of the category of the number of nouns on the basis of a comparison of words denoting one and several homogeneous objects: apple - apples, notebook - notebooks, newspaper - newspapers. It turns out how many objects denote the noun apple and the noun apples. (The work is similar with other words.) Generalization and conclusion is quite simple: if a noun denotes one object, it is used in the singular, if two or more objects, then in the plural.

It is known that in Russian not all nouns change in numbers. The elementary school curriculum does not provide for familiarization with groups of nouns that are used only in the singular or only in the plural. However, it is not uncommon for students in grades II and III to come up with questions like the following: “How do I change the word scissors so that it is in the singular?” There is a need to inform the children that in our language there are nouns that are used only in the plural: scissors, tongs, sleigh, ink, cabbage soup, gates, glasses, holidays, etc. If you need to indicate in the sentence how many sledges, scissors were and other items, then the words are added: one, two, many (one sled, two glasses, many scissors, etc.). Nouns that are used only in the plural have no gender.

There are also nouns in our language that are used only in the singular: sour cream, milk, sugar, potatoes, gold, purity, courage, walking, sadness, etc. (you can say these words to students in grade II).

In the process of working on the form of the number of nouns, it is necessary to systematically practice students in recognizing the gender. There is a kind of interaction between these two operations: in order to determine the gender, you need to put the noun in the singular. Mastering this interaction forms the basis for the further formation of students' ability to recognize the type of declension of nouns.

Observations on the change of nouns by numbers actually represent the initial stage of work on the form of the word (singular and plural). Changing the noun by numbers, that is, changing the ending, students are clearly convinced that the lexical meaning of the word remains the same.

The declension case of a noun expresses the relation of the noun to other members of the sentence. Therefore, the assimilation of the case is based on the students' understanding of the connection of words in the sentence. Work on cases can begin only after students learn how to highlight words in a sentence that are related in meaning and grammatically (phrases). And in the future, all work on cases is work on the connection of words in a sentence. The student must clearly know which word in the sentence the given noun is associated with.

Initial observations on the change of noun endings depending on another word in a sentence begin to be carried out before students get acquainted with the case. In fact, already in the first grade, children get acquainted with the change in the form of the word. In primary school, before studying the topic "Declination", it is important to draw the attention of children to the fact that, including words in a sentence, it is often necessary to change the letter or letters at the end of the word. The change is necessary in order to establish a connection between the words in the sentence. The meaning of the word does not change at the same time.

However, in the first grade, children are not yet aware of the form of the word, but only lead to it. The element of awareness introduces familiarity with the ending in the second grade. Observing the change in the end of the word depending on the other member of the sentence, students identify the changeable part in the word and find out that it serves to link words. A relationship is established between the question that the noun answers and the ending of the word (the question changes - the ending also changes).

The main task of working on nouns in grade III is to teach you to consciously use the case forms of nouns to express thoughts and write case endings correctly.

In school practice, the most traditional way of working is, according to which, at first, students learn to write the case endings of nouns of the 1st declension, then the 2nd and, finally, the 3rd.

In the course of a study in Leningrad, the expediency of simultaneously studying nouns of all three declensions in the following order was confirmed:

1. Nominative case of nouns of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd declension.

2. Genitive case.

3. Dative case.

4. Comparison of the genitive and dative cases.

5. Accusative case.

6. Comparison of the genitive and accusative cases.

7. Instrumental case.

8. Prepositional case.

9. Comparison of accusative and prepositional cases.

10. Comparison of dative and prepositional cases.

11. Comparison of genitive, dative and prepositional cases.

In accordance with this sequence, students first learn characteristics one case of nouns of all three declensions, and then this case is compared with another case, in any respect similar to or opposed to the previously studied one. At the same time, those features that are characteristic of the noun only in this case are highlighted. So, for example, attention is drawn to the fact that the question is from where?, the prepositions from, to, from, without, for are indicators of only the genitive case. At the same time, students are warned against recognizing the case on only one basis (for example, on semantic questions where? where?).

The indicated order of studying cases creates conditions for differentiating similar and hallmarks such cases that are difficult for students to recognize (genitive, dative and prepositional, genitive and accusative, etc.).

The system of work on nouns in grade III is conditionally divided into four stages.

First step (1-15th lessons)- the concept of declension as a change in the endings of nouns on questions, depending on the connection of words in a sentence; study of the features of each of the cases.

