Do participles have a future tense. Communion in Russian

Verbs in the future tense show that the action will take place after the moment of speech.
The future tense has two forms: simple and compound. Shape of the future composite imperfective verbs consists of the future tense of the verb be and the indefinite form of the imperfective verb. The future tense is formed from perfective verbs simple, from imperfective verbs - future tense composite.

Morphological analysis verb

I. Part of speech. General value.
II. Morphological features:
1. Initial form (indefinite form).
2. Permanent signs:
a) view
b) conjugation,
c) transition.
3. Irregular symptoms:
a) inclination
b) number
c) time (if any),
d) number (if any),
e) gender (if any).
III. syntactic role.

Participle

Participle- a special form of the verb that denotes a sign of an object by action and answers the questions what? which? which? which?

Note.

Some scholars consider participles independent part speech, since they have a number of features that are not characteristic of the verb.

As verb forms, participles have some grammatical features. They are perfect and imperfect; present tense and past; returnable and non-refundable.
The forms of the future tense do not have participles.
There are participles real and passive.

Denoting a sign of an object, participles, like adjectives, grammatically depend on nouns that agree with them, i.e. become in the same case, number and gender as the nouns they refer to.
Participles change by cases, by numbers, by gender. The case, number, gender of participles is determined by the case, number, gender of the noun to which the participle refers. Some participles, like adjectives, have a full and short form. initial participle form - Nominative case singular male. All verb signs of the participle correspond to the initial form of the verb - the indefinite form.
Like an adjective, a full participle in a sentence is a definition.
Participles in short form are used only as a nominal part of a compound predicate.

Active and passive participles

Valid participles designate a sign of the object that itself produces the action. Passive participles denote a sign of the object that is experiencing the action of another object.

Participle formation

When forming participles, the following verb signs are taken into account:

1. Transitivity or intransitivity of the verb(both real and passive participles are formed from transitive verbs; only real participles are formed from intransitive verbs).

2. Verb type(Present participles are not formed from perfective verbs. Real participles of the present and past tense are formed from imperfective verbs, passive past participles are not formed from most imperfective verbs, although these verbs have the corresponding forms of passive present participles).

3. Verb conjugations(both active and passive present participles have different suffixes depending on the conjugation of the verb).

4. Reflexivity or non-recurrence of the verb(passive participles are not formed from reflexive verbs). Real participles formed from reflexive verbs retain the suffix -sya at all times, regardless of which sound (vowel or consonant) is in front of this suffix; the suffix -sya stands at the participle after the end.

When forming participles with present tense suffixes -usch- (-yusch-), -ash- (-box-), -em-, -im- and past tense -vsh-, -sh-, -nn-, -enn-, -t- the endings of the masculine, feminine and neuter singular are added ( -th, -th, -th, -her) or ending plural (-th, -th).
From a number of verbs are formed Not all types of sacraments.

Note.
Most transitive imperfective verbs do not have a passive past participle form.

Morphological analysis of the sacrament

I. Part of speech (special form of the verb); from which verb the general meaning is formed.

II. Morphological features:
1. The initial form is the nominative singular masculine.
2. Permanent signs:
a) real or passive;
b) time;
c) view.
3. Irregular symptoms:
a) full and short form (for passive participles);
b) case (for participles in full form);
c) number;
d) kind.

III. syntactic role.

gerund

gerund- a special form of the verb, which denotes an additional action with the main action expressed by the verb, and answers the questions what are you doing? having done what?

As a form of the verb, the participle has some of its grammatical features. gerunds are either perfect or imperfect. They retain the form of the verb from which they are formed.
The gerund retains the verb sign - transitivity.

Note.

A gerund, like a verb, can be returnable and irrevocable.

The participle, like the verb, can be determined by the adverb.
In a sentence, the participle is a circumstance.

Note.

Some scientists consider gerunds to be an independent part of speech, since they do not have many of the grammatical features characteristic of the verb.

Imperfect participles

Imperfect participles denote pending additional action, which occurs simultaneously with the action expressed by the verb - predicate.
Imperfect gerunds are formed from the stem present tense of the verb with a suffix -and I).
After the hissing suffix is ​​used -A, and in other cases - -I.
From the verb to be, the imperfect participle is formed using the suffix - teach.

Notes.

1. From imperfective verbs with a suffix -va- in an indefinite form (give, recognize, get up, etc.), the gerund participle is formed from the basis of an indefinite form: give out (give out) - giving out.

2. Imperfect gerunds are not formed from some verbs:

o from verbs whose roots consist of only consonants:
beat - beat, tear - tear, sew - sew, burn - tourniquet, etc.
Exception:
rush - rush - rush;

o from verbs with a present tense stem to g, k, x: cherish - cherish, able - can, etc .;

o from most verbs with the stem of the present tense to hissing: write - write, whip - whip, etc .;

o from verbs with suffix -Well-: fade - fade, get wet - get wet, pull - pull, go out - go out, etc.

