Since the idea of ​​distinguishing between language and speech was established in linguistics, the question has arisen: what is a sentence in this respect, is it only a unit of speech or also a unit of language? In Slavic linguistics, the majority of syntaxists consider a sentence as a unit of both language and speech. This idea was well expressed by W. Mathesius: "The sentence does not belong entirely to speech, but is connected in its usual form with the grammatical system of the language to which it refers."

The sentence contains both elements produced and reproduced by the speaker. They are reproduced as elements of the structure of the sentence, and not arbitrarily formed by the speaker of the forms of the constitutive members of the sentence, which make up its predicative minimum, which is necessary for the sentence to be a grammatically formalized predicative unit, and a wider nominative minimum, which is necessary for the semantic organization of the sentence, without which it cannot exist as a message - a nominative unit.

In certain speech situations, the sentence may not actually contain all the constituent members, the presence of which is assumed by its formal and semantic organization, but be incomplete and contain only such members that are required by the communicative task of the sentence: - Where are the firewood from? - From the forest, of course(N.); - How long did he live with you?- I asked again.- Yes for a year(L.). But the existence of incomplete sentences does not refute the fact of the presence of reproducible elements in the speech sentence, since, firstly, incomplete sentences exist only in such conditions under which their content is replenished by the context or situation of speech, and secondly, in incomplete sentences their cash the members have the same form as they would have in the composition of the full ones, so that the forms of the present members also signal the verbally unexpressed (implicit) components of the sentence, reproducing, albeit incompletely, one or another sample of the sentence. Yes, proposal All weapons on the table! which does not contain the main member, with its present composition signals that it is built on the model of an infinitive sentence (cf .: Everyone put their weapons on the table) and the offer All weapons on the table!- on the model of a conjugated verb (cf .: Everyone put your weapons on the table.)

So, the rules of Russian syntax (and specifically those related to the system of organization of the sentence, and not other syntactic units) require the use of the nominative case of the noun with the conjugated form of a personal (not impersonal) verb: He is on duty and with the infinitive - the form of the dative case: Him to be on duty; when approving the presence of an object - the form of the nominative case: There is paper; There were difficulties and in case of negation - the form of the genitive case: No paper; There were no difficulties.

The task of the doctrine of the structural scheme of the sentence is to determine, in relation to sentences of different types, the minimum of components, at which the sentence, regardless of the context, is capable of performing its functions. Thus, proposal block diagram can be defined as an abstract sample, consisting of the minimum of components necessary to create a proposal.

A new type of description of the formal organization of a sentence, based on the concept of a structural scheme of a sentence, appeared in Russian science in the late 60s. It was implemented in relation to all constructions of the Russian sentence in "Grammar-70" and in "Russian Grammar" (1980, 1982), discussed in many articles and books on the syntax of the Russian language and the general theory of syntax. The introduction of the concept of a structural scheme of a sentence corresponded to the general desire for the formalization and modeling of linguistic objects, which is characteristic of different directions and areas of modern linguistics and which reflects the demands of the century, as well as the goals of the practical application of descriptive syntax.

At the same time, it immediately became clear that the new type of description of the formal organization of a sentence was by no means self-evident. Controversy arose around the concept of a structural scheme of a sentence. Two understandings of the structural minimum of supply emerged.

The understanding of the structural minimum of the proposal put forward by N.Yu. Shvedova, refers to the formal organization of the sentence as a predicative unit. Therefore, it presupposes an abstraction from everything that is not essential for it. On this basis, the block diagram does not include the components of the sentence that appeared in it as a realization of a connection organized according to the type "word + word form", i.e. all verbal distributors that realize the syntactic potency of words, the forms of which form a sentence and are components of the scheme. Among other things, the scheme does not include mandatory predictable verbal distributors, without which the sentence cannot be a minimal message independent of context. In accordance with this understanding, only those components of the sentence that form its predicative minimum are introduced into the structural scheme.

At this level of abstraction, it turns out to be insignificant that the structural minimum so understood does not, with any lexical content, form a real sentence capable of being the name of an event or a communicative unit. Yes, in the proposals The Rooks Have Arrived and They ended up here from the position of this understanding, the same structural scheme: "the form of the nominative case of the noun + the conjugated form of the verb that agrees with it" (N 1 V f). Meanwhile, in the second case, filling only these syntactic positions does not give a real sentence ("They found themselves").

