Under sentence we understand the immediate integral unit of speech built up of words according to a definite syntactic pattern and distinguished by a contextually relevant communicative purpose.

    There are two principles of classification. Applying one of them we obtain a classification into declarative, interrogative, and imperative sentences. We can call this principle that of “types of communication”.

    The other classification is according to structure. Here we state two main types: simple sentences and composite sentences. According to Structure the sentences are divided into: simple and composite.

Simple sentences:

According to their structure they are divided into: two-member sentences and one-member sentences.

Two- member sentence has 2 members- a subject and a predicate. They may be : complete or incomplete. It is complete when it has a subject and a predicate. It is incomplete when one of the principal parts or both of them are missing. They are called elliptical. EX. What are you doing? Drinking.

    One-member sentences have one member which is neither the subject nor the predicate. They are used in descriptions and in emotional speech. EX. Freedom! Silence.

    Simple sentences, both two- member and one-member, can be unextended and extended.

    In a sentence we distinguish the principal parts, secondary parts and independent elements.

    The principal parts of a sentence are the subject and the predicate. The secondary parts are the attribute, the object and the adverbial modifier.

Composite sentences:

The composite sentence, as different from the simple sentence, is formed by two or more predicative lines. Being a polypredicative construction, it expresses a complicated act of thought, i.e. an act of mental activity which falls into two or more intellectual efforts closely combined with one another.

    Each predicative unit in a composite sentence makes up a clause in it, so that a clause as part of a composite corresponds to a separate sentence as part of a contextual sequence.

    The use of composite sentences, especially long and logically intricate ones, is characteristic of literary written speech rather than colloquial oral speech. This unquestionable fact is explained by three reasons: one relating to the actual needs of expression; one relating to the possibilities of production; and one relating to the conditions of perception.

    That the composite sentence structure answers the special needs of written mode of lingual expression is quite evident. It is the type of speech that deals with lengthy reasoning, descriptions, narrations, all presenting abundant details of intricate correlations of logical premises and inferences, of situational foreground and background, of sequences of events interrupted by cross-references and parenthetical comments. Only a composite sentence can adequately and within reasonable bounds of textual space fulfill these semantic requirements.

    On the other hand, we must clearly understand that the composite sentence as such is part and parcel of the general syntactic system of language, and its use is an inalienable feature of any normal expression of human thought in intercourse. This is demonstrated by cases of composite sentences that could not be adequately reduced to the corresponding sets of separate simple sentences in their natural contexts. Fictional literature, presenting in its works a reflection of language as it is spoken by the people, gives us abundant illustrations of the broad use of composite sentences in genuine colloquial speech both of dialogue and monologue character.

    HISTORICAL SERVEY. The term “Composite Sentence” was used by Poutsma as a common term for both the compound and the complex sentence and it may be accepted by those scholars who adhere to trichotomic classification of sentences into simple, compound and complex. This classification established in the English prescriptive grammar of the mid-19^th century and accepted and developed by the authors of the classical scientific grammar, remains the prevalent scheme of the structural classification of sentences in the grammars of all types in the modern period. A very important syntactic concept which developed along with this classification was the concept of the clause as a syntactic unit, containing a subject and a predicate.

    From the very beginning the authors of prescriptive and scientific grammars have intuitively found out the weak link in this classification- the concept of the compound sentence, containing syntactically independent coordinated clauses or sentences. The compound sentence was not felt to be a sentence proper. There were at least three methods employed by the grammarians to find a way out of this difficulty:

1. To explain it away by pointing out the complete independence and the possibility of isolating each member of a compound sentence without any change of its meaning or intonation.

2. By employing new terms to express more exactly the grammatical peculiarity of this combination of sentences.

3. By excluding this concept from the structural classification of sentences.

 Structural linguists treat the problem of the compound sentence in different ways. Transformational grammar derives complex and traditional compound sentences from two or more underlying strings or source sentences (double-base transformations), including them into matrix sentence (i.e. principal sentences) as inserts by means of embedding and conjoining transformations.

    Composite sentences display two principal types of construction: hypotaxis (subordination) and parataxis (coordination).

