Hierarchical Distribution of Syntactic Level Unit

This is marked in the given table (in the word-group) by the ± sign which testifies to the existence of secondary predication word-group as well as of some syntactically isomorphic intermediaries between simple and composite sentences both in English and in present-day Ukrainian. As can be seen in the table, several deep structure syntactic phenomena are also common in both contrasted languages. These are: 1) co-ordination, subordination and predication; 2) the existence of predominantly common structural types of higher syntactic level units and partly common ways and means of their connection at the syntactic level in the contrasted languages and 3) the existences within the framework of English and Ukrainian supersyntactic speech units.

Hence the most general summery/conclusion:

1. Any contrastive typological investigation aims at establishing iso morphism and allomorphism in the systems of lingual phenomena and the characteristic features pertained to them in the contrasted languages.

2. The main aim of aspect and charactereological typologies is to establish isomorphism and allomorphism in the structural forms of the investigated language units and in the ways and means of connecting their componental parts as well as the means and ways of expressing

their sense/meaning in the contrasted languages.

3. Aspective and charactereological typologies, as could be seen, also aim at establishing the quantitative and qualitative correlation between the isomorphic and allomorphic features and phenomena in the contrast ed languages under investigation.

4. Typologically relevant for the establishment of isomorphic traits in genealogically different languages can also be a contrastive historical approach to some lingual facts within a single language aspect of the contrasted languages. The existence of such facts, as in case of Ukrai nian and Sanskrit, speak in favour of the establishment of a new linguistic subject of historical contrastive typology.