Особливості української мови щодо подавання процесових понять у фахових текстах

Abstract

Стаття узагальнює попередні розвідки автора та на єдиних (спільних) засадах подає особливості дієслів і віддієслівних утворів, які відрізняють українську мову від сусідніх слов’янських мов, насамперед від російської. Основну увагу приділено успадковуванню цими утворами граматичних категорій твірних дієслів і показано, що вони повністю втрачають усі дієслівні категорії, окрім морфологічної категорії виду й семантико-синтаксичної категорії валентності. Останню категорію ці утвори успадковують частково, зберігаючи не всі валентні позиції своїх твірних дієслів.

Problem statement. The topicality of the proposed article is related to the practical needs to write special texts, using the specific Ukrainian language means of expressing process concepts. By the repressive resolutions of 1933, a significant part of these means was stigmatized as “nationalistic” and, till the beginning of the 1990s they were withdrawn from active usage. The reverse process of returning stigmatized grammatical forms, syntactic structures and word-formation models to active usage is rather complicated, since many speakers perceive them as archaic or artificial ones. Therefore, it is a topical task to study a vast majority the peculiarities of the Ukrainian language, which are important for special texts. Purpose of the article. The purpose of the proposed research is to outline the main peculiarities of the Ukrainian language, related to expressing process concepts that distinguish the Ukrainian language from neighbouring Slavic languages, primarily from the Russian one. Research methods. The main method is to analyse the grammatical works of leading linguists, beginning with the "Golden Decade", as well as the repressive resolutions, in order to distinguish specific Ukrainian grammatical forms, syntactic constructions and word-formation models from the imposed ones as a result of government interference into the internal structure of the Ukrainian language from 1933 to the early 1990s. Main results of the study. The main attention is paid to inheriting grammatical categories by the studied deverbal formations (verbal forms in -no, -tо, ‘diiepryslivnyk’, infinitive, verbal noun in -nnia, -ttia with process meaning, ‘diieprykmetnyk’) from derivative verbs. It is shown that they completely lose all verbal categories, except for the morphological category of the ‘vyd’ and the semantic-syntactic category of valency. These formations inherit the latter category partially, preserving not all the valency positions of their derivative verbs. Although these deverbal formation lack the most important proper verbal grammatical categories of tense and mood, the inheritance of the grammatical meaning of the ‘vyd’ and certain valency positions from derivative verbs give grounds to consider these formations as “mixed parts of speech” closely related to the verb. Conclusions and perspectives. Having compared the specific Ukrainian means of expressing process concepts with those of neighbouring Slavic languages, especially Russian, one can conclude that they all differ grammatically and in usage, and these differences should be taken into account both by the grammarians and the authors of special texts. In order to return to active usage the specific Ukrainian forms, structures and models, which were stigmatized in the repressive resolutions as “nationalistic” ones, it is necessary to republish as well as to put into the scientific circulation not only dictionaries but also traditional Ukrainian grammatical works published before 1933