Based on their syntactic properties, conjunctions are divided into coordinating and subordinating conjunctions.
Coordinating conjunctions connect homogeneous members of a simple sentence and parts of a complex sentence. The formal feature of the coordinating conjunction is that, located between the connected components, it is not included in the syntactic structure of any of them. Whereas the subordinating conjunction belongs to the subordinate part, together with which it can occupy different positions in relation to the main sentence: When the detachment entered the city, the sun was setting→The sun was setting when the detachment entered the city→ The sun was setting when the detachment entered the city.
Coordinating conjunctions connect components as functionally equal: when composing, neither the main nor the dependent part can be distinguished. At the same time, the homogeneity expressed by the coordinating conjunction is not the same. It can relate to the syntactic level - a conjunction connects identical parts of a sentence: I’ll get a cat and a parrot; can be lexical-semantic - a conjunction connects different forms with their common or same type of referent orientation: I talk to poets and about poets(V. 3. Sannikov); as well as communicative - a conjunction connects functionally different members of a sentence: It is raining, and heavily; She will return, but not soon - an adjective and an adverb attached to a sentence by a coordinating conjunction are also read as a sentence).
Coordinating conjunctions are divided into: 1) connecting, 2) dividing, 3) adversative, in which gradational ones are especially distinguished, 4) connecting and 5) explanatory.
Connecting unions and, neither... nor, yes(meaning And), both... and... These conjunctions express a connection that is not complicated by additional meanings; they are often used to indicate enumeration: And my Matryona became neither a peahen nor a crow(Krylov); And the sling, and the arrow, and the crafty dagger spare the victor for years(Pushkin). The most abstract of the connecting conjunctions is the conjunction And, which, according to A. M. Peshkovsky, expresses the “pure idea of connection.” Union And is not only used to express enumeration and join. Based on adverbs, particles, modal words (and then, and therefore, and therefore, and means, and yet, and yet, and nevertheless), as well as the meaning of the combined parts, it can convey temporary, cause-and-effect, concessional, conditional, adversative and connecting meanings.
Divisional unions or, or, then... then, not that... not that, or... or, either... either, either... either, or else, and not that express two main syntactic relations:
1) mutual exclusion value: Either she - the telegram - got into a snowdrift and now lies deep under the snow, or she fell on the path and was dragged away by some passerby...(Gaidar),
2) priority value: Now it’s rain, now it’s hail, now it’s snow like white fluff, now it’s sun, shine, azure and waterfalls...(Bunin); The storm covers the sky with darkness, spinning whirlwinds of snow: the way it howls like an animal, the way it cries like a child(Pushkin).
Opposing alliances ah, but, however, yes(meaning But) are polysemantic, the context can modify their content; the main meaning of the conjunction a is comparative: The snow is still white in the fields, and the waters are noisy in the spring(Tyutchev), unions but, however, yes - adversative: She comes up - and in tears she looks at the noisy waters. She hit her chest, sobbing, and decided to drown in the waves - However, she didn’t jump into the water and continued on her way.(Pushkin).
Gradational conjunctions (they are also called double comparative conjunctions) not only... but also, not only... but and, not only not... but, not as much... as, not even that and others express comparison or contrast according to the degree of significance: He is not only handsome, but also talented.
Affiliation unions yes and, yes and that, (and) moreover, (and) moreover, too, also express additional information to what has been said: There was a lot of water, and it was not spoiled.
Explanatory conjunctions namely, that is, or, somehow express clarification and clarification: We drank as usual, that is, a lot(Pushkin); Anna spent the whole day at home, that is, with the Oblonskys...(L. Tolstoy);
Pets, namely cats, have a calming effect on humans; It’s called that, that is, its nickname is Manilovka, but Zamanilovka is not here at all(Gogol).
Note. In some works, explanatory conjunctions are distinguished from coordinating conjunctions and are recognized as lexemes that form a special type of syntactic relations, intermediate between coordinating and subordinating relations.
Subordinating conjunctions
Subordinating conjunctions attach subordinate clauses to the main parts of a complex sentence. Some subordinating conjunctions are also used when constructing a simple sentence. Yes, union How may be placed before the nominal part compound predicate: The house is like a passage yard or enter into a circumstance of a course of action: Dreams disappeared like smoke(Lermontov), union to can attach a goal adverbial expression expressed by an infinitive: We gathered to discuss a plan of action. Wed: We gathered to discuss the action plan.
Subordinating conjunctions are usually divided into semantic and asemantic. The latter include conjunctions that attach subordinate clauses explanatory sentences: what, how, to, as if. They are usually compared with grammatical cases, since with the help of explanatory conjunctions such syntactic places, which may also have grammatical case (You can hear the sound of the wind, You can hear it as if the wind is rustling; I dream about spring. I dream about spring; I remembered what happened. I remembered what happened). Like grammatical cases, explanatory conjunctions express syntactic relations predetermined (given) by the semantics of the word (or word form) to which it refers subordinate clause. An explanatory conjunction does not form the syntactic meaning of a complex sentence, but only expresses it.
However, it would be wrong to think that in terms of content, explanatory conjunctions are empty words. Explanatory conjunctions differ from each other in their modal components of meaning. Union to expresses the desired modality (tell him to come) as if - uncertainty (I see someone standing) that And How associated with real modality.
Semantic subordinating conjunctions have their own meanings. They define syntactic relationships in the structure of a complex sentence.
