The meaning raised as a result of using (RU), first of all, is formed from internal possibility of the language unit using (PU), and second, impacted by surrounding environment, or other words, by other language units of Syntagma composition as well as various factors outside the language system. Speaking conditionally, if to look at the clock as a complex system, constituting many interrelated working parts, it is obvious that the failure of any working part (e.g. spring) out of this set will result in loss of usability for a whole system, or other words its dysfunction.
The same can be observed in the language system. It’s known that if to take out some linguistic units from the particular text in a whole, for example, the person indicators, the text, left with no possibility for specific purpose using (ex. communicative, aesthetic) loses its informational meaning.
Whatsoever the science we would take, there is always the result of using, arising from the purpose of using. For example, the circulatory system, studied by medicine and other natural sciences is a result of activity of the heart.
Owing to this process, the heart supplies system with viability , constituting a part of it, and preserving it. If however, refer to using in linguistics, this would suggest an idea of a role, mission and purpose of using of any language mean.
Each fulfilling goal, first of all, will be at the level of possibility. It means that the goal transforms into achieved result only if there is an opportunity to accomplish such purpose (if applicable).
Consequently, the very using includes the possibility of using (PU) and the result of using (RU) [1, p. 304]. In our opinion, there is a range of using along with possibility of language means using. It seems that in the term the function-potency pointed out by A.V. Bondarko the possibility and the range of using are becoming one.
Yet based on the analysis of the material of the Kazakh language we think that it is correct to study them separately as two borderlines of language means. If possibility of using is a general property of the language means, the range of using is derived from its private property.
Every language unit is polysemous but in traditional grammar it is defined only at the level of the system which it belong to, and the aspect of its polysemanticism is not entirely disclosed.
For example, the verbal participles as a functional type of the verb are described at the level of morphology, and are given passing mention to their participation in producing tense forms and some syntactic functions.
This can be called an initial level of acquaintance with the language system and acquaintance with the language. Since this description is based on the principle “from the form to a meaning”, a prime focus is drawn to unit’s original meaning (OM). There is a definition given by A. Baytursynov for verbal participles: “the short form of paired verbs which uttered first is called an verbal participle”.
For example, “the first words in expressions zhaza ber, қarap tur, zhurіp keldі are verbs-participles” [2, p. 245]. This meaning is OM of the verbal participle determined at the first level with the form driven. Refer to the Table 1:
Linguistic unit and its original meaning (OM)
Possibility of using (PU)
Range of using (RnU)
The result of using (RzU)
Requires the closing verb
At all levels is used in the subordinated meaning.
a) formation of tense forms
b) formation of compound verbs
c) formation of similar parts
g) is adjunct
d) formation of subordinate command of complex structures
а) formation of FSF (functional semantic field) temporality
б) formation of FSF aspectuality
в) formation of FSF taxis etc.
Listed in the second and third columns of Table 1 the PU and the RnU linguistic units in direction “from the form to the meaning”, but respectively to a principle of using are determined by initial methods of functional grammar, described as a group.
There studies were conducted in the Kazakh linguistics on such area concerning verbal participles forms. There not only paradigmatic line of RnU specified in Table 1 is determined but syntagmatic chain [2, p. 736] as well. We’ll try to define the PU and the RnU of separate linguistic units by making an analysis of verbal participles forms:
Suffixes of verbal participles take part in producing adverbial modifier of manner, reason, purpose and time: khatulana shykhty (modifier of manner), sagynyp keldіm (cause), aytkhaly keldіm (purpose), tan’ ata kettі (time). Additionally, the suffixes of verbal participles perform the function of creating similar adjuncts in the sentence. In summary, it can be shown by the following scheme.
a) Formation of adverbial modifier of manner
b) formation of adverbial modifier of cause;
c) formation of adverbial modifier of purpose;
g) formation of adverbial modifier of time;
d) formation of similar adverbial modifier.
This is one part of possibilities of verbal participles forms using. In other words, it is an indicator of some part of the using paradigm. From following analysis below, we will make sure that the range of using of these forms is extremely wide.
Initial stage of combinations move, including adverbial adjuncts expressed by verbal participles forms, to compound verbs are performed by simple compound verbs. They relate to the second function of verbal participles suffixes in the language after performing the function of verbal participle in the sentence. Therefore, they cannot be put in one level with adverbial function. For this reason, we have identified them in a separate paradigmatic line. Summing up, it can be shown by the following scheme:
a) A simple compound verb – Sen baryp kel.
b) Analytical verb – Sіz muny aita kormenіz.
c) Descriptive verb – Koreyіn dep baryp edіm.
d) Fixed verb – Olar khol khusyryp otyr.
The range of verbal participles using can be seen under their using as similar predicates.
The similar predicates formed by verbal participles forms, is difficult to distinguish. Sometimes they are like members of the adverbial parts. By the fact that two verbs are implying an action appearing as a separate process, they can be related to the similar predicates.
The similar predicates formed by verbal participles make a phenomenon that has arisen from the goal of abridged expression of a thought. If the predicates will have separate subjects in a sentence, formed by verbal participles then such sentences from simple become complex. Thus, based on the adverbial adjuncts of simple sentence formed by the verbal participles by means of derivative relations have developed such types of subordinated clauses, as final clause, clause of cause, clause of time and clause of manner.
One might assume that on the basis of similar predicates formed by the verbal participles suffixes, sub clauses have emerged that do not fall under the principal clause in terms of sense. Refer
to a Table 4:
As the Table 4 shows syntagmatic function of verbal participles is small, these forms at the first paradigmatic lines are involved in the formation of such variety of compound verbs, as compound verbs and all other four types. And since the linguistic nature of similar predicates in the Kazakh linguistics is still understudied, there is yet lack of way to show the syntagmatic range of this line using.
The fourth line of the range of using the verbal participles implies their participation in the formation of complex structures. Comparing to the third line there a great range of using syntagmatic line is observed. For example, it is known that the verbal participles suffixes are involved into forming six types of subordinating structures (mode of action, cause, time, purpose, consistency and concessiveness).
Though, the following Table 5 is aimed to demonstrate how a lower-level units are transforming to the base for complex structures formation.
As the Table shows, although formed similar predicates (A) in 3 rd paradigmatic line by the verbal participles are subordinated as for formal side, it became a base for forming sentences, that are free from the principal part as for sense bearing. Regarding verbal participle functions in 1st paradigmatic line (B) the subordinated second part of the pair are subjected to the principal part by both meaning and formally and acts out as one of its members, which in turn became the base for the complex sentences formation.
It would be wise to conduct a study in the area of any linguistic units so that to determine the range of language units using. According to observations of scientists, the formocentrical area, that is, “from formal indicator to a function” is the most essential step to move to the second level of functional grammar, that is, a method of research “from function to a formal indicator (means)” [3, p. 3 ].
Not only the above verbal participles forms, but each functional unit has a specific range of using, unlike to others. Range of using is built from a set of individual usages, typical to that unit. The question arises: where from originates or how forms the range of using and the possibility of using? As pointed out by scholars, designated for this area exploration, this phenomenon comes out from using the certain linguistic units with adaptation to the appropriate environment.
The article deals with the concept of functions as assignment, destination and the purpose of their use as an example of verbal participles.
Each assignment (any purpose), first of all appears as a possibility, ability, and then as the achieved result. Based on this the Tables have demonstrated a potential of the verbal participle of the Kazakh language.