Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Litera
Reference:

Comparative Analysis of the Related Terms "Connection" and "Parcelling" (Based on the Material of the Service Unit "and more")

Tsao Xiaomin

ORCID: 0000-0001-7815-3232

Postgraduate Student, Department of Russian Language and Literature, Far Eastern Federal University

690922, Russia, Primorsky Krai, Vladivostok, Russian Island str., settlement, building 8

690297518@qq.com

DOI:

10.25136/2409-8698.2022.12.38872

EDN:

XUZZNX

Received:

03-10-2022


Published:

30-12-2022


Abstract: This article is devoted to the actual problem of the syntax of the Russian language. Joining is always in the focus of attention of researchers at the present stage of development of linguistic theory. However, due to the fact that attachment has similar features with the term "parcel", in modern Russian syntactic science, a single view on the relationship between "connection" and "parcelling" has not yet been developed. The object of research is the service unit "and also", the subject is the relationship of the related terms "connection" and "parcelling". The purpose of this work is a comparative analysis of "connection" and "parcelling" on the material of the service unit "and more". In the course of the research, we use the corpus method of collecting and processing empirical material. The source of the material is the texts presented in the National Corpus of the Russian language. In addition, both the descriptive method and the comparison method are used to clearly show the differences between the two concepts. Based on a comparative analysis of the actual material, it was found that the most distinct difference between connection and parcelling is as follows: when joining, addition occurs, and when parcelling, separation occurs. Connection is a grammatical category, refers to the phenomenon of the static aspect of a sentence, and parcelling is a stylistic device, refers to the phenomenon of the dynamic aspect of a sentence.


Keywords:

connection, parcelling, addition, separation, the basic part, additional part, parcel, row, parallel structures, stylistic reception

This article is automatically translated.

 

In the 20th century, the syntax of the Russian language is being studied actively and comprehensively. Joining is one of the most important and widespread syntactic phenomena in modern linguistic science. When considering the theory of attachment, researchers often associate it with the terms "composition", "subordination", especially with its related term "parcellation". In this article, we tried to distinguish between the concepts of "joining" and "parcel" with the help of the collected material of the service unit and more. The term "joining" was first mentioned in the first half of the twentieth century, when researchers drew attention to its additional character, which has become widespread in modern syntactic science [5, p. 400; 8, p. 202; 2, p. 27; 3, p. 278; 13, p. 19; 14, p. 10; 1, p. 14; 6, p. 38; 12, p. 61; 10, p. 158].

Currently, there are different opinions about the relationship between "accession" and "parcel", and a single point of view on the concepts of "accession" and "parcel" in Russian linguistics has not yet been developed. On the one hand, a group of linguists identifies attachment and parcellation, but among them some classify both phenomena as attachment, and others as parcellation. On the other hand, many scientists believe that attachment and parcellation are independent and independent linguistic phenomena, despite some similarities between them. In our opinion, joining and parcelling are close, but independent phenomena, each with its own specifics. The similarity of their features is that the connecting structure, as a rule, consists of two parts – the basic part and the additional part, and the packaged structure is divided into a basic part and a parcel, which to a certain extent can be considered as adding information. In fact, the essence of the parcel is the design of a separate independent proposal. Such a view can find appropriate reflections not only in lexicographic sources, but also in many scientific literatures. Let's consider the definitions of two terms in the Dictionary of Linguistic Terms by D. E. Rosenthal and M. A. Telenkova (1976): "Accession. Adding additional messages and explanations to the main statement by means of an adjunctive connection, which arise in consciousness not simultaneously with the main thought, but only after it is expressed. Joining members of the offer. Joining proposals" [9, p. 336]. For example: "A march broke out in the room. Marching march. So kind, cheerful. With such foreshocks, trills. Because of the same fixed curtain" (K. Fedin) [Ibid.]. "Parcelling. Such a division of the sentence, in which the content of the utterance is realized not in one, but in two or more intonation-semantic speech units, following one after the other after the dividing pause" [9, p. 272]. For example: "Elena's in trouble here. The big one" (F. Panferov), "Fleurov is able to do everything. And Uncle Grisha Dunaev. And the doctor too" (M. Gorky) [Ibid.]. According to Vinogradov, parcellation is used for partitioning, artificial dismemberment of the already "ready" syntactic structure of a sentence into separate "communicative molecules" of varying degrees of complexity, and attachment for folding the syntactic structure by "building up" structural "fragments" [4, p. 99]. E. V. Sevryugina adheres to the same opinion and notes that that "the most general categorical meaning of a parcel is separation, and of an attached fragment is attachment" [12, p. 32]. We clearly see that the most striking difference between joining and parcelling is that when joining, the fragment is added, attached to the main part, and when parcelling, the fragment is separated from the main sentence. To develop the differences between these two related concepts, we conduct a comparative analysis on the material of the service unit and more. The source of the material is the National Corpus of the Russian Language (NKRYA) [7].The service unit can also function at different syntactic levels: in a simple complicated sentence, in a complex sentence and in a complex syntactic whole (more broadly, in the text).

