THE HISTORY OF STUDYING ASYNDETIC COMPOSITE SENTENCES IN ARMENIAN LINGUISTIC LITERATURE

THE HISTORY OF STUDYING ASYNDETIC COMPOSITE SENTENCES IN ARMENIAN LINGUISTIC LITERATURE

Susanna Harutyunyan

Postgraduate student, Yerevan State University,

Armenia, Yerevan

ABSTRACT

In this article are observed the points of view of the scientists M. Abegyan, G. Sevak, N. Parnasyan, E. Agayan, V. Arakelyan, Art. Papoyan, S. Abrahamyan, G. Gareginyan, who made a significant contribution to the study of the asyndetic composite sentences in the Armenian language.

Keywords: syntax; composite sentence; asyndetic subordination; asyndetic compound sentence; asyndetic complex sentence; lexical means; intonation.

In the Armenian syntax, asyndetic composite sentences are little studied.. As is known, asyndeton is a method of grammatical linking, in which there are no connecting conjunctions, conjunctive words, and sentences are related to each other in meaning. In the case of an asyndetic connection, speech becomes lively, concise, emotional, short and fast. This is especially true for spoken language. Armenian asyndetic composite sentences are very important in speech communication, and they are used in various functional styles of speech, both in writing and in oral speech. They are widely used in poetry, proverbs, sayings, fairy tales and aphorisms.

The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that for the first time an attempt was made to acquaint the public with Armenian linguists who studied the asyndetic composite sentences in the Armenian language and contributed to the study of the asyndetic composite sentences.

Our purpose is to present the views of Armenian linguists on asyndetic composite sentences.

In the Armenian language, an asyndetic connection is called an asyndeton or asyndetic subordination. The outstanding Armenian syntactic scholars Varag Arakelyan (1964), Nvard Parnasyan (1964), Manuk Abeghyan (1965), Gurgen Sevak (1978), Sergey Abrahamyan (1988), Eduard Aghayan (1987), Grigor Gareginyan (1991), Artashes Papoyan dealt with issues of asyndetic composite sentences (2003) and other Armenian scientists.

The term “sharaharutyun” (asyndetic subordination) was first proposed by M. Abegyan in his monograph “Theory of the Armenian language”, in which he notes that all sentences are connected by coordinating and subordinating relations [1, p. 600]. He divides the subordinating connection into asyndetic subordination and conjunctive connection [1, p. 609]. and the coordinating connection - to asyndetic subordination, demonstrative words, coordinating conjunctions and conjunctive words [1, p. 652].

Following M. Abeghyan, the Armenian linguist Gurgen Sevak also believes that principal and subordinate clauses can be associated with asyndetic subordination  or conjunctive connection [9, p. 100]. However, unlike M. Abeghyan, Gurgen Sevak believes that not only the principal and subordinate clauses that are part of complex subordinate clauses can be associated with asyndetic subordination  or conjunctive connection, but also coordinating sentences that are part of compound sentences . However, unlike G. Sevak, M. Abegyan does not consider such sentences to be a separate variety and notes that coordinating sentences can be connected by an conjunctive connection.

Thus, we conclude that G. Sevak does not distinguish between composite sentences, associated with asyndetic subordination  and conjunctive connection.

N. Parnasyan in his work “Asyndetic composite sentences in the modern Armenian language” studies both asyndetic compound sentences [8, p. 20] and asyndetic complex sentences [8, p. 59].

In her work, she notes that “the determinant of the structural and semantic meaning of an asyndetic composite sentence is the semantic factor, the relationship and ratio of the content of the components of sentences in a composite sentence” [8, p. 17 - 18].

N. Parnasyan believes that in the case of an conjunctive connection of sentences, one can also distinguish between coordination and subordination. He believes that “between the components of a composite sentence there is not only a semantic dependence, but also a structural-grammatical dependence, which is expressed differently in different types of a composite sentence and has its own specific grammatical and lexical means of expression, which, in the absence of conjunctions and relative words, take on the task of compiling a complex whole, expressing the semantic relationships between their parts” [8, p. 9 - 10].