Perfect participles

Perfective gerunds denote completed extra action, which is usually completed before the action begins. expressed by the verb predicate.

Perfective gerunds are formed from the stem of the indefinite form or the past tense (which, as a rule, coincide) with the help of suffixes -in, -lice, -shi. From reflexive verbs, perfect participles are formed with the suffix -lice (s), -shi (s). The participles with a consonant stem are formed with the suffix -shi.

Notes.

1. From some verbs, the formation of double forms is possible: from the stem of the indefinite form and from the stem of the past tense (when they do not coincide).

2. To the suffix -to the return suffix -sya does not join.
In some verbs, the perfective participles are formed with the help of the suffix -and I) from the basis of the future tense.

Notes.

1. Forms with suffixes have been preserved from some verbs -in, -lice, -shi(having returned, having tuned in, having come, having brought, having brought, having said goodbye, having acquired, having seen, having seen, having heard, having heard). if there are double forms, gerunds with a suffix are more often used -and I) as less cumbersome.

2. Sometimes gerunds with suffixes -in, -lice imperfective verbs are formed, but they are rarely used (former, ate, not having).

Morphological analysis of the participle

I. Part of speech (a special form of the verb). General value.
II. Morphological features:
1. Initial form (indefinite form of the verb)
2. View.
3. Immutability.
III. syntactic role.

Adverb- a part of speech that denotes a sign of an action, a sign of an object and another sign.
Adverbs can refer to the verb, to its special forms - participle and gerund, as well as to the noun, adjective and other adverbs.
The adverb means sign of action, if attached to a verb and a participle.
The adverb means object sign, if attached to a noun.
The adverb means sign of another sign, if attached to an adjective, participle and other adverb.
The adverb does not change, i.e. does not bend or hide.
In a sentence, adverbs are most often circumstances.

Note.

Some adverbs can be predicates.

Adverbs are divided by meaning into following groups:

o Adverbs of manner- How? how? - quickly, well, to smithereens

o Adverbs of time- When? since when? How long? how long? - today, now, in winter

o Adverbs of place- Where? Where? where? - away, upstairs, home

o Adverbs of reason- why - rashly, blindly, reluctantly

o Adverbs of purpose- For what? - on purpose, on purpose

o Adverbs of measure and degree- How many? at what time? how much? in what degree? to what extent? - very, completely, extremely

special group make up adverbs that do not name signs of action, but only point to them. They, in addition to the main purpose, are used to link sentences in the text.

o demonstrative adverbs(here, there, here, there, from there, then)

o Indefinite adverbs(somewhere, somewhere, somewhere)

o Interrogative adverbs(how, why, where)

o Negative adverbs(nowhere, never, nowhere, nowhere)

Degrees of comparison of adverbs

Adverbs for -o (-e), formed from qualitative adjectives, have two degrees of comparison: comparative and superlative.
The comparative degree of adverbs has two forms - simple and compound. simple form comparative degree formed with suffixes -her(s), -e, -she from the original form of adverbs, from which the final ones are discarded -o (-e), -ko. The compound form of the comparative degree of adverbs is formed by combining adverbs and words more and less.
The superlative degree of adverbs, as a rule, has a compound form, which is a combination of two words - the comparative degree of an adverb and a pronoun all (total).

Morphological analysis of the adverb

I. Part of speech. General value.
II. Morphological features:
1. The unchangeable word.
2. Degree of comparison (if any).
III. syntactic role.

Morphology Lesson 11. The system of parts of speech in Russian (§ 6)

Purpose: updating knowledge about the system of parts of speech in the Russian language; improving the ability to recognize independent and service parts of speech; belonging of the word by meaning, morphological properties and syntactic function to one or another part of speech.

Course of the lesson: I. Development of the ability to restore the logic of the text, updating knowledge about the system of parts of speech in Russian. Exercise 37, referring to the rubric "Assistant Tips". II. Improving the ability to recognize independent and service parts of speech; belonging of a word by meaning, morphological properties and syntactic function to one or another part of speech. Exercise 38 - the development of skills to determine the basis for classification in terms of morphology:, V. V. Vinogradov in [Vinogradov 1947] and others) note the presence in the language of the so-called future participles, produced from the verbs of the SV according to the model of the formation of participles of the present tense and which are “a deviation from the literary norm; for example: hundreds of excerpts from Green's books that excite everyone (Paust.); samples of headlines that can attract attention (gas.) ”[Shvedova (ed.) 1980].