At the level of a complex syntactic whole, the service unit is also often located at the beginning of statements, can introduce both an auxiliary and a parcelled component. Here are the following examples. On the streets of the city I saw a lot of janitors who sweep and clean.

And there are the fruits of their labor. There is less garbage and dirt.And more. Fewer beggars. Or did Luzhkov expel them from the Mother See, so as not to spoil the landscape? I don't presume to judge. [Kapitolina Kozhevnikova. At the front entrance (2003) // "Bulletin of the USA", 2003.07.23] [7].

If it's wrong, I'll tell you. ? Music is a concept, voice is an embodiment. (Pause.) And yet: valor is a concept, a feat is an embodiment. ? Marina, how strange! A feat is a concept, a hero is an embodiment. ? Ala! [M. I. Tsvetaeva. Attic (1919-1920)] [7].

Log in? The room is empty. On the table at the Sea Girl ? open canned food, bread, a bitten cucumber. And also ? a yellow piece of paper and silver roundels. [Tatiana Tolstaya. Night (1983)] [7].

? Listen to my command! So, I will wet. And so as not to touch it, give the recipe for a beetle, dew and a damn slurp. And also ? dry vodka for analysis. It's been a long time, you know, I haven't chewed booze… ? It's impossible," said Peter. ? We would give, but we can't. [Alexander Silaev. The Vile Heart of the Motherland (2007)] [7].

In the above four examples, the information entered by the unit can be considered additional parts to the main ones. This is their similarity. However, according to the principle, the first two examples relate to the case when the service unit and still introduces the connecting component, and the last two examples relate to the case when and still introduces the parcelled component. What are their differences? Next, we will consider these two cases in detail. First, we analyze the first case when the unit and also introduces the connecting component.

a) I turned to you, "Soviet Screen", not only because I really liked the movie "Shadows disappear at noon", but also because it is a very necessary and important picture. Why? It seems to me that such a film brings up the best traits in our youth. After all, he teaches to distinguish truth from lies in life, good from bad. And more. Such a picture reminds us of the responsibility of our youth for their land, Homeland. After looking at the picture, <...>. [generalized. Viewers about films nominated for the USSR State Prizes // "Soviet Screen", 1973] [7].

b) Everything. Be healthy, hanurik. Cheer up. Our whole friendly team is with you. And also: don't show any special zeal for work, it's harmful. You can tear your health. Nachtov disappeared from the line, and it became boring again. [Igor Adamatsky. The Comforter // "Zvezda", 2001] [7].

c) Answer: <...> Question: "What would you recommend to relieve fatigue? And more: are there any special aroma preparations for children?" Olga Pilipenko Answer:<...> [Marina Kryuchkova. The secret of the cypress and the secret of thyme (2002) // "Brownie", 2002.11.04] [7].

In the above three examples, the service unit also introduces an additional parallel message to the base message. In a) the introduced attached part organizes a parallel structure along with the structure in the connecting part for the development of the speaker's thought. B) a service unit and also connects a number of homogeneous messages with the imperative mood in the form of the second person singular. The attached message is an addition to the message expressed in the attaching part. C) a service unit and also connects two specific issues that are developed within the framework of one topic. The question entered by the unit adds the question presented in the joining part. In all these examples, the unit also performs the function of joining.

