Brief contents of the course

Glossary of linguistic terms:

1. 
   simple verbal predicate – простое глагольное сказуемое
   

2. compound nominal predicate – составное именное сказуемое
3. predicative – именная часть сказуемого

Additional reading:

1. 
   стр. 198-210
   

2. стр. 192-196
3. –
4. –
5. стр. 319-320

Practical tasks:

9. 
   Define the type of subject and the predicate of the following sentences:
   

Model: One might make a story out of it. – The subject of the sentence is impersonal, the predicate is compound verbal.
There is Miss Sands here.
Why aren’t you greeting her?
Agatha Christie was educated at home.
XXXXI. THE SECONDARY PARTS OF THE SENTENCE

OBJECT

The object is a secondary part of the sentence, referring to a part of the sentence expressed by a verb, a noun, a substantival pronoun, an adjective, a numeral, or an adverb, and denoting a thing to which the action passes on, which is a result of the action, in reference to which an action is committed or a property is manifested, or denoting an action as object or doer of another action.
If we take a closer look at this definition, we shall find that it is based on two principles, namely (1) the relation of the object to a certain part of speech, (2) the meaning of the object, that is, the relation between the thing denoted and the action or property with which it is connected.
The first of these principles is syntactical, based on morphology (morphologico-syntactical), the second is semantic.
The first item of the definition practically means that an object can refer to any part of speech capable of being a part of the sentence. The second item enumerates certain semantic points in the relation between the thing denoted by the object and the action (or the property) with which it is connected.

• 
  "a thing (or person) connected with a process or a property".
  