At this stage, students get acquainted with the name of the cases, questions and prepositions of each of the cases, learn to decline nouns with stressed endings, master the sequence of actions that must be performed in order to recognize the case of a noun according to the totality of its main features.

Based on the nature of the case, familiarization with the declension is carried out in the process of analyzing sentences, the basis of the sentence (subject and predicate) and phrases are highlighted. Observing the change in the endings of the same noun in combination with different words, students are led to the conclusion that changing the endings of nouns in questions is called case change, or declension. The initial form of the noun is the nominative singular. A noun in the nominative case does not depend on its other members in a sentence and most often acts as a subject.

The preposition influences the case form of a word in a sentence. Prepositions and case endings are means of expressing the connection of words combined into a phrase. The interaction of preposition and ending necessitates special work on prepositions in the process of studying cases. Students get acquainted with the most common prepositions of each of the cases, learn the prepositions that are used with only one case. The results of observations on the use of prepositions with a certain case are summarized in the form of a table, which is compiled in the process of analyzing sentences2. Students start compiling the table "Cases and prepositions" already in the second lesson. (The table is a typesetting canvas with six strips, each of which has movable parts: cards with the first letter of the case name, cards with prepositions and cards with questions of this case.)

The conscious use of a noun in a certain case, as well as the correct spelling of endings, first of all presupposes recognition of the case. Therefore, at the first stage, a large place is given to the formation of students' ability to distinguish one case from another.

Each case is characterized by a number of essential features. The main ones are questions, prepositions, meaning, endings, syntactic function. The difficulty for students in recognizing cases is that each case has several meanings, and questions, prepositions, and endings of different cases can be the same. Therefore, it is very important to learn to recognize cases by a combination of signs: a question, a preposition, an ending, a sentence member (the latter is important when recognizing nominative and accusative cases).

Students are just getting acquainted with the main meanings of cases, so they naturally find it difficult to focus on the meaning of the case in order to recognize it. Observations on the meanings of the case are important in the sense that it becomes possible (albeit elementary) to reveal the role of the case form of a word for conveying thought in the structure of a whole sentence. For example, students observe the use of nouns in the genitive case with the meaning of belonging to someone (a student's notebook, an eagle's nest, an artist's drawing), the material from which the object is made (a glass vase, an envelope made of paper), as well as nouns in the instrumental case , indicating the person with whom the action is performed (Olya with Lyuda), the tool with which the action is performed (digging with a shovel), etc.

In order for students to be able to use questions to recognize cases, it is necessary, firstly, that students pose a question to the noun from the word to which the noun refers in the sentence, is related in meaning (and not “tear out” the noun from the sentence), and secondly, so that students know the questions of cases well. To do this, it is advisable to compare the questions of all cases, while highlighting similar questions and peculiar to only one case (this can be clearly done using the table mentioned above). Students will learn that it is impossible to use the semantic question where is it to recognize cases, since it is repeated. On the contrary, the question of where? the noun answers only in the genitive case, and this question is an indicator of this case. All case questions, except for whom? what?, help to distinguish one case from another.

The ending of the instrumental case is specific. This case can be recognized both by the question and by the ending.

In Russian, there are prepositions that are used with only one case and, therefore, are an indicator of this case. So, the prepositions from, to, from, without, y, for, about are used only with the genitive, to - only with the dative, about, through - with the accusative, over - with the instrumental, oh, about, with - with the prepositional. It is not advisable to require mechanical memorization of prepositions that are used with only one case. For conscious assimilation, it is useful to compare all the prepositions according to the table of prepositions and highlight the prepositions that are used with only one case. In addition, it is necessary to suggest inflecting nouns with prepositions more often (at the same time, students should be specifically directed to use prepositions that are used with only one case).

It is advisable to establish, together with students, the sequence of actions in case recognition: first, establish the connection of words in a sentence and find the word on which the noun depends, then find out the case using the question and preposition. The recognition of the nominative and accusative cases (according to the member of the sentence; in the presence of a preposition - by the preposition), genitive and accusative is distinguished by its originality.

In order to create more favorable conditions to master the features of cases, the study of each case is carried out _ according to the general plan: 1. Meaning. 2. Questions answered by nouns in this case. 3. Prepositions that are used in this case. 4. The role of the noun in the sentence.

Studying taking into account a single plan makes it easier for students to compare cases, and therefore their recognition.