Let's give similar examples.

Therefore, whether Goncharova cheated on Pushkin or not, only flirted or kissed, only kissed or everything else, nothing or everything – it does not matter, because Pushkin called Dantes for his love, not for her love. For Pushkin would have called Dantes in the end and for the look. So that the scriptures may come true. And yet, whether Goncharova cheated on Pushkin or not, kissed or not, it's all the same – innocent. Innocent because the doll is innocent, because fate, innocent because Pushkin did not love. And Lansky loved and, it seems, was his faithful wife. [M. I. Tsvetaeva. Natalia Goncharova (Life and Work) (1929)] [7].

Why doesn't the horse give so much milk? Why does a cat feed her kittens and not take care of anyone else? Would a talking parrot come up with such an idea? And more. Why do chickens lay so many eggs? It's horrible. They never have fun, they walk like sleepy flies, they have completely forgotten how to fly, they do not sing like other birds ... [Sasha Cherny. The Diary of Mickey Fox (1927)] [7].

Let's turn to the second case, when the unit and also introduces a parcelled component. Let's look at the following examples.

d) <...> And although we were completely different people – by temperament, by level of education, in relation to some aspects of life, to women, drinking and even in relation to mutual friends – but we were united by the main thing: love for the theater, for our genre. And also – respect for each other. Especially from Vitya's side. [Roman Kartsev. "Maloy, Sukhoi and the Writer" (2000-2001)] [7].

e) From the balcony of the hotel, standing on the shore, there was a stunning view – a beach with black volcanic sand, bright greenery and a sea of flowers of incredible beauty. And also – sharp green mountains. For the first time in my life I saw pointed mountain peaks not with snow caps, but completely covered with vegetation. [Yuri Senkevich. The Journey of a Lifetime (1999)] [7].

f) Dear readers! On New Year's Eve, we wish you all good health, a warm roof over your head, decent pay for your work, and successful studies for your children and grandchildren. And also – favorable changes in your life. [I want to work in the village (2003) // "Rural nov", 2003.12.16] [7].

In these examples, the service unit also introduces a partial piece of a "row" construction with parallel members, as a rule, with homogeneous members of the sentence. C) the component "respect for each other" introduced by the unit, along with the component "love for the theater, for our genre", form the construction of a series. It is a structural and semantic addition to the basic part, and forms it as a separate sentence. C) the components before and after the unit "sharp green mountains" and "a beach with black volcanic sand, bright greenery and a sea of flowers of incredible beauty" are parallel homogeneous members of the sentence. The part introduced by the unit, which is closely related to the basic part in structure, is divided into a separate communicative piece. C) the basic construction is "we wish you all what." Here, the indirect addition of "what" covers "health, a warm roof over your head, decent pay for your work, successful studies for your children and grandchildren" in the pretext and the unit part of "favorable changes in your life" in the posttext. Although the parts introduced by the unit can be considered as additions to the main parts, in all these examples, the unit also performs the function of dismemberment, splitting the utterance into parts.

Similar examples.

The very primevalness, revealed not by chance. A thin, flexible figure, a flying gait, charm, grace – and not a single break, no pose, absolutely everything is natural, everything is organic – every gesture, step, word – and this is Eva. Plus anger, tact, sensitivity, responsiveness. And also – tenderness. And loyalty. That's Borya's wife. A fairy? [V. D. Aleynikov. Tajimas (2002)] [7].

When I was in the north, I saw how my friends, normally stupid, normally unsympathetic people did heroic deeds. And then I realized that in some circumstances, the brake of selfishness turns off in a person and then his powers and possibilities are unlimited. This can happen under the influence of excitement, love, music and even poetry. And also, by virtue of conviction, which is especially important. [Sergey Dovlatov. Army letters to his father (From the collection "Sergey Dovlatov: creativity, personality, fate") (1962-1963)] [7].

The comparative analysis of the ratio of "attachment" and "parcel" on the material of the service unit also allows us to come to the conclusion: attachment and parcel are close, but independent phenomena. Attachment is a grammatical category, has a grammatical meaning (the meaning of an additional message). A parcel is a stylistic device, the essence of which is to separate a fragment from the base part and design the parcel as a separate sentence.