Semantic conjunctions are divided into groups according to meaning:
1) temporary unions when, before, after, barely... as, as soon as, barely,
2) causal because, because, since, in view of the fact that, especially since, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, as a result of that;
3) conditional if, if... then, in case if, in case if, provided that, if etc.;
4) concessional despite the fact that, although, despite the fact that, despite the fact that, with all that, no matter what;
5) consequences so, as a result of which;
6) goals so that, in order to, for the sake of, in order to, then in order to;
7) comparative: as, as if, as if, as if, just as, likewise, as if, as if;
8) comparative conjunctions, coinciding with subordinating conjunctions on a formal basis, but in meaning not opposed to coordinating conjunctions if... then, while, meanwhile, whereas, as, as, than... by that. For example, The fathers did not visit each other, she had not yet seen Alexei, while(= a) the young neighbors only talked about him(Pushkin).
Hello, dear employees of "Gramota". Thank you for your work! I read the answers every day and learn something new every day. My question concerns the answer to question no. 276365. There you give the correct version of the sentence:They also remembered how they wandered along this forest for days on end, forgetting about everything else.
But isn’t this a complex sentence, where the main one is a one-part sentence? The circumstance “forgetting about everything else” is difficult to attribute simultaneously to both parts of this sentence. Therefore, I don’t understand why there is no comma before “and”?
Thank you for your kind words!
In a complex sentence, a comma between the main part and the subordinate clause, attached by a simple conjunction or a conjunctive word (in our case - How), not placed, if the subordinating conjunction or allied word is preceded by a coordinating conjunction And.
| Question No. 274782 | ||
Hello. There was a conjunction in the text, THAT IS. That this is a coordinating conjunction - I have no doubt. In school practice, coordinating conjunctions are divided into connecting, adversative and disjunctive. What category does the union THAT IS belong to? (Connective, explanatory?)
Answer help desk Russian language
This is a connecting coordinating conjunction.
| Question No. 271689 | ||
Good afternoon
In Odnoklassniki I made a remark that in the sentence “Life is easier than it seems: you just need to accept the impossible, do without the necessary, and endure the unbearable.” There is no need for a comma before "I". They answered me: “... this is a complex sentence and the conjunction “and” is a coordinating conjunction, and coordinating conjunctions are always preceded by a comma.”
I read the rules and I think I’m right, but I don’t know how to substantiate this: the nuances are too subtle.
In my opinion, the second part is a simple sentence with homogeneous members: you need to accept, get around and endure and there is no need for a comma. At the same time, tell me, what mistakes did I make in this letter?
Russian help desk response
This is a non-union proposal. In the second part ( you just need to accept the impossible, do without the necessary and endure the unbearable) union And connects homogeneous terms, a comma is not required.
| Question No. 270207 | ||
Hello,
please help me with the punctuation in the sentence “Similar things happened (,) when we were on the beach.”
Is a comma required before a compound conjunction?
Thank you!
Russian help desk response
Right: A similar thing happened when we were on the beach. A comma is not placed between the main part and the subordinate clause if there is a coordinating conjunction before the subordinating conjunction or allied word. And.
| Question No. 256431 | ||
Please tell me about complex sentences with different types connections. How to recognize subordinating, coordinating and non-conjunctive connections in such sentences?
Russian help desk response
Pay attention to the following: 1) whether there is a conjunction between the parts of the sentence; 2) if there is, then which one - coordinating or subordinating; 3) if there is a conjunction, then how do the parts of the sentence relate to each other (perhaps one of the parts “replaces” some member of the sentence - a definition, a circumstance, an addition). And of course, we recommend reading textbooks in the “Class” section on our portal.
| Question No. 244100 | ||
Hello! The following question arose here: in the sentence “We can’t wait to eat and listen to music!” Should I put a comma before "yes and". And I would like to know in general in which cases a comma before this conjunction is required and in which it is not.
Russian help desk response
There is no reason to use a comma: coordinating conjunction yes and connects homogeneous members of a sentence.
| Question No. 242465 | ||
Hello.
Five days ago I asked a question about “otherwise”, but did not receive an answer. Maybe something didn't work?
Here's the same question again.
The word "otherwise" can be an adverb and a conjunction. If “otherwise” is a conjunction, is it coordinating or subordinating? If coordinating, then what category (adversative?); if subordinating, then what subordinate clause introduces (concessions?)?
For example, in the sentence: “I must go there, otherwise trouble will happen.”
Thank you. Novel.
Russian help desk response
N. S. Valgina in the manual “Modern Russian Language: Syntax” writes: In the category of adversatives, a special group consists of complex sentences with alternative conjunctions: and then, and not that, not that. Such sentences convey the meaning of a special opposition - with a touch of convention... Alternative conjunctions are characteristic of colloquial speech, they convey meanings close to the meanings of words otherwise, otherwise, which often accompany these conjunctions or are even used independently as connecting elements of a complex sentence.
| Question No. 231650 | ||
The following operations are recognized as the object of taxation: sale of goods (works, services) in the territory Russian Federation, including the sale of collateral and the transfer of goods (results of work performed, provision of services) under an agreement to provide compensation or novation, as well as the transfer of property rights. Please tell me, in this sentence: “sale of goods...., and also...” is an SPP (complex-subordinate sentence) or “and also...” is a continuation of “including...” .