2. Proposals have been repeatedly put forward to introduce participles of the future tense into the participial paradigm of the Russian language. The first of such attempts (which has dealt with the Church Slavonic language) should be considered the grammar of M. Smotrytsky [Smotrytsky 1619], which contains real and passive participles of the future tense, such as etc. [Smotrytsky 1619: 182]. However, this grammar was more focused on translating texts from the ancient Greek language (in which there are participles of all times, including the future), rather than on live colloquial speech, for which it was criticized, in particular, by Y. Krizhanich, who wrote in 1666 that "...single verbs do not have a present participle", and "Smotrytsky gives out many perverse words as a model" [Kpgats 1984: 144].

1 The study was supported by the RFH grant No. 09-04-00264a "Grammar of attributive secondary predications (relativization in Russian)".

IN last years future participles have also attracted the attention of researchers more than once, but all the articles and notes we know about them are mainly aimed at resolving the issue of their status in the literary Russian language, see, for example, [Epshtein 2000; Shapoval, manuscript]. We set ourselves the task of analyzing the use of future participles on the material of texts found on the Internet by the Google search engine (www.google.com), and also assessing their acceptability based on an experiment with native speakers.

3. For the study, 100 frequent NE verbs were selected that do not have morphonological “contraindications” for the formation of future participles, and the first important result can be considered that some of these participles (losing, leaving, writing, finding, opening, saying) Google finds more than a hundred uses, and for the coming communion - more than five hundred.

To resolve the issue of independence (independence from the context) of the participles of the future tense, we analyzed 312 cases of their use from different points of view. We traced the cases in which they are more often used, whether they are necessarily included in the participial turnover, how often they are paired with cognate participles (drank and drunk, sung and sung), and compared the data obtained with the data for participles allowed by normative grammar.

The results speak in favor of the usefulness of the considered forms. So, for example, the case distributions of the use of future participles CB and past participles CB2 do not show statistically significant differences (p >> 0.10), i.e. from this point of view, future participles behave exactly the same as "full" past participles.

From the point of view of inclusion / non-inclusion in the composition of the turnover, between the participles of the future and the past tense (for comparison, we analyzed 312 examples of past participles

2 The distribution for past participles was calculated for the contexts found in the National Corpus of the Russian Language (www.ruscorpora.ru) in the subcorpus with grammatical homonymy removed.

time SW) there are quite significant differences. So, in our materials there were only 13 sentences with single participles of the future tense (4.17%), while single participles of the past tense account for 30.13% of uses (94 examples). However, these differences, in our opinion, are quite understandable, given the “repressed” status of the future participles and their rarity in the Russian language: a fairly large proportion of the single past participles we examined are fully or partially adjectivized participles, such as the past (grew by 6% over the past year) or sunken (switches with sunken lips), and adjectivation, as you know, occurs as a result of prolonged use of a word and a gradual change in its meaning, see [Lopatin 1966: 47].

An important parameter to make an assumption

about the reasons for the appearance of future participles in speech is their position in the participial turnover: they are almost 6.5 times more likely than the past participles CB from our sample to occupy a non-initial position in the participial turnover (46.15% versus 7.34% for past participles).

It can be assumed that it is precisely such cases that are “extreme”, forcing the carrier to fill in the usually unfilled cell in the participial paradigm. Indeed, the most successful replacement for the turnover with the participle of the future tense in Russian, as we will show below, is the relative clause, see (1):

(1) Thus was born a form with its own individuality and originality, a happy combination of functionality and aesthetics, which does not lose / which will not lose its attractiveness for many years. (Google)

However, since in relative clauses the term expressed relative pronoun, always (with the exception of some special occasions associated with the “rat-catcher effect”) moves to the left periphery, starting a dependent predication from any phrasal category that does not dominate the allied word (circumstances of time, etc.), the speaker can no longer use the “permitted” way of expressing the necessary meaning and is forced use non-literary form, see (2):

(2) I remember at the time I wrote this, I considered myself a Great Writer, sooner or later to write / *who will write a work of genius... (Google)

The last assumption that could indicate the lack of independence of the participles of the future tense was that they are used exclusively or predominantly in tandem with past participles, see (3), or present participles, see (4), formed from a verb of the same aspect couples:

(3) Introducing the catalog literary works, released or released under the label "Neue Partisanen". (Google)

(4) Poland is generally a unique, eternally dying, but by no means dying phenomenon in world history. (Google)

However, although such uses are encountered, they account for only 3.8% (12 cases), which, of course, cannot serve as a strong argument in favor of the lack of independence of the forms under consideration.

However, realizing that the examples found on the Internet could well have been generated by people who do not speak Russian well, we considered it necessary to conduct an experiment with literate native speakers, which would allow us to assess the acceptability of future participles from the point of view of speakers.

