Of the sentence

The general implicit morphological nature, the syntactic function and the nomenclature of the secondary parts of the sentence are generally isomorphic in the contrasted languages. Allomorphic features are observed, as a rule, in the structural forms of some types of English objects, attributes and adverbial modifiers, though some Ukrainian secondary parts of the sentence are also characterised by divergent features of their own. The secondary parts of the sentence in the contrasted languages are as follows:

The object which has in English and Ukrainian both isomorphic and allomorphic features. Common, for example, is the functioning of the object as a " subjective complement" (G.G.Pocheptsov), eg: She was invited by me: вона була запрошена мною.

As to its structural forms, the object in both contrasted languages may be: a) simple: I thought that the bank rented it. (F. King) А я думав, що банк позичив їх (гроші). Then she heard music. (S. Hill) Потім вона почула музику....he called " Hsst" several times. (Galsworthy) Він кілька разів повторював " ц-с-с ". b) Simple prepositional: He was afraid of this. (Hailey) Він не думав про це. " May I speak to Lucy? " " Можна звернутися до Люсі? " с) Extended (expressed by a subordinate word-group): " I do so dislike the summer crowds." (S. Hill) Мені так надокучають юрби людей влітку. In his book he had drawn some pretty nasty characters. (Ibid.) У своїй книжці він змалював кілька вельми неприємних персонажів. d) Expanded objects (expressed by the co-ordinate word-groups): The other two women continued to discuss the gas and electricity bills. (F. King)...the car brought his father and mother home. (Galsworthy) These structural types of object have their equivalents in Ukrainian: Дві інші жінки обговорювали рахунки за газ та електрику. Машина привезла його батька й матір додому. Though the first of the expanded objects in Ukrainian (рахунки за газ та електроенергію) may also be treated as the expanded prepositional object, since it is preceded by the preposition. Consequently, the nomenclature of some subtypes of the object may also be enlarged in the contrasted languages.

Apart from the aforenamed there are also other common types of the object/adjective complement in the contrasted languages.

The first to be named are the following traditionally distinguished ones: 1) the direct non-prepositional or prepositional (in English) object. For example: " He could make the money easy". (Snow). " I have heard of it..." (Ibid.) Він міг легко заробити гроші. Я це/про це чув. Не went to Oxford, studied engineering and played rugger. (D. Garnett) Він поїхав до Оксфорда, вивчав машинобудування і захоплювався регбі.

The simple object may be expressed in English and Ukrainian by different nominal parts of speech or their functional equivalents. Eg: He was describing the sufferings of the unemployed (J. London) Він описував страждання безробітних. Her laugh cut Soames to the quick. (Galsworthy) її сміх зачепив Сомса за живе. Fleur flung back her hair. (Ibid.) Флер відкинула назад свою косу. Nelson had asked Mary's

father's consent. (D. Garnett) Нельсон попросив згоди батька Мері. She called out " Hullo! " (Ibid.) Вона вигукнула " Алло! "

Note. The verbs to ask, to answer, to take, to envy, to hear, and to forgive take two direct objects in English, which is not so in Ukrainian. For example: They scared him, (Johnny) and asked him many questions. (Saroyan) Вони залякували його і задавали йому багато запитань (допитували). In this sentence both pronouns, him and the word-group (extended object) many questions are direct objects in English whereas in Ukrainian the second object him (йому) is indirect. Direct in both languages is also the cognate object, eg: Taras Shevchenko lived a hard life....Clare slept the sleep of one who has spent a night in the car. (Galsworthy) Клер спала сном людини, що провела ніч у машині. Napoleon fought several successful battles. Наполеон виграв/ виборов не одну успішну битву.

The prepositional object in the contrasted languages, as has been pointed out, is preceded/introduced by the preposition. For example: It smelt not of vomit, but of food. (D. Garnett) She felt cold in nothing but her nightdress and the light wrap, and with the shiver of cold she felt fear. (Ibid.) Вона ні в що не мерзла, але в нічній одежині та легенькій фантині і від дрижаків та від холоду їй було лячно. " І must not panic", she said to herself. (Ibid.) " Я мушу тримати себе в руках, " - сказала вона сама до себе.

As can be observed, not all English prepositional objects have prepositional equivalent in Ukrainian (cf. it smelt not of vomit). Other prepositional objects, however, are declinable in Ukrainian (Cf. with the shiver of cold big дрижа ків /дриґолі ння, від холоду, в одежин і). No morphological expression of the syntactic dependence is observed in the so-called addressee object (as termed by Prof. G.G.Pocheptsov) to herself which corresponds to the indirect object собі, though it may be conveyed as an indirect prepositional object as well (cf. сказала вона сама до себе, про себе).

One more peculiar feature of the English prepositional object is that the preposition may sometimes be split from the object itself. Eg:...My car a 1960 Morrts Oxford... that I have been so proud of. (B. Hanville) Or in such an example: Who do they (children) belong to? (Maugham) Котрої з них вони/Вони котрої з них?

The indirect object in both languages has an indirect case form which is expressed in English only by the personal pronoun in the objective case and by the interrogative and relative pronoun who. Eg: I know they told me that. (Ibid.) Це вони мені сказали. The doctor gave me pills to take tranquillisers. (Ibid.) Лікар дав мені пігулки для заспокоєння. Не handed her the paper. (Dreiser) Він передав їй папірець. The Ukrainian indirect object may also be a noun, any pronoun or numeral (cf. дати щось комусь, Петрові, Марії, двом/обом). Or in the following Ukrainian sentences: Він послав Ганні книжку. Він послав книжку Ганні/дня Ганни. Гамір не давав дитині (дітям) спати. Hence, all English notionals with no morphological expression of indirect case forms can be called " indirect objects" only conventionally. Cf. I sent Ann a book/ I sent a book to/for Ann. He sent nobody anything. Such morphologically amorphous words as nobody, nothing and even nouns which do not reflect any morphological category by their form can express their relations only through their syntactically predetermined placement. Taking all this into consideration, i.e. the absenсe of any morphological expression of indirect cases in almost all English notionals (except the objective case form of the personal pronouns me, him, her, them, us) and the relative/ interrogative pronoun whom, it would be typologically more expedient to use also the term " complements" instead of the tradition term " object".