Russian help desk response
This is not an IPP, since _and also_ is not a subordinating conjunction, but a coordinating conjunction. As for the question of what exactly the words _as well as the transfer of property rights_ refer to, it is difficult for linguists to answer: the structure of the sentence allows for both interpretations. In our opinion, homogeneous members are as follows: _sale of goods (works, services) on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as transfer of property rights_.
| Question No. 231361 | ||
1. Please clarify, regarding question-answer 231351, whether a comma is needed before “and as a result” (one should consider 1) the conjunction “and” in the sense of the adversative “a” or 2) two homogeneous predicates) in the sentence “We are doing too much immediately, and as a result we cannot complete anything.” 2. Again, commas: “spend less money on retaining specialists, which(,) again(,) leads to increased business profitability.”
Russian help desk response
1. A comma before _and_ is not needed, this is a coordinating conjunction between homogeneous predicates. 2. The specified commas are not required.
| Question No. 214234 | ||
Good afternoon Please tell me what is the correct placement of commas in the sentence “I love the forests near Moscow (,) and when they rustle merrily in the summer breeze (,) and when they, snow-covered, sleep peacefully under the cold light of the moon”? If there was no “and” before the first subordinate clause, the question would not arise, and its presence is not described in reference books. Thank you, Yulia.
Russian help desk response
D. E. Rosenthal considers a similar case: there is no comma between the main and the following one subordinate clause a complex sentence if the subordinating conjunction is preceded by the coordinating conjunction _and, or, or_ (usually repeated). Therefore, it is correct: _I love the forests near Moscow both when they rustle merrily in the summer breeze, and when they, snow-covered, sleep peacefully under the cold light of the moon_.
| Question No. 210974 | ||
I’m writing again because I haven’t found an answer to my question or the question itself. From the point of view of the Republic of Armenia, is it legal to combine opposite categories in one sentence using a clamp INCLUDING: “Anti-tuberculosis care is a set of social, medical, sanitary-hygienic and anti-epidemic measures aimed at identifying, examining and treating, including mandatory examination and treatment , dispensary observation and rehabilitation of patients with tuberculosis and carried out in a hospital and (or) on an outpatient basis 1) Wouldn’t a coordinating conjunction be more appropriate in this construction, because 2 opposite categories (people who have not been diagnosed with tuberculosis, and ALREADY identified) cannot from the point of view of logic, be considered as parts of one whole??? INCLUDING conjunction 1. Used when joining a member of a sentence that is part of the whole about which we're talking about in the first part of the sentence; including smb., sth., including. 2) In Rosenthal’s reference book, “including” is not considered as a conjunction, but is called a “word”?
Russian help desk response
Your question refers to the words: _examination and treatment, including mandatory examination and treatment_. Please note that we are not talking about people, but about the processes of _examination_ and _treatment_. They can be either mandatory or optional. Therefore, it should be recognized that the conjunction _including_ was used correctly, the sentence was constructed correctly.
), which is used to express the syntactic (coordinating or subordinating) connection of units of different nature and volume, from clauses ( Research continues and hypotheses multiply[“Knowledge is power” (2003)]) to phrases ( Apples and prunes are traditionally served with goose[Recipes of national cuisines (2000-2005)]) and even components of words ( two- and three-story houses). Conjunctions are divided into coordinating and subordinating conjunctions. Subordinating conjunctions prototypically connect clauses (although a connection between a word and a clause is possible ( The decisive argument was the fact that the Germans did the same to the French in 1940["Domestic Notes" (2003)]) and words with the word ( Petya is smarter than Vasya)), and coordinating - any homogeneous components (word and word, word and clause, clause and clause). Unlike the preposition, which is functionally close to the subordinating conjunction, the conjunction does not assign a case.
Conjunctions are classified on a number of formal and semantic grounds: by formal structure, by syntactic and semantic properties, by their ability to be used illocutionarily (see Illocutionary uses of conjunctions):
Classification of unions by formal structure (I)
Classification of unions by formal structure (II)
/>
Classification of conjunctions according to syntactic and semantic properties
/>
Classification of conjunctions according to their ability to be used illocutionarily
/>
Etymologically, many Russian conjunctions come from prepositional-pronominal and prepositional-nominal phrases ( because while), less often - from participial forms of the verb ( Although) Many conjunctions are polysemic and sometimes belong in other meanings to other parts of speech, primarily to particles ( yes, and at least barely) and pronouns ( what, how); sometimes significant parts of speech are used as conjunctions ( Truth), which significantly complicates their statistics.
In some cases, a word traditionally classified as a conjunction (see lists of conjunctions below) has in one sense or another intermediate properties (conjunction and particle, conjunction and preposition, coordinating and subordinating conjunction, simple and compound conjunction). In these cases, in the absence of more detailed research, the assignment of a word to conjunctions or to one or another class of conjunctions should be considered to some extent conditional.
Unions should be distinguished from the so-called. allied words (pronominal words that connect parts of a complex sentence and are at the same time members of the sentence).
The lists of conjunctions in this article are given according to the Academic Grammar 1954 [Grammar 1954: 665–673] and the Academic Grammar 1980 [Grammar 1980: §§1673–1683].
The term "union" is a translation from the Greek. syndesmos and lat. conjunctio.
1. Formal classes of unions
Conjunctions are traditionally divided into simple (see) (consisting of one word) and compound () (consisting of more than one word). This division, although in most cases there are purely spelling conventions behind it, is also given in this article.