The level of abstraction set by this understanding of the structural minimum of the sentence corresponds to that which was adopted by the traditional doctrine of the main members of the sentence, therefore, compiling a list of structural schemes in this sense can rely on this doctrine (from such positions the entire system of the Russian sentence is described in the "Grammar- 70" and in "Russian Grammar-80", where closed lists of block diagrams are given).

A different understanding of the structural minimum of a sentence is addressed not only to the formal organization of the sentence as a predicative unit, but also to its semantic organization as a nominative unit, taking into account both its proper grammatical and semantic sufficiency. In this case, the block diagram of the proposal includes more components. Thus, from the point of view of this approach, the scheme N 1 V f corresponds only to the proposition The Rooks Have Arrived, for an offer They ended up here it must be supplemented with a semantically adverbial component of local meaning, which, in accordance with the accepted symbolism, can be denoted Adv lo c /N 2 ... loc , where N 2 ... loc represents any case (prepositional case) form of a noun with an adverbial local value (i.e. place value). The morphological properties of this component (the adverb itself or the prepositional case form) are not essential for the structural scheme of the sentence; compare: They found themselves at home (at the house, in the house, behind the house).

The second understanding of the structural minimum of supply is represented by a large number of works by domestic and foreign scientists. They consider the general principles for identifying structural schemes, but the entire system of the Russian sentence in the form of a closed list of structural schemes is not described.

Each of the researchers implements the central idea of ​​direction in their own way. But in all implementations of this direction, its general idea is manifested: an appeal to the meaning of the sentence as a nominative unit, the recognition of relative completeness, the integrity of the informative content as the main and mandatory property of the sentence. The structural minimum of a sentence here is understood as the limit of semantic autonomy, suitability for performing a nominative function, i.e. to the expression of a certain kind of "state of affairs", events, situations.

With this approach to establishing the structural minimum of the proposal, it is no longer possible to rely on the traditional doctrine of the main members of the proposal. So, "additions, from this point of view, should be classified among the main (ie, necessary) members of the proposal"; the differences between subject and object are not significant in this approach.

The two understandings of the structural scheme of the sentence described above, based on a different understanding of the structural minimum of the sentence, with all the differences between them, complement each other, representing different levels of abstraction: a greater one when oriented to the predicative minimum and a smaller one when oriented to the nominative minimum. This allows us to speak of two types of block diagrams of sentences - minimal and extended. Extended schemas are minimal schemas + non-constitutive schemas, i.e. essential for the semantic structure of the sentence, components. Thus, there are inclusion relationships between minimal and extended sentence schemas. Thus, the minimal scheme N 1 V f is a part of the extended schemes built on its basis, for example, in the scheme N 1 V f Adv loc /N 2 ... loc , which is implemented by the sentence They ended up here or into the scheme N 1 V f N 2 ...obj, according to which sentences are built I remember a wonderful moment(P.); Old Kochubey is proud of his beautiful daughter (P.).

Let's explain this formula. The adjectives in the given examples are optional, they are not included in the nominative minimum, therefore they are not components of the scheme.

Index 2... obj means that the noun it accompanies can be in the form of any indirect case with the meaning of the nearest object of action. What kind of case form he will receive depends on the associative properties of the verb and is not essential for the structure of the sentence; compare: He interferedus; He worked onarticle; We believed invictory.

The specificity of a sentence as a syntactic unit is that it expresses an updated informative content: it gives the name of some situation, while simultaneously evaluating its reality ~ irreality and its location in time relative to the act of speech. In accordance with this, the minimum sentence scheme should include such a combination of word forms (or one word form) that is necessary and sufficient in order to express this “prepositional” meaning with a certain lexical content, namely, to convey informative content, correlating it with reality ( the situation of speech) in terms of the categories of reality ~ irreality and time.

The minimum sentence schemes include word forms of three classes.

1. First of all, these are indicators of predictability. In the modern language, they are represented by three forms: conjugated forms of the verb (V f); conjugated forms of the copula (Cop f) - a function word to be, expressing the grammatical meaning of reality ~ irreality and time, as well as the concordant categories of number and gender (person); the infinitive of a verb or copula (Inf), conveying a specific modal meaning. The conjugated forms and the infinitive of the verb are components of the minimum sentence outline. Those of them that are outside the concordant categories, i.e. in which the number and gender (person) are non-variable as part of the structural scheme, they alone can constitute minimal sentence schemes, since due to their significance, in addition to predicative meanings, they also carry a certain informative content.

