4. Вольперт Р Х. Коннотативный уровень описания грамматики (на материале художественного текста немецкого языка). Рига, 1979. 159 с.
5. Гальперин И. Р. Текст как объект лингвистического исследования. МозКуа, 1981.
6. Гастиленс Н. А. Экспрессивные средства выражения утверждения и отрицания в современном немецком языке : автореф. дис. канд. филол. наук. М., 1972. 20 с.
7. Куманичкина Л. Ф. Средство выражения негативного значения в словах, регулярность их употребления и продуктивность. Вопросы немецкой филологии. М., 1971. С. 135-144.
8. Москальская О.И. Грамматика текста. МовАта, 1981.
9. Шендельс Е. И. Система средств выражения отрицания в современном немецком языке. ИЯШ, 1957. № 3. С. 9-22.
10. Шендельс Е. И. Отрицание как лингвистическое понятие. Ученые записки МГПИИЯ имени М. Тореза, т 19. М., 1959. С. 125-142.
11. Boost K. Neue Untersuchungen zum Wesen und zur Struktur des deutschen Satzes. Berlin, Akademiever- lag, 1957. 157 s.
12. Hartung W. Die Negation in der deutschen Gegenwartssprache, DaF/3, 1966, Heft 2.
13. Heinemann W. Zur Negierung aus stilistischer Sicht. DaF, 1979/1, s. 6-11.
14. Heinemann W. Negation und Negierung. Handlungstheoretische Aspekte einer linguistischen Kategorie. Leipzig : VEB Verlag Enzuklopadie. 1983. 286 s.
15. Moskalskaja O. Grammatik der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. M., Hochschule, 1975. 368 s.
Abstract
The functioning of negation in complete and elliptical sentences
Aliyeva Kh. A.
Thus, the semantics of negation is realized not only by traditional grammatical means, but based on a broad linguistic base, a whole system of hidden and open means of expression is realized through contextual situational indicators.
The variety of manifestations of the implementation of a single invariant semantic sign in the superstructure once again confirms that the approach to the category of negation as a modification of the lexical meaning and syntactic structure of a sentence with simplified thinking and logic does not justify in linguistic practice and is not entirely universal.
Negative sentences are not variants of unconditionally positive offers.
This is confirmed only in the structures of the sentence-thought, which have a negative character and do not have a positive primacy.
Thus, in the reality of speech, different types of negation, different levels and different ways of expression complement and enrich each other in a huge network of microfields, which ensures the selection and development of their optimal options in different functional and communicative areas, structural and semantic diversity.
Summing up, we can say that:
I - different types of negative means can be applied:
a) In simple sentences with separate groups.
b) In continuous sentences.
c) In the role of an amplifier with a different negation (as well as the same type).
II - any negation can appear in a free ellipse; when omitting the significant means, the role of negation in the ellipse is played by nicht.
III - a) in a connected ellipse and in negative-positive groups, participation nicht is mandatory if the original part of the sentence is negative;
b) a significant negative means in the connected and in isolation appears only in a narrowed volume, the condition for its use is the presence of a negative doublet in the final statement in full.
Key words: text linguistic, structural and semantic parameters, elliptical sentences, functioning ofnegation.