Second step. 1st, 2nd and 3rd declension of nouns. (Lessons 16-21.)

At this stage, students develop the ability to recognize the declension of nouns by gender and by the ending in the initial form.

In order to enhance the cognitive activity of students and more solid assimilation of the material, it is advisable to organize acquaintance with the three types of declension in such a way that students independently establish signs of nouns by which they are divided into declensions: gender and ending in the nominative case. The exercises develop the ability to recognize the type of declension, taking into account the gender and ending in the nominative case. To this end, the material of the exercises at first focuses the attention of children on each of the signs. For example, students are asked to determine the declension of nouns: autumn, winter, blizzard, blizzard, aspen, lilac. It turns out how nouns (feminine) are similar and how to determine their declension. Similar work is carried out with masculine nouns: boy, boy, grandfather, grandfather, Sergey, Seryozha, Volodya, Vladimir. Suggested for recognition of declension are also such groups of nouns that are similar in ending, but differ in gender. For example: bear, deer, lynx, ship, pier, rain, terrain, potatoes, carrots. By establishing the similarity and difference of words, students are better aware that in order to determine the declension, it is necessary to take into account both the gender and the ending in the initial form. Gradually, both the tasks and the material of the exercises become more complicated, the independence of students grows. Children themselves select nouns of the same gender, but of different declensions and, conversely, of different genders, but of the same declension. Nouns are also selected on a thematic basis: the names of animals, birds, trees, materials, natural phenomena, rivers, cities, etc. indicate declination.

It is more difficult for students to learn the declension of nouns in oblique cases. Therefore, after students have learned to determine the declension of nouns in the nominative case, texts are widely used. Students find nouns, put the word in the nominative case and determine the declension.

It is important that students succinctly prove how to determine the declension (for example, locality is a feminine noun with ь at the end, meaning the 3rd declension).

Third step. Spelling of case endings of nouns in the singular. (Lessons 22-50.)

The main task of this stage is the formation of the spelling skill of unstressed case endings and the development of the conscious use of nouns in different cases.

At the previous levels, students developed the ability to recognize cases and the type of declension of nouns. At the third stage, these skills interact with each other and on this basis the skill of spelling endings is formed.

In order for students to use the acquired grammatical knowledge to solve spelling problems, much attention is paid to the sequence of actions that must be performed to correctly write unstressed endings.

Working out the sequence of actions is accompanied by a recording.

1) The student puts a question to the noun from the word with which the noun in the sentence is associated, and writes the question in brackets.

2) He recognizes the case by the question and the preposition (indicates the case in brackets).

3) Recognizes the declension (marks the declension with a number and writes the ending as a result), for example: lives (where? in what? Eg, 1st fold, -e) in the village.

Later, operations proceed faster, so there is no need for a detailed record, on the contrary, it can slow down the solution of the problem. Students write down only case and declension. And finally, all operations proceed in the mental plane, that is, without recording.

Parts of speech and contaminants (general provisions)
“In the Russian language, words are divided into categories, or classes, which differ in their main meanings, in the nature of the grammatical categories associated with each of these categories, or classes, as well as in the types of word formation and form formation. These bits are called parts of speech. Parts of speech also differ in the functions they perform in connected speech” [Grammar–1960, vol. 1, p. 20]. “Parts of speech are grammatical classes of words characterized by a combination of the following features: 1) the presence of a generalized meaning, abstracted from the lexical and morphological meanings of all words of this class; 2) a complex of certain morphological categories; 3) a common system (identical organization) of paradigms and 4) a commonality of basic syntactic functions” [Russian Grammar–1980, vol. 1, p. 457]. The concept of parts of speech The part of speech is admittedly one of the most general categories of language. They in a certain way group words with similar lexical and grammatical characteristics, with the same way of displaying objective reality. Therefore, the parts of speech have attracted and continue to attract special interest both in solving important theoretical issues and in the practical development of the language. However, despite the large number of works on this issue, the problem of parts of speech remains unresolved. For the science of language, the words spoken by O.P. Sunik about four decades ago: “A very old and very confusing question about parts of speech, about their linguistic nature, about their quantity and quality in languages ​​of various types and families, as you know, has not received a satisfactory solution either in grammatical studies on individual languages, nor in works on general linguistics” [Sunik O.P. General theory of parts of speech. - M.: Nauka, 1966. - P. 34]. The part of speech in modern linguistics is defined by most linguists as a lexical and grammatical class of words with a set of individual differential features inherent in such a complex only for this part of speech. Term Part of speech- tracing paper from the Latin language ( partes- parts, oratio- speech, utterance, verbal expression or sentence). In the textbook M.F. Guzhva parts of speech are defined as “extremely capacious grammatical categories of words, united by a common grammatical meaning and its formal expression” [Guzhva M.F. Modern Russian literary language. Part II. - Kyiv: Vishcha shkola, 1979. - P. 19]. In this work, the following definition of the part of speech is adopted: it is a lexical and grammatical class of words with a set of individual differential features. The list of parts of speech is constantly being revised, supplemented, refined with the advent of new information about the language . Brief history of the development of the issue