Based on how many conjunctions are connected by a conjunction and which of them are marked with a conjunction indicator, conjunctions are divided into:
1.1. Simple vs. compound unions
1.1.1. Simple conjunctions
Simple conjunctions consist of one, usually one- or two-syllable word.
List of simple conjunctions [Grammar 1980: §1673]: a, anyhow, as much, an, good, it will be, as if, like, yes, so that, even, barely, if, if, then, but, and, for, or, so, if, how, when, if, if, whether, either, only, rather than, but, while, for the time being, as long as, since, moreover, moreover, let, let, once, perhaps, exactly, that is, as if, so, also, also, only, exactly, although, although, than, purely, that, so that, slightly, supposedly.
1.1.2. Complex or compound conjunctions
Complex, or compound, conjunctions consist of two or more words that semantically represent one unit. The formation of most composite unions involves:
Some complex conjunctions, for example because, because, due to the fact that, in connection with the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, in view of the fact that, then that; despite the fact that, despite the fact that; as, after, since, just as, in case, in order to and some others allow different punctuation - a comma is placed either before the entire conjunction or before the word what / how / to / if:
(1) Almost all gardeners despite the fact that this was not officially permitted; a strip of land about two meters wide was plowed in front of the fence on the street side, and potatoes grew on it. [A. Varlamov. Kupavna (2000)]
(2) <…>many issuers from list A could leave it and pension funds would have to sell these securities despite the fact that they are reliable and promising. [A. Verzhbitsky. Pensioners' assets will be preserved (2010)]
In the terminology of AG-80 [Grammar 1980(2): §2949], the first option is called “undivided”, the second – “dismembered”.
Different punctuation reflects a certain semantic difference between the dissected and unsegmented variants: in the first case, the meaning corresponding to the main clause is included in the meaning of the complex sentence as a presumption. Accordingly, this meaning does not fall within the scope of various types of modal operators. Wed:
(3) a. Shekhtel came to Moscow because
b. Perhaps Shekhtel ended up in Moscow because
When (3a) is included in the scope of the modal word Maybe the meaning of ‘Shekhtel got to Moscow’ remains unaffected by the epistemic modality expressed by this word, i.e. (3b) does not imply ‘it is possible that Shekhtel ended up in Moscow’.
For a similar sentence with undivided because This statement is incorrect:
(4) a. Shekhtel ended up in Moscow, because his mother was the Tretyakovs' housekeeper. ["Izvestia" (2002)]
b. Perhaps Shekhtel ended up in Moscow, because his mother was the Tretyakovs' housekeeper.
1.1.2.1. Simple conjunctions within compounds
Below are the main simple unions with the participation of which complex unions are formed. At the same time, the lists of complex conjunctions are not exhaustive; their purpose is to demonstrate the mechanism of word formation.
With the participation of the union What compound unions formed thanks to the fact that, no matter what, for nothing, then that, despite the fact that, not that, because, because, provided that, unless, so that, especially since, especially since, just now.
With the participation of the union How compound unions formed all the same, as, while, before, as if, as suddenly, as if, as for example, as soon as, meanwhile, before, likewise, as, after just like, because, just like, just like, almost like, just like, just like, just like, just like, since, since, whereas, exactly like.
With the participation of the union to compound unions formed without, not, instead of, in order to, then so that, not that, for the sake of, for the purpose of, so that.
With the participation of the union If unions formed in case, if not, as if, in case.
With the participation of unions how, than unions formed whatever, earlier than, before; before.
With the participation of unions only, only unions formed barely, as soon as, only just, just barely, just barely, barely, just, just barely.
1.1.2.2. Prepositions as part of compound conjunctions
Conjunctions are formed with the participation of prepositions in view of the fact that, instead of, in spite of the fact that, in relation to the fact that, up to the fact that, in contrast to the fact that, in contrast to the fact that, as a result of the fact that, like the fact that, in connection with the fact that, due to the fact that that, due to the fact that, in comparison with the fact that, due to the fact that, based on the fact that, in addition to the fact that, on the basis of the fact that, along with the fact that, regarding the fact that, in spite of the fact that, unlike how , regardless of that, despite the fact that, regarding that, under the guise of that, just as, under the pretext that, as, in addition to that, regarding the fact that, due to the fact that, after that how, in comparison with that, in addition to that, depending on the fact that, judging by the fact that.
1.1.2.3. Particles in compound unions
With the participation of particles would, no, really unions formed as if, good, if, if, as if, as if, as if, when, if, if only, as if, if only, even if, that, and not, than, as if not, not yet, not yet, not yet, not that, not that, not that, if, when, if, since, since.
1.1.2.4. Adverbs in complex conjunctions
Conjunctions are formed with the participation of adverbs: for nothing that, how suddenly, as soon as, before, just like, as well as, earlier than, just like, especially, nevertheless, exactly-V-exactly like.
1.1.2.5. Pronouns in complex conjunctions
With the participation of a pronominal noun That The following unions were formed: otherwise, and even then, or even, otherwise, yes even then, not really, I mean, that is, be it, due to the fact that, thanks to the fact that, just like, while, despite the fact that, especially since, meanwhile, before. With the participation of a pronominal adjective That union formed since.