This possibility is realized by the forms of the 3rd person singular in sentences like It's getting light(Vs 3 / n); forms of the 3rd person plural in sentences like Guard!Robbery! (Vpl 3); infinitive in sentences like Get up!(Inf).

The forms of the link cannot make up the minimum scheme of the sentence, since they are only means of actualization, acting only when combined with certain forms of significant words that carry the informative content that, with the help of the means of actualization, correlates with reality. Therefore, the forms of the link are not independent components of the block diagram of the sentence. They form a complex component of the scheme, which, as the second element, includes one of the nominal forms combined with a bunch; it expresses the nominative content of the complex component of the block diagram of the sentence. The conjugated forms of verbs, in which the number and gender (person) as part of the structural scheme are variable, cannot form a minimum sentence, since their design in these categories is determined by the forms of the words with which they are consistent.

2. The minimal schemes of sentences, including a bunch, include certain forms of names and adverbs, which, in combination with a bunch, form a single syntactic complex. In the modern language, these are the forms of the nominative and instrumental cases of nouns (N 1 / N 5), as well as non-prepositional or prepositional forms of any indirect case that can be combined with a bunch (N2 ... pr); forms of the nominative or instrumental case of adjectives and passive participles, as well as their short forms and comparatives (Adj 1/5 /f); adverbs that can be combined with a bunch (Adv pr); infinitive

The carrier of predicativity (the conjugated form of the verb or the infinitive) and the complex formed by the link conveying predicative meanings with the linking nominal form constitute the predicative center of the sentence, its grammatical core.

The minimum sentence schemes, which include verb forms or copulas that are variable in terms of concordant categories, include components that determine the form of predicative indicators by number, gender (person). In modern language, this is a form of the nominative case of a noun and its substitutes, in particular, combinations of quantitative words in different forms with genitive form of the noun: Several visitors came (came) (about a dozen visitors, about a dozen visitors), as well as the infinitive. These components are consistent, reflectively reacting to their form, the conjugated form of the verb or connective, as well as the nominal forms that can agree, combined with the connective; compare: He liked the job.- He liked to work; The work was interesting.- It was interesting to work.

Minimal sentence schemes are the result of a high abstraction: they include only such components, the presence of which is not determined by word connections, are completely exempted from taking into account word compatibility and fix only specific facts of the syntactic organization of the sentence. The list of minimal schemes demonstrates the formal apparatus of the sentence, so this list is of great value for the typological formal-syntactic characterization of the language.

Minimum proposal schemes can be one-component and two-component. One-component schemes are equal to the predicative center of the sentence and are formed by its forms that are not variable in concordant categories: the forms of the singular of the 3rd person (V S 3 / n> Cop S 3 / n), the plural of the 3rd person (V p l 3, Cop p l 3) and the infinitive of the verb or copula (Inf). Two-component schemes, in addition to the predicative center of the sentence, include another component (the form of the nominative case of a noun or infinitive), which determines the form of the predicative center according to the concordant categories.

Minimum sentence schemes are combined into three blocks, which differ both in the number of components (one-component and two-component schemes) and in the form of one of the components (nominative and infinitive two-component schemes). At the same time, according to the nature of the predicative center of the sentence, the structural schemes are verbal (A) and connective (B). In class "A" (verbal) the predicative center of the sentence is elementary, it is the form of the verb (conjugated form or infinitive), which simultaneously expresses both its material content and grammatical characteristics; in the class "B" (connective), the predicative center of the sentence is complex, it consists of a connective (in conjugated form or infinitive), expressing only its grammatical characteristics, and a significant element - combined with a connective form of a name, adverb or infinitive, which expresses a real content (Tables 9, 10, 11).

Table 9

I block (two-component nominative)

Table 10

II block (two-component infinitive)

Table 11

III block (one-component)

One-component sentences built according to the Inf structural scheme can be either verbal or connective, since their only component (the predicative center) can be elementary or complex. In the first case, this is the infinitive of the verb (i.e., a significant word), which simultaneously carries the material content of the predicative center and its grammatical meaning; in the second, it is the infinitive of the link, expressing only the grammatical meaning, and therefore combined, forming a complex component, with the form of the name, which carries a material content. Wed: I have to leave tomorrow; Be this song popular.

A special position in terms of distinguishing between verbal and connective structural patterns is occupied by sentences of a two-component infinitive block. The position of the infinitive in them can be filled either with the infinitive of the verb - a significant word (V in f), or with a complex component - "the infinitive of the link + the linking element" (Cop inf N 5, Cop inf N 2 ...pr / Adv pr, Cop inf Adj f/5): Being a teacher is difficult; It was strange to be without a hat; It was rare to be together; It was rare for him to be cheerful (more cheerful).

