Types of Grammatical Ties between Clauses in English and Ukrainian Composite Sentences

Isomorphism and allomorphism in the system of composite sentences find their expression first and foremost in the realisation of the syntactic connection of their componental parts, i. e. clauses. As to the isomorphic types of composite sentences, they are amply represented in both contrasted languages in the following three varieties: 1) the polycomponen-

tal compound sentences; 2) the polycomponental complex sentences; 3) the compound extended sentences; 4) the complex-compound and 5) the compound-complex sentences.

Each of these common varieties of the composite sentence may have either a syndetic or asyndetic way of joining their clauses. Of typological relevance are found to be the following three most often observed common forms of realisation of subordinate dependence:

a) the consecutive form of dependence as in the following complex-compound sentence: 1 am sure < I don't know < whether or not it is true < that all advertising writers and newspaper men want to do other kinds of writing, + but Ed did all right. (Anderson) The structural pattern of this sentence in both languages reveals a consecutive connection between their sub-clauses: Smatr < Sobj < Sobj < Sobj + co-cjS but Sco-ordinate.

Here each succeeding clause in the complex part of the sentence is subordinate to the preceding clause. Hence, the form of dependence is lineal or direct: Smatr < S₁ < S₂ + co-cjS. Consequently, the clauses are in the first, in the second, third, etc. degree of subordination. The sub-clauses with a lineal/consecutive dependence may also be of different types as in the following polycomponental complex sentence: The young man was leaning against the mantelshelf... with that strange expression < that one sees on the faces of those < who are absorbed by a play < when some great artist is acting. (Wilde) An identical consecutive dependence of clauses (супідрядність) can also be observed in Ukrainian: Тільки з переказів сухий гомін доходить, < що копали цей колодязь колись чумаки, < чиї дороги пролягли в цих сивих степах. (Гончар)

Similarly in the compound-complex sentence, where there may be a non-lineal and lineal form of dependence between the clauses. Cf. " It was said < that you could always find a way... < for the production of a play, + but when you came down to business < you discovered < that the main condition was < that the leading part should be played by some pretty lady < in whom he was interested." (Maugham) The form of dependence between the sub-clauses in both parts of this compound-complex sentence is identical in English and in its Ukrainian equivalent: Smatr < Ssubj co-cj but Sadv < Smatr < Sobj < Spre-dic N < Sattriburive.

The existence of different forms or rather directions of dependence

can be best observed in polycomponental complex sentences with homogeneous clauses, whose number may range from two to several. Hence, their possible forms of structural patterns may be as follows:

Isomorphic in English and Ukrainian and presumably in other Indo-European languages are the following patterns of composite sentences: A.Jan asked nurse Duggin every day < 1) when she came, <

2) < whether the doctor had sent any word. (Cusack) Джейн питала медсестру Даґґін щодня; < 1) коли вона прийшла, < 2) чи лікар нічого не переказував.

В. Other judgements were 1) < that the lectures were of no importance; 2) < that nobody took them; < 3) that they don't matter; < 4) that you can take them < 5) if you like; < 6) that they do you no harm. (Leacock)

This complex sentence has a structurally equivalent pattern with six homogeneous predicative clauses in Ukrainian too. Інші судження були:

1) що лекції не мають жодного значення; 2) що на них ніхто не ходить; 3) що їх ніхто не бере серйозно до уваги; 4) що їх хто хоче, той відвідує; 5) що відвідування їх не шкодить нічийому здоров'ю. The structural pattern of the sentence has the following form:

b) Isomorphic in the contrasted languages are also polycomponental complex sentences with an inverted order of their clauses. Thus, in the affirmative complex sentence below the matrix clause follows the attributive sub-clause: The moment < 1) that he heard Mr. Golspie's visitor going < 2) he would rush out, tell Mr. Golspie < 3) she was there, and thus see her again. (Priestley)

Similarly in Ukrainian: Тієї ж миті, < 1) коли він зачував кроки відвідувача з кабінету містера Ґолспі, < 2) він вибігав, доповідав Ґолспі, < 3) що вона ще там і знову повертався до неї.

The structural pattern of this sentence in both contrasted languages has an identical form: namely: NP < Sattr < Smatr. < Sobj + co-cj + predic. construction.

Such homogeneous sub-clauses are mostly used in the polycomponental complex sentence where they are joined to the matrix clause in English syndetically or asyndetically, the former way being more frequently observed than the latter.

a) Practically allomorphic for the Ukrainian syntactic system is the existence of polycomponental composite sentences with the tagged/concluding disjunctive clauses. Cf. I think < you told < you were in the services, didn't you? (Cusack) The interrogative tag-clause " didn't you? " refers to the objective sub-clause " you told, " which is clearly reflected in the structural pattern of this polycomponental sentence. Namely:

/ Sobj Smatr------------ Sobj ----/-- tag-clause

Its structural equivalent in Ukrainian is a two-componental complex sentence with tag-words (так? правда?) or tag-phrases (чи не так? правда ж?) instead of the subordinate clause which is in the English original.

Cf. I think < you < told < you Мені здається, < ти казав,

were in the services, didn't you? < що ти служив у війську,

(Cusack) чи не так?

A specific feature of such sentences in Ukrainian, however, is their possible " inverted" / transformed structure with the tag-words/phrase in the initial position which is impossible in English — Правда ж ти казав, здається, що (ти) служив у війську?

These were only the main and therefore far from all the isomorphic and allomorphic features characterising the types and paradigmatic classes of these syntactic level units in present-day English in comparison to the

corresponding Ukrainian composite sentences of these types.

Generally isomorphic in both languages are also the main features pertaining to the highest language units which are to be partly contrasted on the forthcoming pages.