Modern linguistic research pays great attention to such an interesting issue as superphrasal unity, since a large number of problems are associated with it. A single term for such a syntactic unit does not yet exist in science, it is called either a "coherent text" or a "set of sentences" - quite a lot of different interpretations. However, the study of this phenomenon is the most urgent task of the present time. The remarkable linguist and literary critic Vinogradov devoted a lot of time to the study of superphrasal unity back in the forties of the last century.
Definition
There are quite a few variations regarding the exact definition of this term. However, each option reflects the main essence: it is a complex syntactic whole, that is, a separatea speech unit consisting of several sentences combined in meaning. Sometimes researchers simplify the task by equating the rights of superphrasal unity and an ordinary paragraph. Where did the word "superphrasal" come from in the definition? This is due to the fact that unity does not end within one phrase, one sentence. And, here the researchers are right, very often, almost always, there is a match with paragraph boundaries.
A paragraph is almost always characterized by thematic unity, since the transition to a new written speech is always indicated by an indent - from a new line. However, the concept of superphrasal unity is somewhat broader than a regular paragraph. You can find as many cases as you like when you can notice the continuation of what has been said, it's just that smaller topics appear inside the main topic - side ones. They are just as important in meaning, and they definitely require isolation with the help of graphics.
Organization
A complex syntactic whole (or superphrasal unity) in the text is also built on the basis of a homogeneous statement, that is, a realized sentence filled with lexically and expressing an absolutely specific goal setting. In a text, we usually come across not even sentences in their terminological sense, but speech units, statements that specify the meaning. If two or more statements are combined structurally and thematically, a superphrasal unity is obtained. You don't have to look far for examples. Basically, any text will do.
Here it is necessary to expand the knowledge of terminology a little more. What is the theme, this source, the firststatement point? This is that part of it that is closest to the reader or listener (recipient of this statement). But there is another term - rhema. In translation - the core. This is all that hidden, unknown, new that awaits the recipient of the statement in the process of getting acquainted with the superphrasal unity, the types of which are very numerous. It is organized precisely by means of a theme-rhematic sequence, where, as it were, the rheme is thematized step by step.
Borders
There are two parameters for defining the boundaries of superphrasal unity. For example, in the volume of the general theme given in the work, and in the volume of a micro-theme of a much smaller particularity. In the transition from one micro-theme to another, that very border will be discovered. The means of superphrasal unity can be used in a variety of ways, but in any case it remains monothematic, only when one unity is combined with another, transitions can be observed - including from microthemes to macrothemes.
In 1998, a wonderful book by Zolotova, Onipenko and Sidorova was published, devoted to these issues of determining the boundaries of a complex syntactic whole. This is "Communicative Grammar of the Russian Language". Previously, these studies began in "Essays on Functional Syntax" and some other works by G. A. Zolotova. In addition, Gasparov's book "Language. Memory. Image" was published in 1996, where the concept of super-phrasal unity is also widely considered.
About categorytext
As a text, it is customary to consider almost any logically meaningful and grammatically correct sequence of words - from one sentence or more. Gasparov's text is opposed to language. He tries to show the principles of internal organization as opposite, and in this he is not consistent everywhere. From a linguistic point of view, it is probably impossible to comprehend all the problems of the text.
It is all the more difficult to imagine a sample of superphrasal unity, since the theory of Russian text formation is not sufficiently developed. It is necessary to develop an idea of at least a unit of text formation and to identify the composition of such units in the system of their relationships. For each unit, as detailed a description as possible should be given. Linguists constantly rely in their research on similarities with traditional linguistic descriptions, but it is necessary to identify the distinctive features of individual units of text formation in their superphrasal unity. In English, this is much easier to do, and there are a lot of works in this direction.
From the three main types of syntactic links - subordinating, coordinating and preactive - you can easily choose any examples by opening the book of any English classic. For example, Dickens. His subordination (subordination) is used especially often, and the relationship can be established by checking (replacing the entire subordinating group). If the core as a whole is preserved, you can see a change in the semantic content, or the entire structure changes with a violation of the semanticinvariance.
Semantic web
Semantics in the language structure distinguishes between the lexical and grammatical meanings of language units. Which are all interconnected. They are combined at the top level, forming a semantic network, the cells of which correspond to their lexical meanings, and the links between them reflect the semantic component. Grammatical meanings determine the nature of all these relationships.