Complex component of the structural scheme of the sentence, headed by the infinitive to be, in these sentences it is not a carrier of predicativity: this function is performed here by the conjugated form of the verb in the scheme InfV ​​f and the conjugated forms of the copula in all other schemes; the complex component headed by the infinitive to be, plays the role of a determinant of the form of the predicative center according to the concordant categories, i.e. the role of a component similar to the form of the nominative case of a noun (subject) in two-component schemes of the nominative block. In connection with what has been said and in accordance with the tradition of contrasting verbal and connectedness only in the position of the predicative center, sentences constructed according to the InfV ​​f scheme with a complex component in the infinitive position are considered as verbal, and sentences with a complex component in the infinitive position constructed according to other schemes of the two-component infinitive block - as connectives.

With the infinitive of the link, not all forms of names that are combined with the link in conjugated form are possible: the infinitive of the link does not allow nominative forms of nouns and adjectives.

It should be said that in the InfCopInf scheme both positions can be replaced by complex components: Now to be happy was to be healthy. The position of the first complex component is the position of the infinitive, which is a determinant of the form of the predicative center in concordant categories, similar to the position of the nominative form of the noun (subject), and the position of the second complex component is the position in the composition of the predicative center of the sentence, headed by the conjugated form of the connective. Let us make the necessary explanations for the list of schemes. Recording the structural schemes of a sentence with the help of symbols reflects the essential features of the morphological appearance of their components. When designating the form of a component, generalizations are allowed, based on abstraction from some facts that are not essential for analysis at a given level of abstraction. So, Adj denotes not only the adjective itself, but also the participle, for which such a function is possible (i.e., passive); N2... pr denotes any secure (non-prepositional or prepositional) form of a noun (except nominative and instrumental forms) capable of forming a complex predicative center with a connective.

It is also assumed that symbols denote both possible substitutes for those forms that are expressed by these symbols, and their possible modifications. So V f in scheme N 1 V f is not only a conjugated form of the verb, but also a verbal interjection (whip-click) or the infinitive, transpositively acting here as the expressive equivalent of V f (Children cry) and N 1 is not only a form of the nominative case of a noun, but also a quantitative combination that replaces it (About a hundred cows grazed in the meadow) or the form of the genitive case in a quantitative sense (Guests have arrived!; Nili!).

The use of the symbol Adj in a one-component circuit requires special explanation. cop s 3/ n Adj fsn (It was hot). Type forms hot in such usage, they are considered as adverbs or are distinguished into a special part of speech (category of state or predicate). But a systematic consideration of the syntactic functions of all classes of word forms in the language leads to combining them with short forms of adjectives. Short forms of adjectives, like conjugated forms of verbs, always act as the predicative center of the sentence; at the same time, like the conjugated forms of verbs, they either agree with the second component of the sentence scheme (in two-component schemes), or take the form of the singular neuter gender (in one-component schemes), which, along with the absence of the second component, is a sign of the one-component nature of the minimal sentence scheme.

Accordingly, in the scheme InfCopAdj f / t /5 (Giving up was hard) Adj f - agreed short form of the adjective: the presence of a neuter form in it is a reaction to the lack of characterization of the first component (Inf) in number and gender. On the same grounds as agreeable forms of the verb are considered (V f ) and bundles (Cop f) in all schemes of block II. Thus, the schemes of the II block are qualified as two-component ones with the forms of coordination: it is precisely this interpretation that is prompted by the consideration of the system relations of these schemes in comparison with the schemes of the I block.

The absence of the Cop symbol in the Inf scheme (He should be on duty; Do not talk!; Do not recognize him) reflects the fact that the modal meaning of infinitive sentences is created directly by the construction itself, accompanying the use of the infinitive as the predicative center of the sentence. This modal meaning is modified depending on many conditions, but always retains a connection with the sphere of unreality. The use of a connective in infinitive sentences is far from always possible; it is not allowed by many modifications of their modal meanings. The function of a link in infinitive sentences differs significantly from its function in sentences built on the basis of other structural schemes: the absence of a link in infinitive sentences does not express the meaning of reality and the present tense and is not its zero form.

The order of symbols in schemes reflects the most common arrangement of components in the composition of general informative, stylistically and expressively neutral statements, but is not among the constitutive features of the scheme: the order of the components is insignificant for the formal organization of the sentence and belongs to the sphere of its communicative organization.

