COMPARATIVE-TYPOLOGICAL APPROACH TO THE STATUS OF SIMPLE AND COMPLEX SENTENCES

The article touches upon the topical problems of modern linguistics related to the question of the status of linguistic units in general, and of simple and complex sentences, in particular, as signs of a nominative and communicative nature; as well as upon their structural-semantic and functional-communicative semantic features and their constituent parts such as, for example, the subject, the predicate, the object, the adverbial modifier, the introductory part and the introductory component, which are peculiarly characterized, defined and classified by the author. Proceeding from an integral approach to linguistic phenomena in modern directions of linguistics, which make up its anthropocentric paradigm, the author tries to express his attitude to a number of controversial issues faced by specialists in the field of syntax. Approaching these issues from a comparative-typological point of view, the author argues that, like any significant unit of a language, a sentence and all its types and varieties from a constructive and communicative-pragmatic points of view, should be considered as integral monolithic signs like a word. Pushing off from this general linguistic regularity, the author approaches in a new way to such parts of the sentence, which perform the syntactic function of a part of a sentence and its extenders, establishes and reveals their substantial status within the framework of sentences of such modern languages as English, which represents a type of languages of a predominantly analytical system; Uzbek representing a type of languages of a predominantly agglutinative system, and Russian demonstrating a type of languages of a predominantly inflectional system. According to the author, there is a universal law, in line with which any significant linguistic unit used in a sentence, alone or in combination with another unit, can and should function as a specific syntactic part of it, therefore, within the framework of a sentence there is not and cannot be such a member that should not have a syntactic ...