1.2. Single, double and repeating conjunctions
1.2.1. Single unions
The vast majority of conjunctions in the Russian language are single, they are found both among coordinating and subordinating ones. Single conjunctions are located between the connected parts of the text or are positionally adjacent to one of them:
(5) She came A he left; He left because she came; He's tired And left; Because She came, he left.
List of simple single conjunctions (see also list of Simple conjunctions (see)): a, anyhow, as much, an, good, be, as if, like, yes, so that, even, barely, if, if, then, then, and, for, or, so, if, as, as that, when, if, if, or, only, than, but, while, for the time being, as long as, since, moreover, moreover, let, let, once, perhaps, exactly, that is, as if, so, also, also, only, exactly, at least, although, than, purely, that, so that, slightly, supposedly.
List of compound single unions: and not that, and that, and and that, and then and, and not, and not that, without not, thanks to the fact that, as if, be it, in view of the fact that, instead of, in spite of the fact that, in in relation to the fact that, up to the point that, in contrast to the fact that, in contrast to the fact that, as a result of the fact that, like the fact that, anyway, anyway, in connection with the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that , in case, in comparison with the fact that, while, and even then, for nothing that, in order that, good, until, until, until, barely, hardly only, if, if would, if, if not, due to the fact that, then what, then so that, based on the fact that, as if, as if, as if, as if not, how suddenly, as if, as for example, how- then, as soon as, whenever, when already, if only, if only, if only, in the meantime, on the basis of the fact that, along with the fact that, in case if, about that that, despite the fact that, not as an example of how, regardless of the fact that, despite the fact that, not that, not that, not that, but not, regarding that, because, before, under the guise that, just as, under the pretext that, not yet, not yet, not yet, as, in addition to the fact that, regarding the fact that, due to the fact that, after, compared to the fact that, because, because, before, before, on condition that, simply as, just like, exactly as, just as, in order that, unless, since, before, in addition to, as if, depending on the fact that, just like, since, for the purpose that, judging by the fact that, since, so that, so that, especially since, especially since, that is, whereas, that is, only if only, if only not, just, just, just like, even if, with whatever, whatever, so as not, just barely, just barely.
Not obvious from the point of view of the formal classification of conjunctions is a construction like Masha and Petya and Vanya, where, on the one hand, the coordinating conjunction And marks more than one conjunction, but on the other hand, does not mark all conjunctions. The first circumstance would seem to exclude this And from among single unions; the second excludes it from the number of repeating ones (see).
This article adopts the interpretation that in a design like Masha and Petya and Vanya features a repeat of a single And. This interpretation is justified by the fact that the specified construction in its semantic-syntactic properties is close to a single And, but not with repeating and... and. Yes, repetitive and... and, unlike a single one, is not used with a symmetrical predicate (for more details, see Coordinating conjunctions / paragraph 2. Repeating conjunctions), and this restriction does not apply to the construction under discussion. Wed: * Spanish, Italian, and French are all similar vs. Spanish and Italian and French are similar.
1.2.2. Double alliances
Double conjunctions are found among both coordinating and subordinating conjunctions. They consist of two parts, each of which is located in one of two syntactically or semantically unequal parts connected.
Subordinating double conjunctions are characterized by syntactic inequality - one of the clauses is the main one (see Glossary), and the other is dependent (see Glossary):
(6) If the sauce won't be spicy enough That you can add ground red pepper [Recipes of national cuisines: Scandinavian cuisine (2000-2005)];
(7) I just guessed that If I wish I could save this woman That would be rewarded with some magical reward. [E. Grishkovets. Simultaneously (2004)]
(8) But barely he threw back the pillow, How found a cigarette case made of dark red transparent plastic [A. Solzhenitsyn]
Moreover, the second part of the union if... then may fall, especially in colloquial speech, provided that each of the clauses contains a subject:
(9) However, If you are tired and want to relax, we have such places here, like cafes and restaurants. ["Screen and Stage" (2004)]
(10) If the sauce will not be spicy enough, you can add ground red pepper
(11) *I just guessed that If If I saved this woman, I would be rewarded with some kind of magical reward.
Coordinating double conjunctions are characterized by semantic inequality of conjuncts: usually the second conjunct is more unexpected for the Speaker: He wasn't so much tired as he was upset; He was more angry than offended. In this way, double coordinating conjunctions differ from repeating ones, which assume equality of parts: He was both tired and upset(for more details, see Coordinating conjunctions / clause 3.2. Double conjunctions, Coordinating conjunctions / clause 2.1. Repeating conjunctions: Semantics, Coordinating conjunctions / clause 2.3. Repeating vs. double coordinating conjunctions).
Coordinating and subordinating double conjunctions have their own characteristics.
Double coordinating conjunctions usually connect not entire clauses, but homogeneous members, and consist of two parts, the first of which is placed before the first of the compared members, the second before the second: He is equally good at both the theoretical and practical sides of the matter.
Double subordinating conjunctions consist of two parts, the first of which is placed before the first clause, the second before the second: As soon as she entered, he stood up and left.
List of double unions: enough...that, barely...how..., if...then, if...then, if we talk about... (then), if not...then, how...so and, not only that... (also), not... ah, not... but, not to say that... (but), not as much... as, not only... but also, not that... but, rather... than, it was worth... how, only... how, than... it would be better, as for... (that), at least...otherwise.