The history of the study of parts of speech goes back centuries. It is believed that the doctrine of parts of speech originated in the 5th century BC. BC e. in India. It was developed by the ancient Greeks and Romans.

European grammars were based on the works of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (4th century BC), who divided all the words of the Greek language into 4 parts of speech: a name, a verb, a member, a union, or a bunch.

In the II century. BC e. Alexandrian grammarians already distinguished 8 parts of speech: name, verb, participle, member, pronoun, preposition, adverb and union. The same number of parts of speech stood out in Roman grammar (with the exception of a member that is absent in Latin; an interjection was added instead).

In the Middle Ages, the adjective was singled out as an independent part of speech, and participles were included in the verb system.

Old Russian scribes relied on the work of the Greeks. This is reflected even in the name: the word "grammar" is of Greek origin, originally it meant "the art of writing and reading."

Until the 18th century there were translated grammar manuals. The first Russian grammar was a work with the same name by M.V. Lomonosov (1755) (recall that the grammar of Melety Smotrytsky, published in 1619, was created on the material of the Church Slavonic language). M.V. Lomonosov identified 8 parts of speech: 1) name, 2) pronoun, 3) verb, 4) participle, 5) adverb, 6) preposition, 7) union, 8) interjection. The name and the verb are the main ones, the rest are auxiliary, or service, parts of speech. The grammar is built on the material of the commonly used Russian language.

OH. Vostokov in 1831 in the "Russian Grammar" singled out the adjective as an independent part of speech. He included participles (“active adjectives”), as well as numerals, as part of adjectives as an independent category.

G.P. singled out numerals in a special part of speech. Pavsky in the book Philological Observations (1841–1842). He was supported by A.A. Potebnya.

In "The Experience of the Historical Grammar of the Russian Language" (1851) F.I. Buslaev divided the parts of speech into significant (independent, full-valued) and service (non-significant). F.I. Buslaev attributed pronouns and numerals to the official parts of speech. In total, he singled out 9 parts of speech, including significant ones: noun, adjective, adverb, verb; service: pronoun, numeral, preposition and conjunction. Interjection is called a special part of speech. The infinitive, based on the proximity of lexical semantics, is assigned to verbal nouns ( sail away - departure).

The modern theory of parts of speech in Russian studies has developed thanks to the works of A.A. Potebni, A.M. Peshkovsky, A.A. Shakhmatova, L.V. Shcherby, V.V. Vinogradov and other scientists.

A talented researcher, a deep scientist, Alexander Afanasyevich Potebnya (1835–1891) not only presented a system of parts of speech, but also painted a picture of the historical development of parts of speech. To significant words he refers to nouns, adjectives, adverbs and verbs. These are real words in which the lexical content is complicated by their grammatical meaning. Formal parts of speech include prepositions, conjunctions, particles, and auxiliary verbs. In addition, stand out real-formal parts of speech, which include pronouns and numerals. Special parts of speech A.A. Potebnya counted participles and infinitives. In his opinion, the primitive word did not belong to any part of speech: over time, a noun emerged from it, and an adjective from a noun. A change in the worldview of primitive people who realized processuality led to the emergence of verbality, the earliest form of which was the infinitive; then the indicative developed. Later, other parts of speech appeared, but the role of the verb remained extremely high, because it was the center of the sentence.

