Sitko, А, Struk, І, Yencheva, H
Kitaêznavčì doslìdžennâ 2021, 2:136-147
https://doi.org/10.51198/chinesest2021.02.111
Section: Chinese Language and Literature
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: 

The article deals with the systematic multifaceted contrastive analysis of the English, Ukrainian and Chinese syntactic structure. It was found that the researches of the Chinese syntactic structure were quite different in comparison with those of English and Ukrainian. Moreover, the sentences of analyzed languages may reflect both allomorphic and isomorphic features. A comparative analysis of the structure in terms of their functioning in different languages is conducted. The research resorts to the following research methods: a continuous sampling method, methods of analysis and synthesis; a descriptive method and the distributive method. The article deals with the convergent and divergent features of syntactic structures of the Chinese, English and Ukrainian languages, as well as the comparative analysis of their grammatical characteristics. The Chinese, English and Ukrainian sentences have different structures. There are three types of sentences depending upon its structure or formation in Chinese and Ukrainian. There are four types of sentences in English. Convergent and divergent features of the Chinese, English and Ukrainian interrogative constructions including their structure and semantics are analyzed. The study demonstrates that interrogative sentences of the English, Chinese and Ukrainian languages differ both in structure, semantics, and communicative purpose. Also, the Chinese sentence words order is very different from Ukrainian and English. The paper features semantic parameters of subject-predicate sentence comparative structure of the Ukrainian, English and Chinese languages. There is evidence that semantic feature of an interrogative sentence efficiently and intuitively quantifies linguistic similarity between all analyzed languages. Particularly, the differences in actual division of the sentence depend, to a great extent, on perception of rhematic components of messages expressed by predicate of the statement respectively.

Keywords: allomorphic and isomorphic features, contrastive analysis, grammatical categories, interrogatives, syntactic constructions

Full text (PDF)

References: 
  1. Alpatov V. (2001), Istoriya lingvisticheskikh ucheniy, Yazyki slavyanskoy kul’tury, Moskva. (In Russian).
  2. Bevzenko S.P., Lytvyn L.P. and Symyrenko H.V. (2005), Suchasna ukrayins’ka mova, Vyshcha shkola, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
  3. Blokh M.Ya. (2000), Teoreticheskiye osnovy gramatiki, Vysshaya shkola, Moskva. (In Russian).
  4. Vykhovanets I.R. (1993), Hramatyka ukrayins”koyi movy, Lybid”, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
  5. Zhluktenko Yu.O. (1981) Porivnyal’ni doslidzhennya z hramatyky anhliys’koyi, ukrayins’koyi ta rosiys’koyi mov, Naukova dumka, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
  6. Ivanova I.P., Burlakova V.V. and Pocheptsov G.G. (1981), Teoreticheskaya grammatika sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka, Nauka, Moskva. (In Russian).
  7. Il’ish B.A. (1971), The Structure of Modern English Language, Prosveshcheniye, L’vov. (In English).
  8. Dobrushina N. (2014), Imperativ i ego formy, available at : http://www.krugosvet.ru. (In Russian).
  9. Kobrina N.A., Korneyeva E.A., Ossovskaya M.I. and Guzeyeva K.A. (2002), Grammatika angliyskogo yazyka, Soyuz, Sankt-Peterburg. (In Russian).
  10. Kondratenko N.V. (2001), Pytal’ni rechennya v ukrayins’komu poetychnomu movlenni: avtor. dys. …kand. filol. nauk, Odes’kyy nats. un-t. Odesa. (In Ukrainian).
  11. Saman’eho D-M.A. and Sitko A.V. (2018), “Syntaksychni osoblyvosti perekladu tvoriv khudozhn’oyi literatury”. Proceedings of the 5th Scientific and Practical Internet Conference, October 24-25, Slavyansk, Ukraine, pp. 116-34. (In Ukrainian).
  12. Sitko A.V. (2011) Vidtvorennya komunikatyvnoyi semantyky anhliys’kykh interohatyvnykh konstruktsiy u perekladi : avtoref. dys. …kand. filol. nauk, Odes’kyi nats. Ped. un-t. Odesa, 19 s. (In Ukrainian).
  13. Sitko A.V. (2011) Vidtvorennya komunikatyvnoyi semantyky anhliys’kykh interohatyvnykh konstruktsiy u perekladi : dys. …kand. filol. nauk, Odes’kyi nats. Ped. un-t. Odesa. (In Ukrainian).
  14. Sitko A.V. and Struk I.V. (2016), “Adekvatnist’ ta ekvivalentnist’ u perekladi movnykh osoblyvostey”. Sciences of Europe. 2016. Vol. 10 (10). pp. 122-126. (In Ukrainian).
  15. Tan’ Aosh·chan. (2002), Problemy skrytoy grammatiki: Sintaksis, semantika i pragmatika yazyka izoliruyushchego stroya (na primere kitayskogo yazyka), Yazyki slavyanskoy kul’tury, Moskva. (In Russian).
  16. Shvyrka Ye.O. (2016), “Linhvistychnyy portret kytays’koyi movy” in I.M. Chepurna (Ed), Ukraine-China: dialogue of cultures, Proceedings of the 6th International scientific-practical conference, pp. 107-113. (In Ukrainian).
  17. Shcherbachuk N.P. (2006), Semantyko-syntaksychna struktura prostoho rechennya u dialohichnomu movlenni: avtoref. dys. … kand. filol. nauk. Kyyivs’kyi natsional’nyi universytet imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Kyiv, 19 s. (In Ukrainian).
  18. Shutova Ye.I. (1991), Sintaksis sovremennogo kitayskogo yazyka. Nauka, Moskva (In Russian).
  19. Matthews Stephen and Yip Virginia. (1994), Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar, Routledge. London, New-York. (In English).