A linguistic message representing a coherent text is realized in the dynamics of the display during analysis, and at the same time, both components of the meanings of each linguistic unit clarify and highlight the corresponding elements of this message. Thus, certain connections that form superphrasal unities become apparent.
The holistic structure lies in the numerous external signals that serve as links between sentences. The writer finds these signals using a variety of means that provide superphrasal unity. These are pronouns and adverbs, this is the form of the article (in English), this is the use of different tenses (many writers know that it is possible to "mix" tenses, this adds liveliness to the text), these are anaphoric and cataphoric connections between sentences that provide the function of text formation.
Analogue of thought
Since the unity of the structure is built in a complex way, stretching from one sentence to another, it acquires semantic integrity only in the context formed by coherent speech, and acts as part of a completely completecommunications. They study the super-phrasal unity in four aspects: as a semantic structure, in terms of pragmatics, then syntactics, and, finally, the functioning of a given message. In this sense, it is quite logical to consider the structure of such unity as an analogue of thought.
Syntax considers the division of the text in its structural aspect according to the concept of a complex syntactic whole (STS). In theory, this concept is quite different from the concept of a paragraph, as Rosenthal wrote in his time, defining FCS as a combination of closely interconnected sentences with a more complete development of thought.
Paragraph and STS
There is a difference between these concepts, which many researchers do not note in their works. For example, prominent scientists Losev, Galperin and many others claim that when analyzing the structure of sentences and the functions of a paragraph, these concepts are confused. Indeed, in texts that are neutral from the point of view of stylistics, the boundaries of the FCS and the paragraph may well coincide.
But in literary texts this order is most often violated. Absolutely any development is possible here: it may not fit in one paragraph of the SCS completely, and several SCSs can coexist in one paragraph. The writer usually pursues his own stylistic goals: the first case is the expression of emphasis, the second is the unification of events into a single picture. That is why multi-level units - a paragraph and a complex syntactic whole - must be studied separately, they cannot be adjusted to one definition.
How recognition works
Recognized word -the first agent is stored in memory by the time the next word is recognized - the second agent. And as soon as the two agents are integrated, there is a leap in the quality of understanding the text, since it is already possible to include analyzers - both syntactic, and morphological, and prosodic. Analyzers decide the most important thing - which element is more important, since both cannot be equivalent. One of them is the figure, and the other will serve as the background.
The semantic analyzer will select the upper category - the general one, and will do it correctly if the whole image is opposed to something. A less important element is the theme, that is, the background. What is it about. But the most important element is the rheme (that is, the figure) - what exactly is being said. It is the rheme that indicates categorical relations. And together they center the focus with the integration of all details. Two words, of course, are not enough to select a general category, it is difficult to form a holistic image. The process continues with the addition of other recognized words until a generalization is made.
Scaling up
The minimum unit that forms a complete image, that is, the meaning, is called a syntagma. Then you can consider the text enlarged: if a number of syntagmas are integrated into a separate sentence, and a number of sentences into a superphrasal unity, a number of such units into a subtext, then a number of subtexts will make up the whole text.
From this we can conclude that a complex syntactic whole is syntax itself. While the paragraph is a completely different category, it isunit of text linguistics. And super-phrasal unity is a linguistic phenomenon that science, for all the duration (about a hundred years) of its study, has not yet decomposed into all theoretical shelves.
What is the paragraph for
First of all, a paragraph helps with reading, because there is always a special long separating pause between paragraphs. It kind of sums up the entire content of the paragraph and smoothly transfers the reader or listener to the next one.
These stylistic text functions are very important: this is how accents are placed, this is how the composition manifests itself, the principle of selecting test units and the layout of the material becomes clearer, the degree of generalization or, conversely, the fragmentation of the depicted, the degree of completeness of what is said is shown.
Why do we need superphrasal unity
SFU is a concept of a higher order. These are several sentences that are connected by adverbs or conjunctions, lexical or pronominal repetitions, which are the same in time, the article changes from definite to indefinite or not. The main thing is not the means that are used, but the result obtained - the generality of the topic. This concept is both in the competence of literary criticism and in the competence of syntax.
All elements work for a cohesive unity, they repeat something or replace, point to something or generalize. All factors are taken into account in the same way as if we sequentially "partitioned" the proposal. Communication always exists, whether the writer uses grammatical or syntacticspecial means, or uses the usual adjacency in meaning.