4. For the experiment, we selected 8 sentences from those considered earlier, diverse in terms of actional characteristics and argumentative structure of the verb from which the participle is formed, the structure of participial turnover, etc. For each of the examples, we selected peculiar “analogues”: two sentences, repeating, if possible, all the characteristics of the original one listed above, but differing from it in that in one, instead of the participle of the future tense, there was the past participle CB with the same taxis value, and in the other, a relative clause3.

All the sentences included in the questionnaire were found by us in the NCR or on the Internet using the Google system, some of them were subjected to minimal editing before being presented to the media.

Here is an example of such a trio of sentences:

(5) And without respect, there is no love, do not believe women who say otherwise! (Google)

(6) And I tell you right away: a person who has announced his candidacy will need to go through an interview.

(7) And to anyone who reports the presence of corruption at Moscow State University or Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, I will laugh in the face with pleasure.

During the experiment, respondents4 were asked to rate the proposals on a four-point scale from absolutely acceptable (3) to absolutely unacceptable (0). According to the results of the experiment, for each proposal, the average score was calculated, which was used later for comparison.

As expected, the future participles forbidden by the norm turned out to be the least acceptable of the three options (average score - 1.26), however, since, for one reason or another, the two options allowed by the grammar did not score maximum number points (the average score for past participles was 2.15, and for the most acceptable option - relative clauses - 2.39), we can say that the assessment by carriers of future participles is 53% of the recorded maximum, which, of course, is not much, however not so much that it can be neglected.

5. Thus, although in Russian the real participles of the future tense CB are prohibited by grammar, but, being structurally allowed, they are periodically found in texts (especially when replacement is impossible, i.e., first of all, in a non-initial position in participial turnover) , demonstrate noticeable similarities in behavior with "full-fledged" participial forms and are not perceived as absolutely marginal by native speakers.

4 For the experiment, 20 people aged 18 to 43 were selected who received or are receiving higher education. Schoolchildren and people with a philological education were not allowed to participate (these two groups of people, it seemed to us, could be guided in their assessments primarily not by a sense of language, but by knowledge of normative grammar, which prohibits the studied forms).

Literature

Vinogradov 1947 - V. V. Vinogradov. Russian language. The grammatical doctrine of the word. Moscow: Uchpedgiz, 1947.

Lopatin 1966 - V. V. Lopatin. Adjectivation of participles in its relation to word formation II Questions of Linguistics 5, 1966, pp. 37-47.

Shvedova (ed.) 198G - N. Yu. Shvedova (ed.). Russian grammar. T. 1-2. Moscow: Nauka, 198G.

Smotrytsky 1619 - M. Smotrytsky. Grammar of Slavensk is correct Syntaґma. Evye, 1619. Reprint: Kiev, 1979.

Shapoval, manuscript - V.V. Shapoval. Draw a house - a prize! (Participles of the future tense in our speech). (http:IIwww.ruscenter.ruI 73G.html)

Epstein 2GGG - M. N. Epstein. Participles of the future tense (doing) II Mikhail Epstein's projective lexicon. Issue 17. 2GGG. (http:IIold.russ.ruIantologIintelnetIdar17.html)

Krizanic 1984 - J. Krizanic. Gramatico izkazanje ob ruskom jeziku. Sabrana djela Jurja Krizanica. Knj. 2. Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti

The text of the work is placed without images and formulas.
Full version work is available in the "Files of work" tab in PDF format

Introduction…………………………………………………………………..3

Communion as a part of speech……………………………………………….4

Substantivation as a way of word formation of participles .................... 7

Conclusions……………………………………………………………….11

Introduction.

Language and time are the eternal problem of linguists. The language lives in time, but the time is displayed in the language. Language is changing and this evolutionary quality is inherent in it. Changes are observed at all language levels. One of the reasons for the transformation of the grammatical structure of a language is the transition of a word from one part of speech to another, a variation of which is substantiation.

The relevance of research. The substantiation of participles is a fairly ancient process. Substantives are already found in the Bible ( Going for mine ... will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire; Having ears to hear).

Lenghists have always strived for in-depth knowledge of the language (as an object of study) and those phenomena that have been analyzed for a long time. Recently, the question of the possibility of forming participles of the future tense has been increasingly raised. Philologists of different generations became interested in them: M.Ya. Glovinskaya, K.A. krapivina, V.V. Shapoval, M.N. Epstein.

Purpose of the study: studying a new type of substantiated participles - the future tense.

Research objectives:

The ability to select and systematize material for observation is developed;

To study the use of future participles in speech;

Consider the historical aspects of the formation of participles of the future tense;

Improve skills in working with scientific and reference literature.

Communion as a part of speech.