Definition of the Attribute
The usual kind of definition of the attribute is this: It is a secondary part of the sentence modifying a part of the sentence expressed by a noun, a substantival pronoun, a cardinal numeral, and any substantivised word, and characterising the thing named by these words as to its quality or property. ¹
If we now compare the definition of the attribute with that of the object we shall see at once that there are two main differences between them: (1) the attribute, as distinct from the object, cannot modify a verb, an adjective, or an adverb, and (2) the attribute expresses a property while the object expresses a thing.
They also have something in common: they both can modify a noun, a pronoun, and a numeral.
Now let us consider the definition of an adverbial modifier. It may sound like this: It is a secondary part of the sentence modifying a part of the sentence expressed by a verb, a verbal noun, an adjective, or an adverb, and serving to characterise an action or a property as to its quality or intensity, or to indicate the way an action is done, the time, place, cause, purpose, or condition, with which the action or the manifestation of the quality is connected. ^All the meanings enumerated in the definition amount to one, viz. the characteristic feature of an action or property.
As to the first item of the definition, it has some peculiarities worth notice: not every kind of noun can have an adverbial modifier, but only a verbal noun, that is, a noun expressing an action presented as a thing.
Let us now proceed to compare the parts of speech enumerated in the definition of an adverbial modifier with those enumerated in the definitions of the other secondary parts of a sentence, and let us first take the list given in the definition of the object. There all the parts of speech capable of being parts of the sentence were given. So the parts of speech which the two lists have in common are, a verb, a verbal noun, an adjective, and an adverb.
If we now compare the list given for the adverbial modifier with that given for the attribute, we shall find that the only point which they have in common is the verbal noun: for the attribute it says "noun", which of course includes verbal nouns, and for the adverbial modifier it expressly says "verbal noun". Thus the sphere of overlapping between attributes and adverbial modifiers is very limited.
Summing up these comparisons we find that the first item of the definitions leaves room for ambiguity in the following cases: (1) if the part of the sentence which is modified is expressed by a noun, its modifier may be either an object or an attribute; (2) if it is expressed by a verbal noun, the modifier may be either an object, or an attribute, or an adverbial modifier; (3) if it is expressed by an adjective, the modifier may be either an object or an adverbial modifier; (4) if it is expressed by a cardinal numeral, the modifier may be either an object or an attribute; (5) if it is expressed by a verb,- the modifier may be either an object or an adverbial modifier; (6) if it is expressed by an adverb the modifier may be either an object or an adverbial modifier, too.
Since in these cases the first item of the definition does not lead to unambiguous results, we shall have to apply its second item, namely, the meaning of the modifier: a property, a thing, or whatever it may happen to be. For instance, if there is in the sentence a secondary part modifying the subject which is expressed by a noun, this secondary part may be either an object or an attribute. (It cannot be an adverbial modifier, which cannot modify a part of the sentence expressed by a non-verbal noun.) Now, to find out whether the secondary part in question is an object or an attribute we shall have to apply the second test and see whether it expresses a thing or a property.
Take, for instance, the following sentence: The dim gloom of drawn blinds and winter twilight closed about her. Here the phrase of drawn blinds and winter twilight modifies the noun gloom, which is the subject of the sentence. Since it modifies a noun it may be either an object or an attribute, and the choice between the two has to be made by deciding whether it denotes a thing (of whatever kind) or a property. How are we to decide that? On the one hand, it may be argued that it denotes a thing and its relation to the other thing, called gloom, is indicated. Then the phrase is an object. On the other hand, however, it is also possible to regard the matter differently, and to assert that the phrase expresses a property of the gloom and is therefore an attribute. We shall consider, say, every prepositional phrase modifying a noun to be an attribute.
We might even say that in such circumstances the distinction between object and attribute is neutralised.
A similar situation is also possible with the object and the adverbial modifier. This is the case, for instance, in a sentence like this: In her face were too sharply blended the delicate features of her mother, a coast aristocrat of French descent, and the heavy ones of her florid Irish father. The question is, what part of the sentence is in her face. As it modifies a verb it can be either an object or an adverbial modifier. To decide between these, we apply the second item of the definitions, and find out whether the secondary part expresses a thing or characterises the action. Now, obviously it is possible to take it in two ways; we might say that the secondary part of the sentence expresses an object affected by the action, or that it expresses a characteristic of the action itself. The right way out of this is to say that in these positions the distinction between object and adverbial modifier is neutralised.
In a few cases a similar doubt may be possible when we try to decide whether a phrase is an object without a preposition or an adverbial modifier, as in the sentence, He walks the streets of London.
There are several types of objects. Objects differ from one another, on the one hand, by their morphological composition, that is, by the parts of speech or phrases which perform the function of object, and on the other hand, in some cases objects modifying a part of the sentence expressed by a verb form (and that is most usually the predicate) differ by the type of their relation to the action expressed by the verb.
Classification into direct and indirect objects is both a morphological and semantic factor. Sentences in which the predicate is expressed by the verbs send, show, lend, give, and the like usually take two different kinds of objects simultaneously: (1) an object expressing the thing which is sent, shown, lent, given, etc., and (2) the person or persons to whom the thing is sent, shown, lent, given, etc. The difference between the two relations is clear enough: the direct object denotes the thing immediately affected by the action denoted by the predicate verb, whereas the indirect object expresses the person towards whom the thing is moved. This is familiar in sentences like We sent them a present, You showed my friend your pictures, etc.
There is another consideration here which rather tends toward the same conclusion. In studying different kinds of objects it is also essential to take into account the possibility of the corresponding passive construction. It is well known that in English there is a greater variety of possible passive constructions than in many other languages. For instance, the sentence We gave him a present can have two passive equivalents: A present was given to him (here the subject corresponds to the direct object in the active construction), and He was given a present (here the subject corresponds to the indirect object of the active construction). However, the second passive variant is only possible if the direct object is there, too. The sentence He was given in this sense (without the direct object) would not be possible. Now, with the verbs tell and teach things are different. It is quite possible to say The story has been told many times and I have been told about it (in this case the subject corresponds to the indirect object of the active construction, and there is no direct object in the sentence). In a similar way, it is possible to say Geography is taught by a new teacher and also Children are taught by a new teacher (without any direct object and indeed without any object corresponding to "geography"). From this point of view the sentences with the verbs tell and teach are different from those with the verbs send, show, give, etc.
Direct object can be expressed by 1/ a noun: We all hated the uniform.
2/ a pronoun (of different types): We had to wear it.
3/ infinitive: I’d prefer you to treat me as a groun up.
4/ gerund: I heard him talking. In some few special cases an object may be expressed by an adverb (as in the sentence We will leave here next week).
From the point of view of morphological composition we must draw a distinction between non-prepositional and prepositional indirect objects. Under the latter heading we will include every object of the type "preposition + noun or pronoun", no matter what preposition makes part of it, whether it be a preposition with a very concrete meaning, such as between, or a most abstract one, such as of or to. Some prepositional objects are synonimous with prepositional: tell him – say to him.
Both non-prepositoinal and prepositional objects (more especially the latter) may sometimes be hard to distinguish from adverbial modifiers. Usually, if the usage of the preposition depends on the verb-predicate, this prepositional construction is an object – interested in books, belong to the party, laugh at a joke. And if the preposition depends on the noun or on the situation, it is an adverbial modifier: find in books, come to the party, laugh at night.
Objects can also be classified according to their semantic role, the deep case: the object of object (patient), can be both prepositional and non-prepositional, it is dependant on a verb, an adjective or a stative and nominating object of action or of a feature. He saw the building. – He looked at the building. Ask for something – beg something, think of something – consider something. This object is complementary, as it appears with the transitive verbs with strong valency. They are not used without objects.
The object of addressee (beneficiary) nominates a person or an object to which an action coming from the subject is addressed. The teacher explained the theory to the students.
The object of subject (agent) is dependant on a verb in passive voice nominating the doer of the action, used with the preposition by.
The instrumental object is used with the preposition with with the meaning of the means of the action.
The locative object is used with the prepositions of place and movement and is difficult to tell from adverbial
THE ATTRIBUTE
As we have already discussed the cases where the distinction between object and attribute is neutralised, so that a secondary part can equally be termed the one or the other.
An attribute can either precede or follow the noun it modifies. Accordingly we use the terms "prepositive" and "postpositive" attribute. The position of an attribute with respect to its head word depends partly on the morphological peculiarities of the attribute itself, and partly on stylistic factors.
The pospositional attribute is usually used with prepositions of/from.
The prepositional attributes to one word are placed in accordance with their qualitative and relative polarity: qualitative attributes to the left side and relative attributes to the right side: An ordinary little wooden house.
The size of a prepositive attributive phrase can be large in Modern English. This is mainly due to the fact that whatever is included between the article (definite or indefinite) and the noun, is apprehended as an attribute to the noun. Examples of attributes reaching considerable length are met with in usual literary (though not in colloquial) style. This is what we can see in the following sentence: The younger, Leander, was above all young, with only a slightly greater than usual grace. The phrase slightly greater than usual is characterised as an attribute by its position between the indefinite article and the noun grace.