The list of minimum sentence schemes includes only non-phraseological schemes, i.e. such samples that 1) do not regulate the lexical properties of the words filling the scheme; 2) imply clear syntactic links between the circuit components.

Meanwhile, in the language there are phraseological schemes, which regulate not only the forms of the components, but also the lexical filling of the positions they open and on which sentences with fuzzy syntactic links between the components are built. The meanings of sentences built according to phraseologized schemes are determined by the meaning of a phraseological unit, they are unique and, as a rule, expressive. For example, the expressive form of agreement with the opinion of the interlocutor is conveyed by sentences formed by the double use of the word form, separated by the particle So:- Well, well, - says the master,- witch so witch(M. B.); - On and on and on- Larka said in a nonchalant voice(V. Sh.); Ride so ride; Stay like that.

A special place among phraseologized schemes is occupied by samples of sentences of the type There is (was, will be, would be) what to do and There is nothing (was, will be, would be) to do; There is (was, will be, would be) someone to consult and No one (was, will be, would be) consulted; There is (was, will be, would be) where to hurry and There is nowhere (was, will be, would be) to rush. Possessing the features of phraseologized schemes, they are distinguished by the fact that they do not belong to the sphere of expressive speech, but are expressive and stylistically neutral ways of expressing the presence or absence of a generalized conceivable situation that are usual for Russian speakers.

Parsing a simple sentence

Scheme for parsing a simple sentence

1. Make a graphical analysis of the sentence: highlight the grammatical basis, indicate the way the subject is expressed, the type of the predicate and the way it is expressed; emphasize the secondary members of the sentence, indicate their categories and ways of expression.

2. Indicate the type of sentence for the purpose of the statement (narrative, interrogative, incentive).

3. Determine the type of sentence by emotional coloring (exclamatory or non-exclamatory).

4. Indicate the type of proposal by the number of main members (two-part or one-part); for one-part sentences, determine the variety (definitely personal, indefinitely personal, impersonal, denominative).

5. Describe the proposal by the presence or absence of secondary members (common or non-common).

6. Characterize the proposal in terms of the presence or absence of structurally necessary members of the proposal (complete or incomplete); if incomplete, indicate which part of the sentence is missing.

7. Indicate whether the sentence is complicated (what is complicated: homogeneous, isolated members of the sentence, introductory words, appeals) or uncomplicated.

Note. When parsing a part of a complex sentence as a simple one, the characteristic in terms of the purpose of the statement and emotional coloring should be omitted; it is enough to indicate that this is a simple sentence as part of a complex one.

Simple Sentence Parsing Sample

Our sacredcraft exists thousand years (A. Akhmatova).

The sentence is narrative, non-exclamatory, two-part, common, complete, uncomplicated.

Main members: craft - subject, expressed by a noun; exists - a simple verbal predicate, expressed by a verb.

Minor Members: craft (what?) ours- agreed definition, expressed by a pronoun; (what?) sacredexists (for how long?) thousands of years- the circumstance of time, expressed as a whole phrase.

Where should Iget away this January? (O. Mandelstam)

The sentence is interrogative, non-exclamatory, one-part, impersonal, common, complete, uncomplicated.

Main member: get away - a simple verbal predicate, expressed by the infinitive.

Minor Members: go (where?) where- circumstance of place, expressed by a pronominal adverb; get away (to whom?) me- indirect object, expressed by a pronoun; get away (when?) in January- circumstance of time, expressed by a noun with a preposition; in January (what?) this- an agreed definition, expressed by a pronoun.

In the cell, also illuminated by electric light, despite the morning hour, the clerkIvan Pavlovich with obvious pleasuredrilled andstitched silk cord of paper... (M. Alda-nov).

The sentence is narrative, non-exclamatory, two-part, widespread, complete, complicated by a separate agreed definition, expressed by participial turnover, a separate circumstance of concession, expressed by a turnover with a preposition in spite of, homogeneous predicates.

Main members: Ivan Pavlovich - subject, expressed by a noun; drilled and stitched - homogeneous simple verbal predicates, expressed by verbs.