The Armenian linguist professor Eduard Aghayan also expressed his opinion about the subordinating relationship. He wrote in his university textbook "Fundamentals of Linguistics" that "the connection of subordinate clauses with the principal clause is a subordinating connection, which is largely expressed by subordinating conjunctions or auxiliary words" [2, p. 557].

Thus, professor E. Aghayan also argues that the connection of subordinate clauses with the principal clause is mainly expressed by subordinating conjunctions and auxiliary words, but he also considers a asyndetic connection possible․

V. Arakelyan in his work “The Syntax of the Armenian Language” dedicated a separate chapter and considered both composite sentences with independent asyndeton and composite sentences with dependent asyndeton. According to Varag Arakelyan, “asyndetic subordination combines different relationships, and their differentiation is due to intonation and more pronounced one or another meaning.” [4, p. 294].

The contribution of the Armenian linguist Artashes Papoyan to the study of asyndetic composite sentences is also great. He writes in his monograph “Elliptic connection in complex sentences in the New Armenian language” that “between asyndetic complex sentences, the grammatical order of syntactic and morphological rules and patterns is manifested to the maximum extent” [6, p. 49].

In the history of Armenian syntax, the contribution of Sergey Abrahamyan is also great. In his school textbook “Armenian language. Syntax”, he considers lexical means and intonation as means of combining principal and subordinate clauses. Subordinating conjunctions, relative words and control words act as lexical means, and “when the principal and subordinate clauses are not connected by conjunctions or relative words, their connection is formed by intonation. In such cases, the most characteristic feature is an increase in tone and a significant pause, immediately after that" [3, p. 234]. S. Abrahamyan considers important the subordinate relation of the components of the sentences in connection with the principal and subordinate clauses. Instead of the term "conjunctive connection", he used the term "lexical means", and instead of the term "asyndetic subordination " - the term "intonation".

G. Gareginyan also made a great contribution to the study of the asyndetic composite sentences in the Armenian language. According to him, "asyndetic composite sentences are such sentences, the components of which are not connected by conjunctions and relative pronouns" [5, p. 305]. He attaches great importance to the role of intonation, the ratio of types of temporal forms and the location of the sentence components.

In the university textbook "The Syntax of the Modern Armenian Language", Artashes Papoyan notes that the connection between principal and subordinate clauses is carried out with the help of auxiliary words and without auxiliary words [7, p. 276].

Thus, having studied the views of Armenian syntaxologists on asyndetic composite sentences, in this article we have tried to systematize the statements of Armenian scientists who have made a significant contribution to the study of the syntax of the asyndetic composite sentence in the Armenian language. During the period of development of Armenian linguistics, the theory of the asyndetic composite sentence in the Armenian syntax was enriched with many fruitful ideas.

References:

1. Abegyan M. Theory of the Armenian language, Yerevan, Mitk publishing house, 1965, 699 pages.
2. Agayan E.B. Fundamentals of linguistics. Yerevan, Yerevan University Publishing House, , 1987, 736 pages.
3. Abrahamyan S. G. Armenian language. Syntax. Textbook for 7 - 8 grades of high school. Yerevan, Luys publishing house, 1988, 328 pages.
4. Arakelyan V. Syntax of the Armenian language. Volume 2, Yerevan, publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR, 1964, 468 pages.
5. Gareginyan G. L. Modern Armenian language / Complex sentence / Yerevan, University Publishing House, 1991, 432 pages.
6. Papoyan Art. A. Elliptic connection in complex sentences in the New Armenian language. Yerevan, publishing house "Mitk", 1968, 276 pages.
7. Papoyan Art., Badikyan H. Syntax of modern Armenian language, Yerevan, University Publishing House, 2003,  463  pages.
8. Parnasyan N. A. Asyndetic composite sentences in the modern Armenian language.  "Issues of Language and Style" Volume 2, Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Yerevan, 1964, pp. 5 - 153.
9. Sevak G. Syntax of the Armenian language, textbook for grades 7-8 of a general education school, Yerevan, Luys Publishing House, 1978, 152 pages.