The participle is a hybrid verb-adjective form, which in the school tradition is considered as a special verb form. Participles connect the signs of a verb and an adjective, expressing the meaning of the procedural attribute of an object. Verbal signs of participles:

The nature of the verb control is preserved (for example: dream of freedom - dreaming of freedom);

The form of the corresponding verb is preserved;

The participle has two collateral forms (in accordance with the two-collateral concept) - the active and the passive voice (for example: allowed - active voice, permitted - passive voice);

The sacrament has two tense forms - present (loving, beloved) and past (loving) tense.

All verbal signs of participles are constant, variable signs are signs of an adjective: gender, number, case, full or short (for passive participles) form and the corresponding inflection in a sentence - a predicate or a definition.

Present participles are formed from the verb stem of the present tense with the help of suffixes -usch-/-yushch, -ash/-yash- - real participles, suffixes -em-, -om-, -im- - passive participles. Past participles are formed from a stem with an infinitive stem. At the same time, to form real participles, the suffixes -vsh- are used if the stem ends in a vowel (for example: hear-be - heard-who) or -sh- if the stem ends in a consonant (for example: brought-ti - brought-shi). When forming passive participles of the past tense, suffixes -nn- are added to the verb stem if the stem ends in a vowel, except for /i/ (for example: hang-t - hang-n), -enn if the stem ends in a consonant or /and/, moreover, in the latter case, / and / drops out (for example: shoot-th - shot-off, brought-ti - brought-on), -t- - to form participles from some verbs of unproductive classes with stems on i-, s-, o -, as well as from verbs of the IV productive class (for example: sshi-t - sshi-ty, wash-t - washed-ty, stab - stabbed, turn-t - turned-t). initial form the participle, like the adjective, is the nominative singular masculine.

A common feature of the use of participles is that they belong to book speech. This is explained by the history of the sacraments.

The main categories of participles refer to the elements of the literary language, borrowed from the Old Slavonic language, which affects a number of their phonetic features, for example, the presence of u in present participles: current, burning corresponding to adjectives fluid, hot, which are Old Russian participles by origin, and are also available for a number of participles before a hard consonant under stress e, while in the verbs from which they are formed, under the same conditions, there is yo (o): come, But came, invented, but invented, blossomed, But blossomed. 6

The connection of participles with the Old Slavonic language in the 18th century. noted by Lomonosov, who in his "Russian Grammar" explains about several categories of participles that they are used only from Slavic verbs and are unacceptable from Russian. So, he writes: “The real tense of the present sacrament ending in -shchy, derived from verbs of Slavic origin: crowning, writing, nourishing; but not very decent from ordinary Russians, which are unknown among the Slavs: speaking, slurring". The same is noted by him regarding the passive participles of the present tense “From Russian verbs, not used by the Slavs, produced, for example: touched, shaken, soiled, are very wild and intolerable to hearing”, and regarding the past participles of the active voice: “... for example, blurted out, blurted out, dived, dived, very disgusting." At the same time, Lomonosov also notes the great relevance of participles for high styles of speech, indicating that they "rely more decently in rhetorical and poetic writings than in simple calm or in common speech."

At present, two centuries after Lomonosov, there are no restrictions on the formation of participles from purely Russian verbs that are alien to the Old Slavonic language. And the examples of unacceptable participles demonstrated by Lomonosov do not create the impression of insulting the linguistic instinct about which he speaks with such categoricalness, and are quite acceptable. Basic ranks full participles are productive and are easily formed from any verbs, including from neoplasms ( vernalizing, vernalizing, vernalizing). The passive participles of the present tense are the least common, but they are also productive in some types of verbs ( polluted, formed, stored) and are unproductive only with the suffix -om- (carried, driven, sought).

But even now, firstly, participles are an accessory of the literary language (they are absent in dialects); secondly, they almost never occur in colloquial speech.

Despite the prohibitions of academic and school grammar, they exist. "The one who does, is able, wishes, sees, reads..." Relation to the future is an important sign of the present. Participles of the future tense are organic for the Russian language, and only conservative linguistic morality prevents their use.

Substantiation as a way of word formation of participles.

In the 60-80s. In the 20th century, the attention of researchers on the problem of substantiation was concentrated mainly on the grammatical essence of the phenomenon, methods of word formation (I.G. Golanov, E.A. Zemskaya, N.M. Shansky).

In recent years, the phenomenon of substantiation has become the subject of research in many dissertations. However, there are still different views on substantiation as a way of word formation, many problems have not been fully resolved and a number of issues remain debatable: there is no single view on the nature of substantivized words, the issue of substantiation of participial phrases has not been considered.

At the turn of two millennia, it is necessary to take stock of what has been achieved on the problem of "Communion in the Russian language", to determine the direction and path of further research.

The frequently raised topic of participles of the future tense is periodically discussed at linguistic forums, the relevant questions are sent to the reference services of the Russian language.