Minor Members: Ivan Pavlovich (what?) clerk- application, expressed by a noun; drilled and stitched (where?) in the camera- circumstance of place, expressed by a noun with a preposition; in a cell (what?) illuminated by electric light- isolated agreed definition, expressed by participial turnover; drilled and stitched (despite what?) despite the morning hour- a separate circumstance of assignment, expressed by a turnover with a preposition in spite of; drilled and stitched (how?) with pleasure- circumstance of the mode of action, expressed by a noun with a preposition; with pleasure (what?) obvious- agreed definition, expressed by an adjective; drilled and stitched (what?) papers- direct object, expressed by a noun; drilled and stitched (with what?) with a cord- indirect object, expressed by a noun; cord (what?) silk- an agreed definition, expressed by an adjective. Too- union, is not a member of the proposal.

2. Correlation between the concepts of Sentence and Statement This problem has become relevant in connection with the study of the functional side of the language, i.e. not only the study of linguistic facts, but the use of them by the speaker. Different linguistic schools have different attitudes to this problem, but they all agree on one thing: considering the sentence not in terms of its syntactic features, but in terms of the communicative use of the sentence (for the purpose of communication). There are various approaches: - A statement is wider than a sentence, since a structural scheme may not be realized in a statement. *Do you want it with or without sugar? - Without. However, at the heart of any statement is still correlation with a sentence. - The sentence is equal to the statement. This point of view is reflected in scientific grammars. - A statement is a language level above a sentence (Ir.Il. Kovtunova) What is a statement? A sentence is a unit of language. An utterance is a unit of speech insofar as it is related to the functioning of language. Thus, an utterance is a segment of speech that has a communicative orientation, semantic integrity, which is the implementation of a language system (structural diagram), reflecting the norm of the language.

The proposal scheme is not another whim of teachers. Thanks to it, you can better understand the structure and specifics of the proposal and parse it faster. However, not all students know how to draw up a sentence diagram, considering this lesson to be useless. But any scheme is a visualization that allows you to understand the essence. And having understood it, you can apply this scheme to other sentences, which means that you can avoid mistakes in writing in the future.

We draw up a proposal scheme

Before drawing up a graphic diagram of a sentence, it is necessary to start by determining which members of the sentence are words. First of all, it is necessary to determine the subject and predicate, which constitute its grammatical basis. Then you should distribute the remaining words among the members of the sentence, only you need to take into account that each of them refers to the subject or predicate. The subject includes definitions, the predicate - addition and circumstance. It should also be noted that some words do not belong to the members of the sentence: conjunctions, interjections, plug-in and introductory constructions. It may also be that several words together are one member of the sentence: participial and adverbial phrases. After the analysis, you will have the initial scheme of the sentence, from which you only need to remove the words and leave the lines that underline the members of the sentence.

We draw up a scheme of a complex sentence

If everything is quite easy with a simple sentence, then a complex one confuses many. And most students are wondering how to chart a complex sentence. If this is a compound sentence, then the diagram should reflect all the predicative parts that are in it. After that, both parts must be highlighted in square brackets, and between them put a punctuation mark and a union connecting them:, and. If the sentence is complex, non-union, then we also analyze each of its parts separately, and then select them in square brackets.

If you need to parse a complex sentence, then in this case you should show all the relationships between the parts. It should be noted here that the part that obeys is the main one, the one that obeys is subordinate. Thus, the main is indicated by square brackets, while the subordinate clause is indicated by round brackets:, (which ...). After studying the material, you will easily be able to make sentence schemes, and they will tell you how to correctly place commas, and you can avoid many punctuation errors.

Hello doppelgangers. I recently wandered around the Internet and came across a textbook on the Russian language. I remembered this school, which I had to go to every day and sit out my pants. Even though I have always studied well…. let's say not bad, I would not want to repeat this experience. In the textbook I found a lesson on how to properly structure sentences. And I decided to write an article about this so that you, caught by nostalgia for school days, or, suddenly, by necessity, would not wander in search of textbooks on the Russian language, but would come to my blog. And here's a check for you:

Time limit: 0

Navigation (job numbers only)

0 out of 10 tasks completed

Information

You have already taken the test before. You cannot run it again.

Test is loading...

You must login or register in order to start the test.

You must complete the following tests to start this one:

results

Time is over

You scored 0 out of 0 points (0 )

1. With an answer
2. Checked out

1. Task 1 of 10

   1 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure [ __ and __ ====== ]

2. Task 2 of 10

   2 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure [│О│,…]

3. Task 3 of 10

   3 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure [│ВВ│,…].

4. Task 4 of 10

   4 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure [│DO│, X ...].

5. Task 5 of 10

   5 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure [ X, │ PO │, ...].

6. Task 6 of 10

   6 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure "[P!]" - [a].

7. Task 7 of 10

   7 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure “[П..,│О│!] - [a]. - [│BB│, ... P ..] ".