Professor Alexander Matveyevich Peshkovsky (1878–1933) believed that parts of speech are objective categories, not scientific fiction. The concept of parts of speech, although not systematically presented, can be seen in the book Russian Syntax in Scientific Illumination, but it is presented differently in the first (1914) and second (1928) editions. In 1914 A.M. Peshkovsky named 7 parts of speech: noun, adjective, verb, participle, adverb, participle, infinitive. In 1928, 4 universal categories are distinguished that exist in all languages: noun, adjective, verb, adverb. “Mixed” categories are recognized as participles, gerunds, gerunds, etc. To categories that did not fall into either the main parts of speech or mixed ones, A.M. Peshkovsky relates the pronoun, numeral, preposition, conjunction and interjection. Prepositions, conjunctions, particles, connectives and introductory words by A.M. Peshkovsky considers morphemes, not parts of speech, as "formless words", auxiliary means of language. He also identifies a group of words that are not included in any part of speech and later called "homeless" ( have, no, on, can, need, can't, sorry, take and etc.).

Academician Aleksey Aleksandrovich Shakhmatov (1864–1920) wrote more than 150 works and paid much attention to grammar. The general list includes A.A. Shakhmatova 14 parts of speech, of which 4 are significant (noun, adjective, adverb, verb), 4 non-significant (noun-noun, pronoun-adjective, pronominal adverb, numeral), 5 auxiliary (preposition, copula, particle, union, prefix ) and one special part of speech (interjection).

Academician Lev Vladimirovich Shcherba (1880–1944) made a great contribution to the development of the theory of parts of speech. The main provisions are set forth by him in the article "On the Parts of Speech in the Russian Language" (1828). Ideas expressed by L.V. Shcherba, cannot be assessed unambiguously. Lev Vladimirovich, like some other scientists, believed that it was difficult to create a classification of parts of speech that meets strict logical laws, so he emphasized the secondary importance of the classification moment for parts of speech. In this regard, on the one hand, he admits that the same word turns out to be simultaneously subsumed under different categories (for example, participles that combine the features of a verb and an adjective). On the other hand, a number of words do not fit into any category at all, an example of which are various types of introductory words, words Yes and No and etc.

Is it possible to agree with the point of view according to which for the classification of parts of speech, based on the meaning and grammatical features of words, logical inconsistency, incompleteness and even inconsistency are inevitable? We give a negative answer to this question. Classification can only be logical, built on the observance of the basic laws of logic. Otherwise, we turn into that natural scientist, about whom L. Elmslev spoke ironically. In his opinion, one who ignores the laws of logic is likened to a representative of the natural sciences, who would divide animals into quadrupeds, birds, horses, dogs, eagles and pigeons (Quoted from the book: Shcherbak A.M. On the linguistic nature of parts of speech // Questions of the theory of parts of speech. - L.: Nauka, 1968. - P. 229).

Merit L.V. Shcherba is that he saw lexical and grammatical classes of words in parts of speech, singled out the generalized lexical and grammatical meanings of significant parts of speech and, along with the traditional parts of speech, singled out groups of words that had not been subjected to detailed analysis before him. It is primarily about words like cold, light, it's time, you can, you must, hunting and others L.V. Shcherba writes: “Perhaps we are dealing here with a special status category.

<…>The formal features of this category would be immutability, on the one hand, and use with a copula, on the other: first, it would differ from adjectives and verbs, and secondly, from adverbs. However, I myself do not think that this would be a bright and convincing category in the Russian language ”(Shcherba L.V. On parts of speech in Russian // Shcherba L.V. Selected works on the Russian language. - M .: Uchpedgiz, 1957 . - S. 74). A bold idea is expressed, but it is accompanied by reservations. The boundaries of this category are still unclear and blurred. However, in general, the teachings of L.V. Shcherba about parts of speech, although incomplete and somewhat nihilistic, stimulated further research in this area and prepared, to a certain extent, the ideas expressed by V.V. Vinogradov.

The classification of academician Viktor Vladimirovich Vinogradov is one of the most reasonable and convincing. She divides all words into four grammatical-semantic (structural-semantic) categories of words: 1) parts of speech, including words-names that have a nominative function, forming the subject-semantic, lexical and grammatical foundation of speech (nouns, adjectives, numerals, verbs, adverbs, words of the state category; pronouns are also adjacent to them); 2) speech particles, that is, connective, service words (prepositions, conjunctions, actual particles, bundles); 3) modal words; 4) interjections.

Such a hierarchical division makes it possible to objectively assess the place of each fact in the system of other lexico-grammatical units.

Based on the achievements of linguistics, critically evaluating the views of representatives of different areas of Russian grammatical thought, V.V. Vinogradov was able to determine the future of grammatical studies for the coming decades. It is important to recognize the consideration of hybrid phenomena, the processes of transitivity in the system of parts of speech; singling out words of the state category as an independent part of speech and modal words as a separate structural-semantic category (for the first time in linguistics!). Boldly and in a peculiar way, the book “Russian Language (Grammar Doctrine of the Word)” solves many other issues, including the grammatical features of individual parts of speech (numerals, pronouns, etc.). To the pronouns V.V. Vinogradov classifies a small group of words with a pronominal meaning, categorically correlative with nouns. He distributed the remaining pronouns into several parts of speech: adjectives, numerals, adverbs.

Published in 1952–1954 the academic Grammar of the Russian Language (vol. 1) (later republished in 1960 with almost no changes) is largely based on the ideas expressed by V.V. Vinogradov (the author of the Morphology section is V.A. Plotnikova). The grammar distinguishes ten parts of speech: noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun, verb, adverb, preposition, conjunction, particle and interjection. Words that reflect reality in its objects, actions, qualities, properties are included in the significant parts of speech; words that express the relationship between the phenomena of reality, refer to particles - service parts of speech. A special place is given to interjections as words that do not name anything, but only perform expressive functions in speech.

As you can see, in this grammar, modal words are not singled out as an independent structural-semantic category and the words of the category of state are not called an independent part of speech, that is, the classification of V.V. Vinogradova is not fully represented in it. The following is said about the words of the state category in the “Grammar of the Russian Language”: “A group of words is closely associated with adverbs in terms of lexical and morphological composition, which is used only as a predicate, mainly in impersonal sentences, for example: cold, warm, sad, ashamed, possible, impossible, sorry and etc.<…>This group of words is defined as predicative adverbs, and by some Russian linguists it belongs to a special grammatical category - status categories" [Grammar of Russian language. - Vol. 1: Phonetics and morphology. - M .: Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1953. - S. 40]. The category of state and modal words, according to the author, are not separate parts of speech, but "syntactic derivatives". Outside parts of speech are words Yes and No.

Schematically the classification of V.V. Vinogradov can be represented as follows.

Table 1

In the future, the theory of parts of speech continued to attract the attention of scientists. A number of monographs of a general nature appeared (for example, A.N. Savchenko "Parts of speech and categories of thinking" in 1959, O.P. Sunika "The general theory of parts of speech" in 1966, etc.), a number of articles, new textbooks .

The next step was the publication in 1970 of the Grammar of the Modern Russian Literary Language. It set the task of theoretical understanding of the accumulated knowledge, did not claim to be a complete description and was a kind of intermediate stage in the preparation of the new academic "Russian Grammar", which was published in 1980. The authors of the sections that described the parts of speech in "Russian Grammar" (1980), are N.S. Avilova, A.V. Bondarko, V.V. Lopatin, V.A. Plotnikova, I.S. Ulukhanov, N.Yu. Shvedova and others.

In the "Russian Grammar" 10 parts of speech are distinguished: 6 significant, or full-valued, independent (noun, pronoun-noun, adjective, numeral, adverb, verb), three service (prepositions, conjunctions, particles) and interjections, representing a special a group of words that serve to express an emotional attitude and subjective assessments. “The first six parts of speech are significant (full-valued, or independent) words, that is, lexically independent words that name objects and signs or point to them and are able to function as members of a sentence. Prepositions, unions and particles are auxiliary, that is, lexically non-independent, words that serve to express various syntactic relations (prepositions and unions), as well as to form analytical forms or to express the syntactic and modal meanings of a sentence (particle). Interjections make up a special group of words: they do not name anything and serve to express an emotional attitude and subjective assessments” [Russian Grammar–1980, vol. 1, p. 457]. Schematically, the classification of Russian Grammar–80 can be represented as follows:

table 2

As can be seen even from the enumeration of parts of speech, the grammar basically follows the tradition, does not include words of the category of state and modal words in the parts of speech, but at the same time highlights a new part of speech - pronouns-nouns. The authors of this section relied on the well-known opinion of V.V. Vinogradov, who wrote: “With the exception of subject-personal pronouns, which make up a small grammatically separate group, other categories of pronouns are scattered across different grammatical categories. They do not form an independent grammatical class” [Vinogradov V.V. Russian language: (grammatical doctrine of the word). - M.: Higher School, 1972. - S. 256]. But, firstly, V.V. Vinogradov later revised his views on pronouns, although he did not leave written evidence of this; secondly, the current level of development of linguistics makes it possible to more deeply and comprehensively evaluate the semantics and grammatical specifics of pronominal words and, on this basis, distinguish them into an independent part of speech; thirdly, it is impossible to recognize as correct from the point of view of the laws of logic the allocation of nouns and pronouns-nouns in one row.