Apart from the above-mentioned subtypes of the direct object in the contrasted languages, two more structural forms of it are to be singled out. These are: 1) the clausal object/expressed by the object subordinate clause: " You're always telling me how good you are". (I. Shaw) Ти завжди повторюєш мені, яка ти добра. Or " I suppose she's been telling you that I'm a selfish brute." (J. Сагу) " Гадаю, вона вам сказала, що я жахливий егоїст".

The formal object is an allomorphic feature/phenomenon pertained to the English language only. This object is expressed by the formal pronoun it which has an implicit meaning, as can be seen in the following sentences: On Saturday she would clean it, wash it, and air it. (J.K. Jerome) which means in Ukrainian the following: По суботах вона прибирала, мила й провітрювала (всі кімнати, приміщення). І found it impossible to utter the next word. (Kahler) У мене не було жодної

змоги сказати хоч слово. We can walk it very quickly. Ми швидко пройдемось (туди).

The complex object is not a completely allomorphic feature for Ukrainian either, though some of its structural forms are alien to it. These are, for instance, the objective with the infinitive, the objective with the present participle or the gerundial complexes/constructions, which have nouns or subordinate clauses for their equivalents in Ukrainian. For example: " Oh! If I could only see him laugh once more." (M. Twain) She had expected him to be more sympathetic. (Ibid.) I heard someone weeping. (D. Greene) I hear him calling her name. (Fitzgerald) " It's no good your flying in temper." (Maugham) Apart from these there are some isomorphic or similar complexes, which are observed in both languages. There are cases " like It would be better for us to leave him." (O. Wilde) There was need for him to be economical. (London): Було б краще для нас залишити його. У нього настала необхідність економити. These English complexes have structurally different equivalents in Ukrainian: either the prepositional object (для нас) or the direct object (залишити його). In the second sentence (for him to be economical) the equivalent is again different in Ukrainian: у нього (prepositional object) and to be economical becomes an attribute in Ukrainian (потреба бути економним).

Isomorphism is observed in both contrasted languages in the function and structure of the objective with the past participle complexes like They found the door unlocked/the soldier wounded. Вони застали двері відімкненими/знайшли бійця пораненим. І remember the actor younger. Я пам'ятаю цього актора молодшим. These participial (and adjectival) components and constructions are treated in Ukrainian as the double predicate (Cf. Вони застали двері/ дверібули відімкнені/відімкненими).

The attribute in both languages functions as an adjunct to a noun head in a word-group. The categorial meanings of English and Ukrainian adjuncts differ considerably, however, since English adjuncts can not express gender, case and only rarely number as in the example with the demonstrative pronouns this/that+N_sing - these/those + N_plur; such a + N_sing - such+ N_plur, many a+ N_sing- many+ N_plur.

Almost all Ukrainian attributive adjuncts, however, mostly agree with the head noun in gender, case, and number. These adjuncts are: adjectives, numerals, pronouns, participles: гарний день, мій брат, перше літо, працююча зміна, засіяне поле, моя батьківщина, etc.

Each of these and other adjuncts has also case endings: гарного дня, гарному дневі, гарним днем, (при) гарному дневі; мого брата, моєму братові, моїм братом, мій брате; першому дневі, першим днем, etc.

But there are some non-declinable adjuncts in Ukrainian as well. Cf. Number 17 was on the second floor. (Christie) Номер 17 був на третьому поверсі. Similarly in: Палата 17, у палаті 17, etc.

Here the adjunct " 17" does not agree in Ukrainian in gender (like in English) with its head word " number" '/номер, палата № 17). Neither is there any syntactic agreement in English and, as will be shown further, even in Ukrainian word-groups between the adverbial, infinitival and some phrasal adjuncts. Cf. in English: George was the first to recover. (J. K. Jerome), the then government, sugar cane production, a to-be-or-not-to-be question, the sentence below, books to read, the House of Commons debate, etc. Similarly there is no syntactic agreement of adverbial and infinitival adjuncts with their noun heads in Ukrainian either. Cf. Гвідо вибрав шлях наліво... (Л. Українка), бажання виграти, спроба виправдатись.

Some adverbial adjuncts in English may be post-posed, eg: A voice inside said. (Maugham) But: In the light of after events... (Fox).

Common in English and Ukrainian is the use of prepositional adjuncts and adjunct clauses, eg: There were only two houses of any importance in King's Abbot. My friend of whom I spoke was a young man... (Christie) Біля шарабанів коні в хомутах. (Головко) Мій приятель, про якого я казав...

Isomorphic are also noun adjuncts as in the sentence I heard Joanie's voice (Maugham) Я чув голос Джоані (or Джоан ін голос).

Pertaining to English only, however, are adjuncts consisting a) of clusters of nouns like sugar cane production; b) of statival adjuncts to nouns: Miss Ackroyd saw her uncle alive at a quarter to ten. (Christie); c) of gerundial adjuncts to nouns: " You have not spoiled my pleasure in

meeting you, Mr. Gray". (Wilde); d) of the contextual adjuncts expressed by articles having a lexical meaning in the text: The thought was fire in him. (London) " I want the Dorian Gray I used to paint..." (Wilde) Ця думка пекла його вогнем. Я хочу мати справу з тим Доріаном Ґреєм..., якого я малював...".