Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 04.10.2023
Home Issues 2017 Year Issue №3 REVERSE COMPARISON IN MODERN ENGLISH
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Rating
  • Search
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.edu.ru
praxema.tspu.edu.ru
ling.tspu.edu.ru
npo.tspu.edu.ru
edujournal.tspu.edu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

REVERSE COMPARISON IN MODERN ENGLISH

Petrochenko Lyudmila Anatolyevna

DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2017-3-38-41

Information About Author:

Petrochenko L. A., Tomsk State Pedagogical University (ul. Kievskaya, 60, Tomsk, Russia, 634061). E-mail: lapetrochenko@tspu.edu.ru

The article deals with the peculiarities of the use of reverse comparison forms in Modern English. The category of adjectival comparison, constituted by three degrees and five forms, expresses the quantitative characteristic of the quality of a nounal referent. The synthetic forms of comparison in -er and -(e)st coexist with the analytical more/most-forms (direct comparison) on the one hand and the analytical forms effected by the auxiliaries less and least (reverse comparison) on the other. Linguists often point out the semantic and functional parallelism existing between the synthetic forms of comparison and the more/most-combinations while the less/least-combinations are regarded as completely opposite. But from grammatical point of view, the term ‘opposite meaning’ amounts to ascertaining the categorial equality of the forms compared. The basic form as the positive degree of comparison is quite often included in one and the same syntagmatic correlations with the other members of comparison scale. The reverse comparison forms are of lesser usage than the direct ones. Psychologically it is easier to follow the direct model of comparison based on the principle of addition than the reverse model based on the principle of subtraction, but in some cases the reverse comparison forms are indispensable. The reverse comparative and superlative forms can be found in syntagmatic correlations with the positive degree form and all the forms of direct comparison. The reverse comparison performs several significant functions. The most important of them are: subtraction of qualitative quantities without changing the nature of a quality, understatement as far as negative qualities are concerned, euphemistic usage, creating comic effect.

Keywords: adjective, degrees of comparison, reverse comparison forms, syntagmatic correlations, comparative semantics, euphemisms

References:

1. Blokh М. Ya. Teoreticheskaya grammatika angliyskogo yazyka [A Course in Theoretical English Grammar]. 5th ed. Мoscow, Vysshaya shkola Publ., 2006. 421 p. (in Russian).

2. Rayevskaya N. M. Teoreticheskaya grammatika sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka [Modern English Grammar]. Кiev, Visshaya shkola Publ., 1976. 304 p. (in Russian).

3. The Handbook of English Linguistics. Ed. by B. Aarts and A. McMahon. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 2006. 806 p.

4. Kuteva T. On the frills of grammaticalization. Rethinking Grammaticalization: New perspectives. Ed. by M. José López-Couso, E. Seoane. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Co., 2008. Pp. 189–217.

5. Huddleston R., Pullum G. K. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge, Camb. Univ. Press, 2002. 1842 p.

6. Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and New York, Longman Group Ltd., 1985. 1779 p.

7. Carstairs-McCarthy A. An Introduction to English Morphology: Words and Their Structure. Edinburgh, Edinburgh Univ. Press, 2002. 151 p.

8. González-Díaz V. English Adjective Comparison: A historical perspective. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Co., 2008. 252 p.

9. The Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar. Ed. by B. Aarts, S. Chalker, E. Weiner. Oxford, Oxf. Univ. Press, 2014. 453 p.

10. Khaimovich B. S., Rogovskaya B. I. Teoreticheskaya grammatika angliyskogo yazyka [A Course in English Grammar]. Мoscow, Vysshaya shkola Publ., 1967. 298 p. (in Russian).

11. Petrochenko L. А. Strukturnye osobennosti kategorii komparativnosti (na materiale angliyskogo yazyka) [The Structural Characteristics of the Category of Comparison (Data of English)]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – TPSU Bulletin, 2013, vol. 3 (131), pp. 9–12 (in Russian).

12. Crookston I. Comparative Constructions. Concise Encyclopedia of Grammatical Categories. Ed. by K. Brown, J. Miller. Amsterdam, Elsevier Science Ltd., 1999. P. 76–81.

13. BYU-BNC – Brigham Young University: The British National Corpus. URL: http://corpus.byu.edu/bnc/ (accessed 15.11.2016).

14. The Penguin Dictionary of English Synonyms and Antonyms. Ed. by R. Fergusson. London, Penguin Books, 1992. 442 p.

15. Senichkina Е. P. Evfemizmy russkogo yazyka [Euphemisms in the Russian Language]. Moscow, Vysshaya shkola Publ., 2006. 151 p. (in Russian).

petrochenko_l._a._38_41_3_180_2017.pdf ( 348.69 kB ) petrochenko_l._a._38_41_3_180_2017.zip ( 341.58 kB )

Issue: 3, 2017

Series of issue: Issue 3

Rubric: CURRENT PROBLEMS OF GERMANIC STUDIES

Pages: 38 — 41

Downloads: 1054

For citation:


© 2023 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU