Psycholinguistic aspect of grammar

So far, we have considered individual language units. Turning to grammar, we turn to the rules of speech organization. Here we are confronted with units of a higher level of abstraction, for grammatical meaning is a meaning abstracted from reality, a meaning that reflects the relationship between forms of words, types of connection between words in speech. Indeed, it is difficult, referring to the extra-linguistic meaning, to explain why, for example, the word “house” has the characteristics of the masculine, the “building” - the middle one, and the “hut” - the female one.

Objective reality with grammatical meanings is in a very difficult relationship. However, in speech, grammatical forms serve the purpose of transmitting information no less than the meanings of words. This is well shown by the textbook experiment, which is usually conducted by Academician L. V. Shcherba at his lectures. He offered the students to analyze a sentence consisting of non-existent words (quasi-sentence).

Globally kuzdra shteko bledanula bokra and curls bokrenk.

All the grammatical (morphological and syntactic) attributes of the words of the Russian language have the quasi-words that make up the sentence. What can be understood from such a sentence, from a sentence in which there is not a single “living” word, but only relations of “bare” grammatical forms? It turns out - a lot. Firstly, it is absolutely clear that we are talking about an action performed by a certain subject (“kuddra”), therefore, it is logical to assume its animation. This is a feminine being, which follows from the definition of "gloko". Secondly, the actor has already committed (in the past) an action (“budlanula”) in relation to another animate object (“bokrara”). Moreover, this action is endowed with a sign ("plug"). Finally, at present, the subject of the action commits a new action in relation to the cub of the Bokra, “bokrenka”.

And all this information is embedded in the system of grammatical forms that enter into relationships and relationships within the sentence.

The Scherba experiment clearly demonstrates the important role played by grammatical elements in human speech activity. It shows the effect of language laws only within one sentence. However, in real communication, our statements may also consist of several phrases that are combined into a discourse (text). Strictly speaking, grammar, from the point of view of the theory of speech activity, should be defined as a system of rules for the organization of coherent speech. This idea is even more vivid than the experience of L. V. Scherby, illustrated by the quasi-fairy-tale written by the modern writer L. Petrushevskaya.

Puski btyatye

Syal Kalush on the gun and uvazila butyavku. And screaming:

- Kalushata, kalushatochki! Butyavka!

Kalushata zaypalis and butyavku strung.

And podduonilis.

And Kalush will:

- Oee, oee! Butyavka something nekuzyavaya!

Kalushat Butyvka learned.

Butyavka shook. snuffled and fell over with a cannon. - And Kalush will:

33

- Butyavok not twitch. Butyavok not twitch. Butyavki - dybye and zyumo-zyumo nonkazyavye. From butterflies dudonitsya.

And the booty will come after the gun:

- Kalushata poddonilis! Kalushata podduonilis! Zyumo nekuzyavye! Puski btyaty!

In the fairy tale there is no "normal" vocabulary lexeme. However, the most surprising thing is that preschool children, as a rule, perceive it as quite “normal”, informatively full. At the same time, each child gives out his own understanding, “decoding” of what he heard. Some children even try to illustrate the text.

The associative experiments described in one of the previous paragraphs show that word-stimuli sometimes “pull” lexemes from our consciousness, which form phrases with the original word and even whole sentences. Indeed, if we say the word “trust”, the “Give high trust” stamp immediately pops up. The word "rain" brings to mind the definitions of "pouring", "drizzling", etc. Our consciousness is filled with speech stereotypes, cliches, patterns. They exist in memory in the finished form and are used in speech activity as language units, saving time for generating a statement.

In addition to speech stamps, human consciousness carries samples, models by which sentences of one syntactic type are built. So, on one model (N - V) sentences are built: The boy eats an apple. A student writes a lecture. Architects design the building. Another model (N - Adj) forms the basis of sentences like: Morning is fresh today. The wind is strong now. Our work is interesting, etc.

The presence of independent syntactic structures in the human linguistic consciousness confirms the example of the American linguist N. Chomsky. The scientist proposed to the subjects a phrase consisting of normal meaningful words, which contradicted each other in a meaningful way: Colorless green ideas sleep wildly . Despite the absurdity of the meaning of the sentence, this phrase was recognized by the participants of the experiment as correct from the point of view of the general norms of syntax.

Among many generations of schoolchildren, there is a phrase consisting of a set of words grammatically related to each other, borrowed from a foreign language: “ From the point of view of a banal

erudition is not every individual metaphizing abstraction capable of differentiating a tendency paradoxical of emotions . " This sentence has no meaning; however, pronounced with a clever appearance by one of the high school students, it is perceived by his peers as incomprehensible, but “very smart” quotation from scientific work.

Here is an example of a different kind. The beginning of the poem D. Harms.

Somehow grandmother waved,

And immediately steam locomotive

The children filed and said:

Drink porridge and chest .

Here the rules of syntactic compatibility are violated. In Russian, one cannot say "filed" and not say "what." Syntactic violations, along with violations in the field of meaning, create a sense of irregularity and absurdity in the readers of the poem.

The sentences that we use in speech are always associated with the preceding speech context and are written into the concrete situation of communication. For example, the phrase "Excellent student replied brilliantly" is based on already known information that the student in question had previously received excellent marks on exams.

Specific situations of communication predetermine the goals of the speakers and those communication tasks that carry sentences.

Imagine a situation. Students peacefully record a lecture. The dean enters and says the phrase: "Second-year students do not study tomorrow."

Another situation. Students know that tomorrow one of the faculty courses will be excused from classes, but they do not know which one. The dean enters and says: " Second- year students do not study tomorrow."

Finally, the third situation. Students know that for some reason, their course is exempted from classes on one of the days of the week, but they do not know on which day it will happen. The dean comes in and says the same phrase: “Second-year students do not study tomorrow ”.

In different speech situations the same sentence has a different meaning, conveys different information. In the first case

Moreover, the content of the whole sentence is news to the audience. In the second and third, relying on information already known to the audience, it only clarifies this information.

That new, relevant in this situation, that conveys the statement, is called rem (P) sentences. Rema is what the phrase is said for. This, the initial information that is contained in the statement, is called topic (T).

The division into themes and bumps, into this and the new, forms the basis of the teaching on actual division. The theory of actual articulation was initially developed in relation to the proposal. However, as the science of language developed, it became clear that the division into a topic and a bump is one of the secrets of combining sentences into a coherent text. Our speech is often based on the principle of consistent introduction of new information into each new sentence. However, in the newly pronounced or written phrase there is usually a repetition of what was already mentioned earlier, which connects the sentence with the preceding text. This movement of information within the text is called a thematic progression .

Consider a small piece of connected speech. (1) Students listen and outline a lecture. (2) It is devoted to the problems of psycholinguistics. (3) This is one of the fascinating areas of language science.

The text can be represented as a diagram.

This kind of text organization is called a simple linear thematic progression. Another example.

(1) Students sit in the audience. (2) They listen and outline a lecture. (3) Young people enthusiastically comprehend the secrets of speech activity.

On the diagram, this text looks as follows.

In this case, we have a thematic progression with a constant theme.

Real speech communication demonstrates the most diverse types of thematic progression, a detailed consideration of which is not part of our tasks.

A glance at the traditionally distinguished units, objects of linguistics, forces us to turn to a new object — a coherent text. We will talk about what a text is and what its psycholinguistic nature is in the next chapter.