    By coordination the clauses are arranged as units of syntactically equal rank, i.e. equipotently (равнозначно); by subordination, as units of unequal rank, one being categorically dominated by the other. In terms of the positional structure of the sentence it means that by subordination one of the clauses (subordinate) is placed in a notional position of the other (principal).

    The means of combining clauses into a polypredicative sentence are divided into syndetic, i.e. conjunctional, and asyndetic, i.e. non-conjunctional.

    According to the traditional view, all composite sentences are to be classed into compound sentences (coordinating their clauses), and complex sentences (subordinating their clauses), syndetic or asyndetic types of clause connection being specifically displayed with both classes.

The compound sentence

    A compound sentence is a sentence which consists of two or more clauses coordinated with each other. A clause is part of a sentence which has a subject and a predicate of its own.

    In a compound sentence the clauses may be connected:

a) syndetically, i.e. by means of coordinating conjunctions (and, or, else, but, etc) or conjunctive adverbs (otherwise, however, nevertheless, yet, still, therefore, etc.);

b) asyndetically, i.e. without a conjunction or connective adverb.

EX. The rain fell softly, the house was quiet.

We can distinguish the following types of coordination:

1. Copulative coordination (соединительная связь) expressed by the conjunctions and, nor, neither…nor, not only…but (also).

2. Disjunctive coordination (разделительная связь) expressed by the conjunctions or, else, or else, either…or, and the conjunctive adverbs otherwise. By these a choice is offered between the statements expressed in two clauses.

3. Adversative coordination (противительная связь) expressed by the conjunctions but, while, whereas, and the conjunctive adverbs nevertheless, still, yet. These are conjunctions and adverbs connecting two clauses contrasting in meaning.

4. Causative-consecutive coordination (причинно-следственная связь) expressed by the conjunctions for, so, and the conjunctive adverbs therefore, accordingly, consequently, hence.

For introduces coordinate clauses explaining the preceding statement.

Therefore, so, consequently, hence, accordingly introduce coordinate clauses denoting cause, consequence and result.

Complex Sentence

A complex sentence consists of a principal clause and one or more subordinate clauses.

Clauses in a complex sentence may be linked in two ways:

a) Syndetically, i.e. by means of subordinating conjunctions or connectives. There is a difference between a conjunction and a connective. A conjunction only serves as a formal element connecting separate clauses, whereas a connective serves as a connecting link and has at the same time a syntactic function in the subordinate clause it introduces;

b) Asyndetically, i.e. without a conjunction or connective.

A subordinate clause may follow, precede or interrupt the principal clause.

A subordinate clause may be subordinated to the principal clause or to another subordinate clause. Accordingly we distinguish subordinate clauses of the first, second, third, etc. degree of subordination.

EX.: I don’t mind making the admission…that there are certain forms of so-called humor, or, at least, fun, which I am quite unable to appreciate.

According to their grammatical function subordinate clauses are divided into subject, predicative, attributive, object and adverbial clauses.

1. Subject clause performs the function of subject to the predicate of the principal clause. Attention should be paid to the peculiar structure of the principal clause, which in this case has no subject, the subordinate clause serving as such. EX.: What I want to do is to save us both.

If a subject clause follows the principal clause the so-called introducing it is used in the principal clause. Subject clauses are connected with the principal clause in the following ways:

a) by means of the conjunctions that, if, whether: It was unfortunate that the patient was brought in during the evening;

b) by means of the connectives who, which, what, whoever, whatever (connective pronouns), where, when, how, why (conjunctive adverbs): What was done could not be undone;

c) asyndetically: It is a pity her brother should be quite a stranger to her.

2. Predicative clauses perform the function of a predicative. The peculiarity of complex sentences with a predicative clause is that in the principal clause we find only part of the predicate, i.e. a link verb, which together with the predicative clause forms a compound nominal predicate.

Predicative clauses are connected with the principal clause in the following ways:

a) by means of the conjunctions that, if, whether, as if: I felt as if death had laid a hand on me;

b) by means of the connectives who, which, what (connective pronouns), where, when, how, why (conjunctive adverbs): That was why you were not one a bit frightened ;

c) asyndetically.

