Реферат на тему «Yes-No» questions with positive and negative orientation

Содержание:

INTRODUCTION.. 2

1. General provisions for interrogative sentences in
English. 2

2. General (yes/no questions) in English. 8

CONCLUSION.. 14

REFERENCES. 15

Appendix 1. Glossary. 16

Введение:

The question as a communicative
type of expression refers to the most problematic speech units and has always
attracted the attention of representatives of the most diverse fields of
knowledge. Such attention to the issue is because many important linguistic
aspects related to thinking, cognition and judgment, which are essential for
communication, find their direct expression. In this regard, interrogation as a
linguistic problem remains open for researchers of different directions.

The object of the research in the
abstract is an interrogative sentence in English. The subject of the study is a
general interrogative sentence in English. The aim of this paper is to consider
all possible classifications of the general interrogative sentence in English.
To achieve the goal, the following tasks were set:

1. To study the general grammar rules
on the subject of research.

2. To analyze interrogative sentences
in terms of the speech actions they express.

3. Consider the types of general
interrogative sentences.

As research methods, there are
elements of comparative and descriptive analysis. In conclusion, the basic
theoretical provisions on this issue are summarized.

Заключение:

Based on the foregoing, the
following conclusions can be made. With the help of the question as an indirect
speech act, both a request for information that the speaker does not have, and
a request, advice, expression, and other speech acts can be expressed. From the
point of view of the theory of speech acts, the specificity of an interrogative
statement is that, as an indirect speech act, an interrogative statement can
express a wide range of intentions.

An interrogative statement as an
indirect speech act is characterized by a discrepancy in the form and
communicative orientation of the statement. The communicative-informative
aspect of any sentence is two-pronged: on the one hand, this is the general
communicative content of the sentence, which is in accordance with the
syntactic form, on the other hand, this is the possible content of the speech
act expressed by the sentence. Thus, the problem arose of distinguishing
between the interrogative sentence and the interrogative utterance, since the
speech act of the question is not always aimed at obtaining information.

The traditional classification of
interrogative sentences is based on the nature of the question expressed by the
sentence. Based on this feature, researchers identify general questions, special
questions, as well as alternative and dividing questions, which are a kind of
general questions. The classification of the means of expressing the question
distinguishes lexical and morphological means. Taking into account the role of
interrogative sentences in the communication process allows you to create a
different classification of interrogative sentences.

From the point of view of the
communicative approach, interrogative sentences are divided into verifying
questions, appellate questions, cross-questions, clarifying questions,
explicating questions, anticipating, identifying questions and emotionally
interrogative statements.

Фрагмент текста работы:

1. General provisions for
interrogative sentences in English

Question is a form of thought
expressed in the main language by a sentence that is pronounced or written when
they want to ask something, that is, to obtain information of interest.

In any language, if they say a
question, they use interrogative intonation, and if they do, they put a
question mark [1] at the end and / or use interrogative particles [2]: whether,
not … whether, what, what, how , perhaps, is it really that if, but, yes, the
truth is not it, is it so, is it not so, is it true; interrogative pronouns:
who, what, what, what, whose, who, how much, how, where, where, where, where,
when, why, why, why, how much. Using these tools, any non-questioning sentence
can become a question or a question. The person asking the question usually
awaits an answer. An exception is a rhetorical question for which no answer is
required. [8]

In some languages, interrogative
sentences have a strictly defined word order. For example, in English, the
question first comes with the predicate (or its auxiliary part), and then the
subject.

The theory of speech acts, the
foundations of which were laid by J. Austin, P.F. Stroson and J. Serlem, as the
minimum unit of verbal communication, considers a speech act, understood as an
updated sentence and consisting of three components: purposefulness
[illocution], speech (pronunciation) [locution], achievement of the desired
consequences [perlocution]. Thus, the goal (intention) of the speaker and the orientation
of the speech act to a specific reaction of the addressee, the result of the
speech act, are of great importance; that is, the effect, consequences of
speaking become part of the speech act. In contrast to formal syntactic
studies, in which a sentence is examined as a statement taken out of the
context of communication, pragmatics includes the addressee, the communication
situation, and the “pragmatic competencies” of the speakers, which
significantly extends the range of problems studied. With the addressee of the
speech, first of all, the problems of understanding, interpreting the utterance
and those rules and principles that are used by the addressee to derive both
superficial and latent or indirect meanings of the utterance, and the true goals
of the speaker, as well as the (expected) reaction of the addressee to the
utterance are associated the speaker (verbal and non-verbal, direct and
indirect). Without considering the addressee, the perlocative effect of the
utterance or the influence of the utterance of the addressee is inconceivable:
informational, emotional, aesthetic. The context or situation of communication
is interpreted by the theory of speech acts primarily as a set of preparatory
conditions for the successful implementation and recognition of a speech act.