Until now, we have considered only lexical neoplasms on the topic of time. But even in the field of grammar, the development of the language does not stop, of course, more slowly. The best thing we can do for a language is to free it from artificial prohibitions, to legalize what the language has never stopped doing "on the sly". One of the most urgent changes in grammatical legislation is the admission of future participles.

Are there such words in the modern Russian language as "doing", "able", "succeeding", "seeing", "reading", "coming", "wishing"? Many examples of future participles can be cited from quite worthy sources of Russian literature :

Saint Philaret of Moscow: ... How pitiful is the person who has already visited him, the power of light, who is unable to hold back!

Elder Paisios: God gave me a beautiful house in such a beautiful place, which will be the envy of many rich who wish to have one for recreation.

Nicholas Roerich, "Origins": But in many places folklore is no longer preserved; except where he ended up in the stationary departments of the museum, and only by chance a musician or writer will stumble upon him, wishing to revive these parchments and scrolls.

Psalms 117:26: Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! (also Mat.21:9; Mar.11:9; Luk.19:38) (in former translations - "coming").

Future participles are regularly and productively used in modern Russian. In particular, on the Internet, where "deviations from the norm" are less subject to editorial control. Search system Google finds 88 uses of the participle "wishing", 70 - "doing", 45 - "seeing", and these statistics apply only to the masculine singular form of the nominative case.

It should be noted that future participles in the modern language are found in all stylistic contexts: scientific(Modern science is waiting for a new Einstein, opening the unified law of all four physical interactions), literary(I will be the wife of a knight able tame the dragon, or I will never marry, - the princess stamped her foot), official business(Publishing house, publishing this novel may make a hefty profit, but will be forced to spend it on legal fees), journalistic(India, ranked third ... among the world's largest economies and soon becoming the most populous power in the world, concluded that, in order to occupy its rightful place in world affairs, it must become a member of the nuclear club) And informal communication of Internet users(Probably, just as directly, his writer will look into his eyes soon coming of death; Baghirov hoped that someday he would turn out a big deal, and the amount would fall into his pocket, making his enough independent and independent from the will of his parents).

However, from the point of view of the dominant grammar, there are no such word forms and cannot be: they represent a forbidden, "repressed" category of "future participles".

Looking into modern textbooks of the Russian language, we will find such firm formulations: "participles have forms of the present and past tense, they do not have forms of the future tense"; "Unlike verbs, participles do not have a future tense"; "the form of the participle of the future tense is absent."

In modern literary language the forms of active participles in -sch from verbs of the perfect form (with the meaning of the future tense) are not used, "thinking to compose", "trying to assure", "able to explain". D. E. Rosenthal

However, no convincing arguments are given against the participles of the future tense. I will be grateful to the grammarians who will be able to explain why this cannot be said.

Perhaps the logic of the ban is as follows. The participle combines the properties of a verb and an adjective: the action performed by an object acts as a sign of this object. "Reader" - the person whose sign is the action "read". It is impossible to define an object in terms of what it does not do or has done, but only will do.

But this logic is extremely vulnerable, especially considering the fact that the Greek language, on the basis of which the grammar of Old Slavonic was largely created, has participles of the future tense. There are participles of the future tense in Sanskrit, and Latin, and in Esperanto, and in Ido, and in the language of the Avesta (beginning of the 1st millennium BC). Why can't a future action serve as a sign of an object, since potential signs are just as important as actual ones? Culture, as the unity and interaction of times, cannot do without potential signs as determinants for the phenomena of the present. The very word "culture", the Latin "cultura" is a future participle from the verb colere, "cultivate", "process", "care", "care", "cultivate", "educate".

We all bear the marks of our future, our possibilities. The fact that a student will read a book, even if presumably, sets him apart from those who will not read it. The fact that a politician will fulfill his promises, even if presumably, distinguishes him from those who do not.

conclusions

In the ban on future participles, perhaps, mistrust affects traditional culture to the future and the possible, underestimated, in comparison with the past and present, the logical and grammatical status of the future as definitive for things. This prohibition existed not only in Soviet era, but apparently earlier. Otherwise, Vadim Shershenevich would not have proclaimed in his 1920 Imagist manifesto:

It is necessary, finally, to create the communion of the future according to the principle: whoever comes, who sees, who makes noise. "My surname, noisy for centuries" - this is an example of an agrammatical phrase of a truly poetic speech.

Shershenevich's appeal, as far as I know, went unanswered, but the need for future communions remained. Recently, the poetess Olga Sedakova admitted: " I miss the future participle or something like a gerund in Russian". And sometimes she resorts to this form, for example" this is a saucer of water that reads the location of the planets". Like Felix Krivin: " And Cirrotauma, who has never seen the light and will never see it, shines, shines..."Like Viktor Pivovarov, writing about Genrikh Sapgir:" moral man without moralism. Easily, naturally does no evil."