3. Object clauses perform the function of an object to the predicative verb of the principal clause. An object clause may also refer to a non-finite form of the verb, to an adjective, or to a word belonging to the part of speech expressing state. EX.: She was aware that someone else was there.

Object clauses are connected with the principal clause in the following ways:

a) by means of the conjunctions that, if, whether: Time will show whether I am right or wrong;

b) by means of the connectives who, which, what, whoever, whatever, whichever (connective pronouns), where, when, how, why (conjunctive adverbs): I’ll do just what I say;

c) asyndetically: He said there was nothing much the matter with me;

    -or may be introduced by a preposition: I am always ready to listen to whatever you may wish to disclose.

4. Attributive clauses serve as an attribute to a noun (pronoun) in the principal clause. This noun or pronoun is called the antecedent of the clause. According to their meaning and the way they are connected with the principal clause attributive clauses are divided into relative and appositive ones.

Attributive relative clauses qualify the antecedent whereas attributive appositive clauses disclose its meaning. Attributive relative clauses are joined to the principal clause syndetically – by means of connectives, and asyndetically; attributive appositive clauses only syndetically – by means of conjunctions. Attributive relative clause can be restrictive and non-restrictive or descriptive.

5. Adverbial clauses perform the function of an adverbial modifier. It can modify a verb, an adjective or an adverb in the principal clause. Adverbial clauses are joined to the principal clause by means of subordinating conjunctions; they are not joined to the principal clause asyndetically except sometimes adverbial clause of condition.

a) Adverbial clause of time: conjunctions- when, while, whenever, as, till, until, as soon as, as long as, since, after, before, now that; EX: You can stay here as long as you want;

b) Of place: conjunctions- where, wherever; EX: I looked where she pointed;

c) Of cause: as, because, since, for fear (that), on the ground that, for the reason that;

d) Of purpose: that, in order that, so that, lest;

e) Of condition: if, unless, suppose, in case, on condition that, provided;

f) Of concession: though, although, as, no matter how, however, whoever, whatever, whichever, notwithstanding that, in spite of the fact that;

g) Of result: so that, that

h) Of manner: as; EX: John left the house as he had entered it

i) Of comparison: than, as, as…as, not so…as, as if, as though; EX: We were going up the road as fast as we could.

Word order in English is much greater importance than in Russian. As English words have hardly any inflexions and their relation to each other is shown by their place in the sentence and not by their form, word order in English is fixed:

    The subject, the predicate, objects, adverbial modifiers.

The order of words in which the subject is placed after the predicate is called inverted order or inversion. The inverted order of words is widely used when a word or a group of words is put in a prominent position, i.e. when it either opens the sentence or is withdrawn (отведено назад) to the end of the sentence so as to produce a greater effect. So word order often becomes a means of emphasis, thus acquiring a stylistic function.

In this case inversion is not due to the structure of the sentence but to the author’s wish to produce a certain stylistic effect.

1. Inversion occurs when an adverbial modifier opens the sentence

2. Inversion occurs when the emphatic particle only, the adverbs hardly, scarcely, the adverb no sooner, or the conjunction nor open the sentence.

3. Inversion occurs when the sentence begins with the word here which is not an adverbial modifier of place but has some demonstrative force.

4. Inversion occurs when postpositions denoting direction open the sentence and the subject is expressed by a noun. Here belong such words as in, out, down, away…The order of words makes the speech especially lively.

5.  Inversion occurs when an object or an adverbial modifier expressed by a word-group with not a…, many a…opens the sentence.

6. Inversion often occurs with a predicate expressed by an adjective or by a noun modified by an adjective or by the pronoun such opens the sentence.

7. Inversion is also found in conditional clauses introduced without any conjunction when the predicate is expressed by was, were, had, could or should.

8. There is another way to make almost any part of the sentence emphatic. This is achieved by placing it is or it was before the part of the sentence which is to be emphasized.

So it’s you that have disgraced ( опозорить ) the family.