1.2.3. Repeating conjunctions
Repeating conjunctions are found only among coordinating conjunctions. They are formed by reproducing the same or, less commonly, functionally similar components: and...and, or...or, then...then etc., which are placed before each of two or more equal and formally identical parts:
(12) I always had a dream that someone would appear who or will buy or will give or will give Spivakov a real violin for lifelong use. [WITH. Spivakova. Not everything (2002)]
The exception is the union whether... whether, parts of which are located in the position of the Wackernagel clitic, i.e. after the first full-stressed word:
(13) First of all, your peace is open, think about it; suddenly someone sees us, a dwarf whether, full-length whether household member (T. Mann, trans. S. Apta)
At the union either... or the first part is located in the position of the Wackernagel clitic, the second - in front of the conjunct:
(14) First of all, your peace is open, think about it; suddenly someone sees us, a dwarf whether, or full-sized household member
List of repeating conjunctions: And ... And ... And; neither ... neither ... neither; whether ... whether... whether; or ... or ... or; That ... That ... That; either... or... or,not that ... not that ... not that; or ... or ... or; be ... be, at least ... at least; That ... That ... otherwise; That ... That ... or even; or ... or ... either; or ... or ... or; either ... either ... or; be it ... or; or ... or ... or maybe; Maybe ... Maybe ... or maybe; Maybe ... Maybe; Maybe ... or maybe.
Repeating conjunctions deserve detailed consideration because they have common semantic and syntactic features that are typologically relevant. To understand these features, it is important to distinguish a repeating conjunction from a formally similar unit - a repeated single conjunction. The main formal difference between them is that a repeating conjunction is repeated before each, including the first, conjunct, while a single conjunction can only be located between conjunctions, thereby not affecting the position before the first conjunct. Wed. examples with repeating and... and and repeat single And, respectively:
(15) Sounded And requirements, And criticism … ["Weekly Magazine" (2003)]
(16) So that inside you there is peace, and outside there is a lively life, cultural values And boutiques, And trams, And pedestrians with shopping, And small cafes with the aroma of sweet cheesecakes. ["Brownie" (2002)]
2. Semantic-syntactic classes of conjunctions
This section discusses two types of conjunctions - coordinating and subordinating, in accordance with the two types of relationships between syntactic units, which the union expresses - composition (coordination) and subordination (subordination).
2.1. Essay vs. subordination
Composition and subordination are two fundamental types of syntactic relations that have varied manifestations in different languages.
For example, in German composed clauses require different word orders:
(17) Er geht nach Hause, denn er ist krank – ‘He’s going home because he’s sick, lit. there is a patient’
(18) Er geht nach Hause, weil er crank ist– ‘He’s going home because he’s sick, literally. the patient is’
Although composition and subordination are basic concepts in grammar, there is no single generally accepted approach to defining them (see Composition, Subordination, Composition and Subordination). Along with the traditional syntactic approach, according to which the elements of a coordinating construction are characterized by the same syntactic function, and the elements of a subordinating construction are characterized by different syntactic functions [Beloshapkova 1977], there are also semantic and pragmatic-communicative approaches.
Despite all the differences in approaches, the generally accepted idea is that coordinating relationships are characterized by symmetry, and subordinating relationships are characterized by asymmetry. The symmetry of the composition manifests itself at different levels of language: morphological (cf. * smoking and reading while lying down are harmful; *he was handsome and smart), syntactic (usually identical parts of the sentence are composed), lexical-semantic (cf. when and where did this happen vs. *yesterday and at five o'clock).
In the Russian grammatical tradition, the question of distinguishing between composition and subordination and the question of distinguishing between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions are equated to each other. Strictly speaking, however, these are different questions. But the difference is significant, first of all, for those languages where the conjunction is not the main means of polypredicative communication. For the Russian language, where the conjunctive method of forming dependent predication dominates, this difference, somewhat coarseningly, can be neglected. Typical examples of coordinating conjunctions in Russian are: and, but, or, either, typical examples subordinating conjunctions – since, when, so that, due to which, if, although.
Within the class of subordinating conjunctions, the following distinction is also significant: conjunctions that usually introduce actant (subject or object) clauses, and conjunctions that usually introduce circonstant clauses. In Russian terminology, the first roughly correspond to explanatory conjunctions (what, to, as if etc.), and the second – all other subordinating conjunctions ( because, although, if, when etc.). In the typological literature, the term is adopted for conjunctions heading an actant clause complementizer, for conjunctions heading a constant clause - the term adverbial subordinator. English term complementizer broader than the Russian term explanatory union: complementizers include, in particular, the interrogative particle whether, heading an actant clause.
It should be borne in mind that conjunctions introducing actant and sirconstant clauses do not necessarily form two non-overlapping groups. So, in Russian the conjunctions so that, as if, as if can act in both functions. Wed:
(19) <…>Kazbich imagined as if Azamat, with the consent of his father, stole his horse from him, at least I think so. [M. Yu. Lermontov. Hero of Our Time (1839-1841)] – the subordinate clause fills the objective valency of the main predicate
(20) The snakes busily studied the situation, as if were wondering where to start... ["Crime Chronicle" (2003)] - the subordinate clause does not fill the valency of the main predicate
The distinction between actant and circonstant clauses - and in the case when both types of clauses can be introduced by the same conjunction, as in (18)–(19), and the distinction between conjunctions - is based on a number of formal grounds (see the article Subordination for more details). For example, takeaway interrogative pronoun admissible from an actant clause, but not from a circonstant clause, cf. examples (20) and (21) respectively:
(21) a. Do you want to be paid a million?
b. How many do you want to get paid?