8. Task 8 of 10

   8 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure […..], and […..].

9. Task 9 of 10

   9 .

   Find among the presented sentences the structure […..], (what ….).

10. Task 10 of 10

    10 .

    Find among the presented sentences the structure […..], (which ....).

Someone will object: “The school ended a long time ago, we will write without diagrams.” This point of view is quite correct. For those who communicate via SMS and game chats. So, today the topic of our lesson is: “How to draw up a proposal scheme?” Especially if you are a copywriter or want to become one and earn more than your teacher, knowledge of sentence schemes, unfortunately, is necessary.

The procedure for drafting an offer scheme

To draw up a diagram, you need graphic symbols. Equal sentences in a complex sentence are denoted by square brackets. The subordinate, together with the union, is in parentheses. The main word from which the question is asked is a cross.

Simple sentence scheme

Let's look at an example right away. Let's start with the easiest task for elementary school.

This is a simple two-part sentence. There is also one-component, when the main members of the sentence are expressed by one subject or one predicate. Simple sentences are common, as in our case, or non-common, for example:

We pay attention to the predicate. It can be simple or complex:

• Simple: " Michael composed ».
• Compound verb: " Misha wanted to write on the sofa».
• Compound nominal: " Misha was a friend for me».

In a simple sentence, there may be an appeal:

Ivan, sit in the left lane. The proposal scheme is as follows

[│О│,…..].

It is important to separate the treatment with commas in the same way as introductory words.

Unfortunately, this happened quite often.

[│BB│,…..].

Do not forget to find and highlight the adverbial or participial phrases.

Without taking his eyes off, the dog looked at her

[│DO│, X ...].

The view before him was like an enchanted realm of cold.

[ X, │ ON │, ... ..].

In literary texts, in reasoning texts, direct speech is often found.

"Don't go into the yard!" the stranger shouted loudly.

"[P!]" - [a].

“Hurrah, brothers!” he shouted. “It seems that our business is starting to go smoothly.”

“[P ..,│O│!] - [a]. - [│BB│, ... P ..] ".

So, English teacher. Imagine I have all fives (80 percent), I go to a technical school with honors, olympiads, conferences - everyone knows me. And this one…. well…. a woman gives me a shake. I tell her: are you not normal, look at my grades, what are you doing? And nifiga - supposedly a principle. Although what the hell is the principle when she gave fours to athletes who did not come to the couples at all and put fives for a can of coffee. And everyone told her this, Pasha needs to put at least a four. In short, tin. Already at the defense of the diploma, the director himself intervened and she gave me 4 after the defense, but the red diploma was lost.

Scheme of a complex sentence.

There are several types of complex sentences. Let's consider them in order.

Compound - these are two simple equal sentences connected by a coordinating union.

The walls of the tunnel parted, and the travelers found themselves in a huge sublunar grotto.

The scheme here is simple […..], and […..].

In a complex sentence, one part is main, the second obeys, accompanies the first.

Individual columns were so huge that their tops reached to the very vault.

[…..], (what ….).

The air around him was much cleaner than the one he breathed at home.

[…..], (which….).

Subordination in such sentences occurs with the help of subordinating unions.

A non-union sentence is similar to a compound one, but does not have a union.

The television studio offered a ridiculously small amount - Miga got angry.

[…..] — […..].

In our example, Migi's dissatisfaction is caused by the actions performed in the first part of the complex sentence. But there is no union, it is replaced by a dash.

Don't get confused by drawing up a diagram with different types of connections. Breaking down such sentences without losing the main idea can be very difficult.

The bottom of the tunnel went down, so it was easy and simple to go: it seemed that someone was pushing in the back, and the light would soon come on ahead.

[…..], (therefore….): [│BB│,...], and [....].

A complex sentence can have several subordinate clauses that follow one from the other. This is sequential submission.

The children were told that tomorrow there would be a holiday that would end with a carnival procession.

(which the ….).

There is also parallel subordination. From the main sentence, different questions are asked to the subordinate parts. The subordinate parts in this case can become separate simple sentences practically without change.

When the photographer arrived, Serenky wrapped the action in a handkerchief to hide it in his bosom.

↓ when? ↓ why?

(when ....), (to ....).

In Russian, homogeneous subordination is distinguished. This is a list of simple sentences. They are asked the same question from the main part, and they are connected by the same union.

Watching nature in spring, you can see how birds fly in, how tender leaves appear, how the first flowers bloom.