Not only poetry, but speech as a whole lacks participles of the future tense, especially since modern language provides convenient grammatical forms for their formation. The same suffixes "-usch-" ("-yusch-"), "-asch-" ("-yash-"), which serve to form present participles, can also be used to form future participles - but already from perfective verbs ("to do, to be able, to see, to read...").

The question of the future participles is debatable, but this phenomenon is already a real linguistic fact of our time, and the recognition of the forms of the future participles as the norm is a matter of the near future, and the proof of this is the ever-increasing frequency of their use in all styles of language, both in participial phrases and their substantiated forms, for example: finder lost mobile phone with heart keychain, please call…(from ad); Not passing medical examination will not be allowed to work(from ad); reading whole from cover to cover encyclopedic Dictionary does not necessarily become an erudite; Wishing have a good rest in Turkey can contact the travel agency at the address ...(from ad).

Bibliography.

Dal V.I. Dictionary living Great Russian language. T.Z.M., 1955, p.459

A. N. Gvozdeev. Essays on the style of the Russian language.

Access mode: http://www.zaslavsky.ru/rez/vahtangov2.htm/

http://lib.ru/RUSS_DETEKTIW/BONDAR_A/dog.txt_Piece40.01/

Access mode: http://www.veer.info/59/dar_fut_partic1.html

Melikyan V.Yu. Essays on the syntax of an indivisible sentence / V.Yu. Melikyan. - Rostov n / D., 2001.

Chernega L.V. Substantiation of participles in diachronic and synchronic aspects / Bulletin of the TSPI, humanities, spec. Issue No. 1, 2011.

Vysotskaya I.V. Syncretism in the system of parts of speech of the modern Russian language / I.V. Vysotskaya. - M., 2006.

Objective (associated with the adjective) signs of the participle are the categories of gender, number and case, the possibility of forming short forms in passive participles, the syntactic function of an agreed definition.

The participle is used in many Indo-European languages, Arabic, Hungarian, and also in many Eskimo languages ​​(for example, in Sireniki).

In other languages, together with the gerund, it forms a special part of speech - English. Participle, German Partizip.

In russian language

The question of the status of participles has been and has been repeatedly resolved in Russian studies, however, linguists agree that participles are formed from a verb. The formation of participles is closely related to the category of aspect and transitivity. For example, present and past participles can be formed from imperfective verbs, and only past participles can be formed from perfective verbs (although the meaning of future participles is doer, writer- very transparent). In addition, passive participles can only be formed from transitive verbs.

The present participles are formed from the stem of the present tense. Active voice forms are formed using suffixes -usch- working) And -ash- holding). Passive forms of the present tense are formed with the help of suffixes -om- , -eat- for verbs of the first conjugation ( slave) And -them- - for verbs of the second conjugation ( persecuted).

Past participles are formed from the stem of the infinitive. Active participles are formed with the suffix -vsh- for verbs whose stem ends in a vowel ( holding). With a suffix -sh- such participles are formed from verbs with a stem into a consonant ( growing up).

Some verbs have specificity in the formation of participles, such verbs include verbs in -st , during the formation of which the original basis is truncated ( shrunken). From verbs with suffix -Well- it is possible to form two forms of participles, for example, extinguished - extinguished.

Passive past participles are formed using suffixes -nn- (from verbs in -at : read, Lost), -enn- (from verbs in -it And -whose : baked), -T- (from monosyllabic verbs: crumpled).

Passive participles, as a rule, have full ( verified) and short ( verified) forms. Short forms vary by gender and number.

However, not all passive participles of the present tense have a short form. Since the passive participles of the present tense ( slave, readable) refer mainly to book speech, there are some stylistic restrictions on the formation of such forms.

Therefore, from colloquial and some neutral verbs (for example, beat, cover, feed and so on) passive participles of the present tense are often not formed.

Also, not all verbs form passive past participles in Russian.

Participles are divided into passive past and present tenses, real past and present tenses.

Passive present participles

Formed from imperfective verbs, transitive with the help of suffixes -em- and -im-:

• -im- is written if the participle is formed from the verb of the II conjugation.
• -eat- ; -om- is written if the participle is formed from the verb of the I conjugation.

Examples:driven, led, driven

Passive past participles

Formed from perfective verbs, transitive with the help of suffixes -enn- (-enn-); -nn-; -T-; -en- (-yon-); -n-.

Examples: offended, fed, rejected.

Active present participles

Formed from verbs of an imperfect form, transitive and intransitive with the help of suffixes -usch- (-yusch-), and -ash- (-yash-).