(22) a. Have you come to be paid a million?
b. ??? How many did you come to get paid?
2.2. Coordinating Conjunctions
Coordinating conjunctions are traditionally divided into three semantic groups:
- connecting conjunctions: and, yes, and also; both... and, not only that... also, not... but, not... but, not to say that... but, not so much... as, not only... but also, not that... but, rather... than;and... and... and; yes... yes... yes; neither... nor... nor; whether... whether... whether; or... or... or; then... then... then; either... or... or, not that... not that... not that; either... or... or; be... be, at least... at least; then... then... and then; then... then... and even; either... or... or; either... or... or; either... or... or; be it... or; or... or... or maybe; maybe... maybe... maybe; perhaps... perhaps; maybe... or maybe;
- adversative conjunctions: but, yes in meaning but, however, and, on the other hand, and that;
- dividing unions: or, or, or else, not that, not that; or... or, either... or; whether... whether, whether... or, at least... at least, what... what, be it... or; and then, and maybe (maybe) and; not... so, if (and) not... then; maybe (be), maybe (be)... maybe (be), maybe (be)... and maybe (be); not that... not that, or... or; then... then.
2.3. Subordinating conjunctions
Subordinating conjunctions are divided into the following semantic groups:
(1) causal conjunctions ( since, because, since, because, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, for, then that);
(2) consequence unions ( so, or else, or else);
(3) target unions ( so that, in order to, in order to, then in order to, in order to);
(4) conditional conjunctions ( if, if, if, once, if, as soon as, if (would), if, if only);
(5) concessionary alliances ( although, at least; for nothing; if only, if only; despite the fact that, despite the fact that; at least, at least, let, let; while, meanwhile, whereas; it would be good, let it be; only, really);
(6) temporary unions ( barely, barely, as soon as, as, when, only, only, as, after, since, until, until, while, until, until, until, before, before than, just, just, just, barely, barely, before, while);
(7) comparative unions ( how, what, as if, as if, as if, as if, as if (as), likewise, exactly, exactly (as), than, rather than).
(8) explanatory conjunctions ( what, in order, as if, how);
3. Illocutionary use of conjunctions
The use of a conjunction is called illocutionary when it expresses the connection between the propositional content of one clause in a complex sentence and the illocutionary modality of another:
(23) Yes, and not yet I forgot, give them a coin. [A. Belyanin. The Fierce Landgrave (1999)]
Bye expresses here the temporary connection between the propositional meaning of the subordinate clause and the illocutionary modality of the request included in the content of the main one. Wed. with non-illocutionary use of the conjunction Bye(see Subordinating conjunctions / clause 7.1. Temporary conjunctions) :
(24) Knead the dough until Bye it Not will become shiny and will not lag behind the fun. [Recipes of national cuisines: Czech Republic (2000-2005)]
Conjunctions are capable of illocutionary use because, because, once, If, Bye, to, otherwise, otherwise, otherwise, So, for and some others. Wed. examples:
(25) Because We don’t know each other, let me introduce myself: Vasily Ivanovich Stepanenko. ["Science and Life" (2007)]
(26) A once So, what should we test combines on? [A. Azolsky. Lopushok (1998)]
(27) You, brat, turn around, otherwise you should lie in your grave! [M. Gigolashvili. Ferris Wheel (2007)]
(28) Rejoice, you didn’t ask anything, So Rest! [SMS messages from high school students (2004)]
4. Statistics
Statistics of groups of unions are given based on the Main Corpus with homonymy not removed, because the check shows that in the Corpus with the homonymy removed, the homonymy of conjunctions with particles and pronouns is not removed. Thus, the data for the much smaller Corpus with the homonymy removed are not more accurate. In addition, many conjunctions are multi-valued and belong to several classes at once. Any accurate statistics of many conjunctions, especially frequent, polysemantic, double ones, often turns out to be completely impossible. The data below reflects, therefore, a far from complete picture. In general, conjunctions, like other auxiliary parts of speech, quite evenly permeate a variety of speech registers, so that their diachronic analysis, as well as analysis in different linguistic registers, is relatively uninformative, especially in relation to entire classes and subclasses of conjunctions.
More informative is the statistical analysis of some individual conjunctions, namely, those that are unambiguous and not homonymous with other parts of speech. This is usually typical for compound (see), but not double (see) and non-repeating (see) conjunctions, such as just like. Such an analysis makes it possible to correct the descriptions of some conjunctions existing in dictionaries and grammars as bookish, outdated or rare. Compare, for example, unions so that, single or and some others who returned to modern language as colloquial or frequency in newspaper texts. Statistics of some individual unions are given for the Main and Newspaper Corps.
Some conjunctions are given with homonymy not completely removed, but only in cases where their statistics are still relatively representative. For example, for the union And homonymy with the particle is not removed And. However, since the conjunction lexeme is significantly more frequent, statistics on And, however, is of interest. For some unions, individual filters were developed, which made it possible to partially remove homonymy - for example, for the comparative union how only contexts were taken into account comparative degree.