References
1. Averina M.A. Structural-semantic and functional properties of phraseological units-unions: abstract of the dissertation ... Candidate of Philology. sciences. Chelyabinsk, 2004. – 23 p.
2. Beloshapkova V.A. A complex sentence in modern Russian. (Some questions of theory). – M.: Enlightenment, 1967. – 160 p.
3. Valgina N.S. Syntax of the modern Russian language. 2nd Ed. Study for. universities. – M.: Higher School, 1978. – 439 p.
4. Vinogradov A.A. Structure and functions of connecting structures in the modern Russian literary language: diss. ... Candidate of Philology. sciences. Uzhgorod, 1984. – 193 p. Russian Russian.
5. Kryuchkov S. E. On connective connections in the modern Russian language / S. E. Kryuchkov // Questions of the syntax of the modern Russian language / edited by V. V. Vinogradov. – Moscow: Uchpedgiz, 1950. – pp. 397-411.
6. Kuznetsova O.M. Functional and semantic field of gradation in modern Russian (syntactic aspect): dis. ... Candidate of Philology. sciences. Novosibirsk, 2010. – 202 p.
7. NKRYA – National Corpus of the Russian language [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: http://www.ruscorpora.ru / (accessed 07.03.2021).
8. Paladkina A.F. To the study of connecting structures // Scientific notes of the Far Eastern University. Issue 5. Vladivostok, 1962. – pp. 201 – 213.
9. Rosenthal D.E., Telenkova M.A. Dictionary of linguistic terms. – M.: Enlightenment, 1976. – 543 p.
10. Sevryugina E.V. The difference between the semantics of attachment from the semantics of other types of syntactic communication. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice. – Tambov: diploma, 2015. – ¹ 7 (49): in 2 h.1. – p.158 – 160.
11. Sevryugina E.V. Joining-Parcel. Science and School, 2012. – pp. 31-34.
12. Sidorova E.G. Connecting constructions in the system of the modern Russian language. Vestn. Volgogr. state University. Ser. 2, Linguistics. – 2012. – ¹ 2 (16). – Pp. 57 – 62.
13. Tursunov B. Joining as a special type of syntactic connection: abstract of the dissertation... Doctor of Philological Sciences: 10.02.19 / B. Tursunov. – St. Petersburg, 1993. – 36 p.
14. Han Hee Jung. Connecting staples in Modern Russian: Syntax and semantics: dissertation ... Candidate of Philological Sciences: 10.02.01 / Han Hee Jung. – Moscow, 2003. – 190 p