Russian Grammar-1980 largely repeats the textbook for university students "Modern Russian Language" edited by V.A. Beloshapkova, but it contains some additions and clarifications. The system of parts of speech is represented by nine positions: nouns, adjectives, numerals, adverbs, verbs, prepositions, conjunctions, particles, interjections. The following is said about pronouns: “In connection with the discussion of the issue of parts of speech in Russian, pronominal words were denied the status of a special part of speech. However, pronominal words, distributed among nouns, adjectives, numerals and adverbs, are characterized by some morphological features that distinguish them from the “typical representatives” of the corresponding parts of speech” [Modern Russian language. - M .: Higher. school, 1981. - S. 302]. The authors, not considering the pronouns as an independent part of speech, but distributing them by nouns, adjectives, numerals and adverbs, at the same time allocate for them the 6th chapter “Pronominal words” (p. 302–309), in which they consider the specifics of gender categories, numbers, cases of pronouns and types of their declension. The semantic specificity of pronominal vocabulary remains outside the attention of the authors.

Textbook for students of pedagogical institutes "Modern Russian language" N.M. Shansky and A.N. Tikhonova (1981; 1988) most consistently develops the ideas of Academician V.V. Vinogradov. The authors distinguish the following parts of speech: nouns, adjectives, numerals, pronouns, verb, participle, gerund, adverb, state category, modal words, prepositions, conjunctions, particles, interjections, onomatopoeia. What differs from other modern grammars here is that, firstly, the so-called “new” parts of speech (state category and modal words) are distinguished; secondly, the status of a part of speech is assigned to "hybrid words": participles and participles. Schematically, this classification can be represented as follows.

Table 3

School grammar considers 10 parts of speech: noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun, verb, adverb, preposition, conjunction, particle, interjection.

The publication of two books should be recognized as a great achievement of Russian studies: Russian language. Encyclopedia. – M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1979. - 432 p.; Linguistic Dictionary. – M.: Sov. Encyclopedia, 1990. - 685 p. They cover a wide range of language-related topics. Parts of speech are presented in them traditionally.

The last decade was marked by the intensification of publishing activities in this area. You can name, for example, the following textbooks, teaching aids: Rakhmanova L.I., Suzdaltseva V.N. Modern Russian language. Vocabulary. Phraseology. Morphology. - M .: Publishing House of Moscow State University, Publishing House "CheRo", 1997. - 480 p.; Modern Russian: Phonetics. Lexicology. Word formation. Morphology. Syntax / L.A. Novikov, L.G. Zubkov, V.V. Ivanov and others; Under total ed. L.A. Novikov. - St. Petersburg, 1999. - 864 p.; Kamynina A.A. Modern Russian language. Morphology. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1999. - 240 p. ; Modern Russian language: Theory. Analysis of language units: In 2 hours - Part 2: Morphology. Syntax / V.V. Babaitseva, N.A. Nikolina, L.D. Chesnokova and others. Ed. E.I. Dibrova. - M.: Publishing Center "Academy", 2001. - 704 p.

The number and content of parts of speech in different grammars is not the same. It depends primarily on the criteria of differentiation used by language researchers when distributing words into parts of speech.

The names of the main parts of speech came to Russian studies mainly from Greek and Latin. Let's give examples.

Name goes back to Greek. onoma or Latin. nomen. Subsequently, a common noun was singled out ( nomen appellative) and a proper name ( nomen proprium).

Pronoun is a tracing paper from the Greek. antonomia or Latin. pronomen (instead of a name).

Term verb of late origin, before it (until the 18th century) the term was used speech(gr. rema, Latin. verbum).

Participle derived from Latin. participium-“partially taken” (meaning that the participle took for itself part of the signs from the verb, the other from the adjective).

Adverb(gr. epirrema, lat. adverbum) literally translates as “verb” (that is, existing with the verb).

Pretext – prodesis, praepositio("placed in front").

Union – syndesmos, conjunctio(“binding”), first noted in Russian studies in the 17th century.

Interjection - lat. interjectio("thrown between").