Table 1. Frequency of the main semantic-syntactic classes of conjunctions
|
Main building |
||
|
coordinating conjunctions (% of all words) |
||
|
subordinating conjunctions (% of all words) |
||
|
total |
||
|
classes of coordinating conjunctions (% of all conjunctions) |
||
|
connecting |
||
|
adversative |
||
|
dividing |
||
|
replacement |
statistics not possible |
|
|
classes of subordinating conjunctions (% of all conjunctions) |
||
|
causal |
||
|
consequences |
||
|
targeted |
||
|
conditional |
||
|
concessionary |
||
|
temporary |
||
|
explanatory |
||
|
comparative unions (% of all unions) |
||
Table 2. Frequency of main conjunctions in percentage (from total number words)
|
Union |
Main body with unsolved homonymy |
Newspaper building |
||
|
essay unions |
connecting |
1. and also 3. and...and(with a distance of three words) 4. both...and 5. not as much... as 6. not only...but also 7. not that...but<но> 8. not that...but 9. neither...nor 10. rather than |
||
|
adversarial |
2.en(in combination with Not And No) 3.but 5.however |
|||
|
separating |
1.or even 2.be it... or 3.if not... then 4.or 5.or...or 6.either...or 7.Lily 8.or 9.either...or 10.maybe... maybe 11.not that... not that 12.then... then(with a distance of two words) 13.either... or |
|||
|
subordinating conjunctions |
causal conjunctions |
1.thanks to the fact that 2.due to the fact that 3.due to the fact that 4.due to the fact that 5.due to the fact that 6.then what 7.for 8.because 9.because 10.because 11.because |
||
|
investigation unions |
1.otherwise 2.otherwise 3.So |
|||
|
target alliances |
1.so that 2.in order to 3.then to 4.so that 5.so that 6.to |
|||
|
conditional conjunctions |
1.if 2.If 3.if only 4.if 5.if only 6.if 7.as soon as 8.once |
|||
|
concessionary alliances |
1.while 2.for nothing that 3.it would be nice 4.if only 5.meanwhile 6.no matter what 7.despite the fact that 8.while 9.Although |
|||
|
temporary unions |
1.barely 2.as soon as 3.When 4.only just 5.Bye 6.not yet 7.not yet 8.as 9.after 10.before 11.earlier than 12.since |
|||
|
explanatory conjunctions |
1.as if 2.How 3.What 4.to |
|||
|
comparative unions |
1.as if 2.than 3.just like 4.as if 5.how |
|||
Notes on Tables:
1) homonymy with particles and pronouns has not been removed;
2) the homonymy between single and double/repeating conjunctions has not been removed;
3) homonymy between unions of different groups has not been removed;
4) parts of double and repeating conjunctions are given with a distance of up to 4 words, unless another distance is indicated.
Bibliography
Basic literature
For punctuation in compound subordinating conjunctions and the conditions for their division, see also [Rosenthal et al. 1999: section 108]. "Towards the conditions of dismemberment complex union include: 1) the presence of negation before the conjunction Not; 2) the presence of intensifying, restrictive and other particles in front of the union; 3) presence before the union introductory word, 4) inclusion of the first part (correlative word) in a series of homogeneous members.
Unions with a similar set of properties are found in the main European languages(cf. English) both... and, either... or, neither... nor, German. sowohl… als auch, entweder… oder etc.). However, as can be seen from the examples, the very sign of “repetition”, i.e. the coincidence of parts of the union is not typologically significant.
/>In the section on the question coordinating and subordinating conjunctions...which are coordinating and which are subordinating? given by the author Marusya the best answer is if, as, as if, exactly, that, so that and others. First in compound sentences, the second - in complex ones.
Reply from Advise[guru]
Coordinating conjunctions can connect homogeneous parts of a sentence and simple sentences as part of a complex sentence, and subordinating sentences are only sentences (as part of complex sentences).
Reply from Vulgar[active]
and, yes (and), not only--but and, as--so and, but, but, however, but, or, either, that, not that--not because, because, since, in view of the fact that, thanks to the fact that, due to the fact that, so that, when, barely, if, as if, as if, exactly, that, in order
Reply from Dmitry Aprelov[newbie]
Coordinating: Adversative: Ah, but, but, however... Disjunctive: Or, either, that... that, not that... not that. Conjunctive: And, neither nor, not only but and, as well as.
Reply from Eurovision[newbie]
Subordinating: and, a, but, yes, however, but... Subordinating: because, because, since, so that, when, barely, if, if, as, as if, exactly, that, while ...
Reply from Mishanya Strausov[newbie]
1. COORDINATING: and, yes (and), not only--but and, as--so and, but, but, however, but, or, either, that, not that--not that, etc.2 . SUBORDERING: because, because, since, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, so that, when, barely, if,
Reply from Olesya Pyrlya[newbie]
Nnn
Reply from Gonchar Evgeniy[newbie]
ahh
Reply from Ora Petrash[active]
1. COORDINATING: and, yes (and), not only--but and, as--so and, but, but, however, but, or, either, that, not that--not that, etc.2 . SUBORDERING: because, because, since, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, due to the fact that, so that, when, barely, if,
List of Fairy Tail episodes on Wikipedia
List of Fairy Tail episodes
List of No. 1 singles in South Korea in 2015 Gaon International on Wikipedia
Look at the Wikipedia article about List of No. 1 singles in South Korea in 2015 Gaon International
Union part of speech on Wikipedia
Look at the Wikipedia article about the Union part of speech