• -usch- (-yusch-) is written if the participle is formed from the verb of the I conjugation.
• -ash- (-ash-) is written if the participle is formed from the verb of conjugation II.

Examples: whistling, trembling.

Real past participles

Formed from perfective verbs with the help of suffixes:

• -vsh- is used in words whose stem ends in a vowel.
• -sh- is used in words whose stem ends in a consonant.

Examples:staring, fading

Adjectivation

Adjectivation the transition of various parts of speech into adjectives is called, but most often it is participles that undergo adjectivation.

When adjectivized, participles lose their verbal categories and begin to designate a permanent, static, unchanging sign, thus, participles are rethought.

Grammar signs

The participle changes according to the characteristics of the adjective. It changes by numbers, by cases, by gender in the singular.

The participle can be perfective and imperfective, past and present. These signs for communion do not change.

Some scientists consider participles to be an independent part of speech, since they have a number of features that are not characteristic of the verb.

As verb forms, participles have some grammatical features. They are perfect kind and imperfect; present time and past; returnable And irrevocable. The forms of the future tense do not have participles.

Participles are real and passive.

Denoting a sign of an object, participles, like adjectives, grammatically depend on nouns that agree with them, that is, they become in the same case, number and gender as the nouns they refer to.

Participles change by cases, by numbers, by gender (in the singular).

Case, number, gender of participles is determined by the case, number, gender of the noun to which the participle refers. Some participles, like adjectives, have a full and short form., Formed by adding to real communion elapsed time particles would, is debatable. However, similar forms are sometimes found in the works of N.V. Gogol, and in the form of a stable turnover would do honor- many other authors.

Participial

A participle with dependent words is called participle turnover. In a sentence, participial turnover and participle are a separate or non-separate agreed definition.

In Russian, the participial turnover is often separated by commas. If the participial turnover is after the word being defined, it is separated by commas on both sides. When the participial turnover is in front of the word being defined, commas are not put, except when the word being defined is expressed by a personal pronoun or the participial turnover indicates the cause. If after the participial turnover the end of the sentence, then a comma is placed only before the participial turnover.

Examples:

• A hastily written program performed an illegal operation.
• A hastily written program performed an illegal operation.

Simple sentences can be overloaded with participial phrases:

• A woodpecker chiseling a tree growing in a forest covered with snow falling from its branches is very cold.

Participles have only present and past tense forms. The forms of the future tense of the participles were not fixed, which is due to the presence of an imperfect form of the compound form of the future tense in verbs (it is impossible to form a participle from “I will write”).

From verbs nes. species, participles of the present and past tense are formed, and from the verbs of owls. species - only past participles.

Participle tense forms can have both absolute and relative meanings.

Relative participle times

The full forms of participles, which perform the function of a definition in a sentence, most often have a relative meaning. At the same time, the type of the relative time of the participle (relative preceding or relative simultaneous) depends on the type of participle, as well as on the tense form of the verb-predicate used in the sentence.

participle	predicate-verb	value refers. communion time
nesov. V. present and past. temp.	in the form of past temp.	simultaneity	I lay on my back and saw the clouds floating quietly above me.
nesov. V. current time	in the form of present or bud. temp.	simultaneity	I lie on my back and see the clouds quietly floating above me.
nesov. V. past temp.	in the form of present temp.	precedence	Today on the street I meet an actor who played in the "Forest".
owls. kind	in the form of pr., present, bud. temp.	precedence	The extinguished ashes will no longer flare up (P.).

Absolute participle time

1. Full forms of participles less often denote absolute time. As a rule, the absolute tense is expressed by past participles with verbs in the future tense form ( To the mentors who kept our youth ... not remembering evil, we will reward for the good (P.)).

2. Absolute time can be expressed by short participles that are part of a compound nominal predicate.

If such a predicate includes the zero form of the link with the value of the present tense, then the participle indicates the presence in the present tense of the result of an action committed in the past ( The laundry is dry. Article outlined.).

If the predicate contains a link in the form of the past tense, then the participle shows that the result of an action performed in the past is also referred to the past tense ( The linen was dry. The article has been revised.).

5. Collateral meanings of participles

The pledge meanings of participles need a special characteristic.

Passive participles are always participles of the passive voice.

As for real participles, then among them may be:

a) participles of the active voice ( boy reading a book);

b) passive participles (necessarily with the postfix -sya): story written by the author;

c) participles of revocable pledge ( hugging friends);

d) participles outside the voice category, formed from non-voiced verbs ( stone lying on the road).

Thus, we can conclude that the concept of "actual participle" is much broader than the concept of "actual participle". DP with the postfix -sya, having the meaning of a passive voice, are used only when the corresponding passive participle is not formed or is of little use:

A house built by workers. - A house built by workers is not formed.

A house being built by workers. - A house built by workers is of little use.