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The thematic prospectus of the reviewed article concerns a rather complex and variable phenomenon in linguistics – the factors of "attachment" and "parcelling". In my opinion, the research topic is raised correctly in principle, since the semantic fusion of these terms is manifested in the scientific paradigm. The text of the essay has the characteristics of a research project, the style and language correlate with the scientific type of narrative. In the introductory part, the author indicates that "in the twentieth century, the syntax of the Russian language is studied actively and comprehensively. Attachment is one of the most important and widespread syntactic phenomena in modern linguistic science. When considering the theory of attachment, researchers often associate it with the terms "composition", "subordination", especially with its related term "parcellation". In this article, we tried to distinguish between the concepts of "joining" and "parcel" using the collected material of the service unit and more." Thus, the idea that the problem is relevant enough for decryption is confirmed. However, further in the work, he did not analyze the available critical literature on the topic of study in sufficient detail, it is advisable to expand and supplement this grade. Despite the fact that the article contains references to the works of V.A. Beloshapkova, N.S. Valgina, A.A. Vinogradov, D.E. Rosenthal and other authors, there are not so many references to works of a profile type. I think that the author's concept should be expressed more texturally and unambiguously, it is desirable throughout the text to foster the idea that "attachment and parcelling are close, but independent phenomena. Attachment is a grammatical category that has a grammatical meaning (the meaning of an additional message). Parcel is a stylistic device, the essence of which is to separate a fragment from the base part and design the parcel as a separate sentence." And also to prove and argue the indicated view in the final. There is not enough illustrative material in the study, actually this factor also affects the productivity of solving the problem. The author needs to expand the block of examples, and not only introduce available constructs, but also comment on the difference / proximity of the phenomena of "parcelling" and "joining". Most of the judgments are objective and unambiguous, this is a positive feature of the article: "the term "attachment" was first mentioned in the first half of the twentieth century, when researchers drew attention to its additional character, which has become widespread in modern syntactic science. Currently, there are different opinions about the relationship between "accession" and "parcel", and a common point of view on the concepts of "accession" and "parcel" in Russian linguistics has not yet been developed. On the one hand, a group of linguists identifies attachment and parcellation, but among them some classify both phenomena as attachment, and others as parcellation. On the other hand, many scientists believe that attachment and parcellation are independent and independent linguistic phenomena, despite some similarities between them. In our opinion, attachment and parcellation are close, but independent phenomena, each with its own specifics," or "an office unit and can still function at different syntactic levels: in a simple complicated sentence, in a complex sentence and in a complex syntactic whole (more broadly, in the text). At the level of a complex syntactic whole, the service unit is also often located at the beginning of statements, it can introduce both an auxiliary and a parcelled component. First, let's consider the first case when the unit also introduces an auxiliary component," etc. I think that during the revision / revision of the study, at the beginning it is necessary to prescribe the methodology of work more voluminously, this factor will allow a potentially interested reader to understand the essence of these categories fully, correctly, scientifically. The text can be the basis for the formation of a good "new" work, the author understands the difference between two close linguistic phenomena, knows how to differentiate them. In the technical editing mode, it is worth considering the formal requirements of the publication – the variation of the links "..." [2, p. 22] fits better, and looks more convincing. As a result, I quote: the reviewed article "Comparative analysis of the related terms "attachment" and "parcel" (based on the material of the service unit and more)" needs to be finalized, in this form it cannot be recommended for open publication in the scientific journal "Litera".

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The article presented for consideration "Comparative analysis of the related terms "attachment" and "parcel" (based on the material of the service unit and more)", proposed for publication in the journal "Litera", is undoubtedly relevant despite the fact that the processes of transition of significant words into official ones have been the object of research since the middle of the XX century, to the present Linguists continue to consider the issues of the functioning of official and semi-official words of various semantics and degrees of definition. As the author notes, the qualification and description of such units is accompanied by a number of problems. These problematic issues are what the author is trying to solve in the course of his work. In this article, the author attempts to distinguish the concepts of "joining" and "parcel" using the collected material of the service unit and more. The practical research material taken by the author is not entirely clear. The author does not specify the sample size on which the work is based. It should be noted that the postulated by the author is illustrated by language examples with explanations. The article presents a research methodology, the choice of which is quite adequate to the goals and objectives of the work. The author turns, among other things, to various methods to confirm the hypothesis put forward. The following research methods are used: biographical, hermeneutical, dialectical. This work was done professionally, in compliance with the basic canons of scientific research. The research was carried out in line with modern scientific approaches, the work consists of an introduction containing a statement of the problem, a mention of the main researchers of this topic, the main part, traditionally beginning with a review of theoretical sources and scientific directions, research and final, which presents the conclusions obtained by the author. The disadvantages include poorly formulated conclusions in the final part of the article. The bibliography of the article contains 14 sources, including exclusively works in Russian. The author did not include foreign works, which artificially isolates the work in question from global science. The practical significance of the research lies in the possibility of using its results in the process of teaching university courses in the Russian language, theoretical grammar and syntax. In general, it should be noted that the article is written in a simple, understandable language for the reader. Typos, spelling and syntactic errors, inaccuracies in the text of the work were not found. The comments made are not significant and do not affect the content. The work is innovative, representing the author's vision of solving the issue under consideration and may have a logical continuation in further research. The article will undoubtedly be useful to a wide range of people, philologists, undergraduates and graduate students of specialized universities. The article "Comparative analysis of the related terms "attachment" and "parcel" (based on the material of the service unit and more)" can be recommended for publication in a scientific journal.