↓ what? ↓ what? ↓ what?

(as ....), (as ....), (as ....).

The main types of proposals are considered. When reading and analyzing the text, carefully look through the sentences that are large in structure. Highlight key information. Mentally ask questions from the main word or main part to the subordinate or subordinate. This will help to capture the essence and correctly punctuate.

All creative success. Well, find 10 differences in these pictures and write how much you managed to do it.

find 10 differences

When syntactic parsing a sentence, the construction of a sentence scheme is assumed.

All three educational complexes use line charts, in which the parts of a compound, non-union sentence and the main parts of a complex sentence are indicated by square brackets, and the subordinate parts of the NGN are round. At the same time, in each part, underlining marks indicate the subject and predicate, means of communication are introduced into the schematic representation of the subordinate part, a question is raised from the main part to the subordinate part; in linear diagrams, it is customary to put punctuation marks between parts of a complex sentence.

As workers in all educational complexes, such a kind of linear diagrams is used, in which the presence of complicating members in the sentence is symbolically displayed, however, in the final analysis of the sentence, these designations are no longer used.

As already mentioned, they are more visual for demonstrating the connection of parts in a complex sentence hierarchical (vertical) schemes. Their construction is provided for by complexes 2 and 3 along with the linear ones and the new textbook of complex 1. In complex 2, for the hierarchical scheme, the same conventions are used as for the linear one, but the first-degree clauses are placed under the main ones, the second-degree clauses - under the first-degree clauses and etc.; these schemes could be called linear-hierarchical Complex 3 uses hierarchical schemes similar to those presented in our description. Let us give as an example a linear and two hierarchical schemes of the same sentence:

I regretted 1 , what am I not an artist 2 , which can display all the beauty of this spring morning 3 .

Line diagram:

The hierarchical scheme adopted in the new textbook of the complex and in complex 3:

The new textbook of complex 1 also offers an unconventional view of hierarchical schemes used when a subordinate clause breaks the main one:

The path that led us to the lake suddenly broke off.

,

In complex 3, circles and ovals are used instead of rectangles to indicate subordinate clauses.

In the practice of pre-university training, it is customary to use hierarchical schemes.

There are such ways of constructing schemes in which unions that are not members of the sentence are taken out of the rectangle (circle) of the subordinate part, and allied words, as members of the sentence, are placed inside the schematic representation of the parts.

So, the proposal scheme:

I regretted 1 , what I'm not an artist 2 , which can display all the charm of this spring morning 3 .

in this case it will look like this:

When constructing a hierarchical scheme, parts connected by any type of syntactic connection (composing, subordinating, non-union) are connected by lines.

Punctuation marks hierarchical schemes may be included (new textbook of complex I, complex 2) or not included (complex 3).

Syntactic analysis of a complex sentence should be carried out according to the following scheme:

I. Parse the proposal by members.

II. Divide the sentence into parts, number the parts in order.

III. Draw up a sentence scheme indicating the means of communication and types of subordinate clauses.

IV. Describe the relationship between the subordinate clauses: sequential, parallel, homogeneous subordination.

V. Make a descriptive analysis according to the following scheme:

1. According to the purpose of the statement:

narrative;

interrogative;

Incentive.

2. By intonation:

Non-exclamatory;

Exclamation point.

3. By the number of grammatical foundations:

1) simple;

2) complex:

compound,

complex,

Unionless

with different types of communication.

4. By the presence of one or both main members:

1) two-part;

2) one-part. With main member:

a) subject - denominative;

b) predicate:

Definitely personal

Indefinitely personal, (- generalized personal),

Impersonal.

5. By the presence of secondary members:

common;

Uncommon.

6. By the presence of missing members:

Incomplete (indicate which member/members of the sentence is/are missing).

7. By the presence of complicating members: 1) uncomplicated;

2) complicated:

Homogeneous members of the proposal (specify which ones),

Separate secondary members of the sentence - definitions (including applications), additions, circumstances (expressed by participial, participle, comparative and other turns),

Introductory words, introductory and plug-in constructions,

direct speech,

Appeal.

If the sentence is complicated by direct speech or an interstitial sentence, they are considered and described as an independent sentence.

Sample syntactic analysis of a complex sentence:

The sentence is narrative, non-exclamatory, complex, with different types of connection.

1 part: two-part (subject cabinet, predicate was, PGS), widespread, complete, complicated by homogeneous circumstances;

2 part: two-part (subject dampness, predicate was, PGS), common, complete, uncomplicated;