Article.

Oksana Putilina

УДК 81371+81367.625=811.112.2=811.161.2(075.8)

TYPOLOGY OF SYNTACTIC AND SOCIOLINGUISTIC CHANGES IN PRESENT-DAY ENGLISH LANGUAGE (IN COMPARISON WITH THE UKRAINIAN ONE): REASONS AND CONSEQUENCES

The paper denoted to a characterization of stages and causes of forming a grammatical, especially syntactic, changes as basis of innovative processes in Present-day English language (in comparison with Ukrainian), an establishing of the nature and prime causes of changes in the grammatical organization (proper syntactic features) and on the sociolinguistic and lexically-semantic levels of English at the stage of  its modern development (compared with the Ukrainian), a separation of functioning forms in British and American English (in comparison with Ukrainian), a classifying intralinguistic / extralinguistic reasons of syntactic and sociolinguistic changes of innovative type in both languages.

Keywords: competing ("struggle"), condensation of phrases, declarative sentence, ellipsis, functional-semantic groups, global integration, grammatical changes, innovative process, professional differentiation, pseudo-subordinate independent sentences, racial profiling, semisuffix (splinter), social stratification of the vocabulary, sociolinguistic level, syntactical level, variant, word order.

Results of global integration (strengthening intercultural relations, development of world "live" languages, including English and Ukrainian) are a rapid process, particularly not only on the lexical but on grammatical (including syntactic) and sociolinguistic levels that are not always predictable. Analysis of patterns adjusted by many linguists, especially A. Paunder, L. Bauer, R. Lieber et al., who are concerned about this fact, revealed new structural types of lexical items, such as fragmented elements (splinters), a significant number of highly unstable compound nouns with a separate writing, but common unifying accent (block compounds) and a creation on their basis of compound words / pseudo-compound words (other parts of speech), whose self-morphological identity usually defined only within a specific context for the fulfillment of their syntactic role, that is, their appearance has a strengthening influence of analogy in the formation of composites / quasi-composites that can lead to structural changes of lexical units, including the conversion of compound words in derivatives for potentially unlimited number of new words with unstable and unpredictable grammatically-categorical indicators [Putilina 2012; Putilina 2013].

This process is one of the differential features of Present-day English, especially British (BE) and American (AmE) variants as competitors that stand out against other variants of English (such as the Australian or Canadian ones) with multiplicity of media, geographical area due to extralinguistic factors of their spread – as the classic, 'original ', 'true' English (as claimed by some supporters of BE) in the status of one of the languages of international communication and as less conservative language with signs of language-cosmopolitan, that absorbed into itself the elements of other languages, which directly contacted, and in the role of the language of the powerful state in the world (AmE), respectively. Lack of substantial research in this area makes the relevance of proposed research.According to S. Müller, dynamics of spreading any language necessarily led to the changes of its lexical and grammatical forms, but if the process of changes in vocabulary occurs naturally (due to word-formation and borrowing), the grammatical changes are more noticeable for a native speaker and especially for those who use a language as a second one [Müller 2008: 9]. A set of grammatical changes caused "shifts" in all grammatical system of language, resulting may be particular difficulties that often arise in the modern media of English (especially in order to whom English is not native) in the process of reading art texts in lexical and sociolinguistic areas.

However, a comprehensive analysis of innovative processes that currently take place in the English language (as opposed to Ukrainian), primarily on the grammatical and sociolinguistic levels [Путіліна 2011; Jespersen 1922; Putilina 2012a], not be possible without the differentiation of specific syntactical constructions and features of social stratification of the vocabulary in Present-day English in comparison with the Ukrainian that is the purpose of our study. It is quite obvious there is a determination of the main tasks, namely: a characterization of grammatical and sociolinguistic processes in Present-day English (in comparison with Ukrainian) and their lexical interpreting, an establishing of the nature and causes of grammatical (syntactical) and sociolinguistic changes in the vocabulary of English (compared with the Ukrainian), a separation of literary / colloquial functioning form of English (in comparison with Ukrainian), a classifying types of new constructions in both languages.

Grammatical changes taking place in Present-day English, affect not only the lexical level but also grammatical, in particuliary syntactic (from phrases to the text). The general list is rather long and it continues to grow, so it seems appropriate to name the most important signs typical of Present-day English syntax (in comparison with Ukrainian) and represented in most variants of English, including:

1)       declarative sentence can be used as an affirmative-interrogative one with higher intonation at the end of a sentence (cf. Ukrainian, for which a certain word order and the presence of specific markers are not principal), for example: You are looking for a vacuum cleaner↑? ‘Ви шукаєте пилосос↑?’ To enhance the interrogative effect after such construction can be used interrogative word-sentence like Right? ‘Правильно?’, Correct? ‘Вірно?’; O.K.? ‘Так?’; Eh? ‘Так?’; What? ‘Адже так?’ with the increase of the voice at the end, eg.: But you ↓ talked about it? ↓ When? ‘Але Ви ↓ говорили про це? ↓ Коли?’ [Kastovsky 1991];

2)       change of word order with a decrease in the number of prepositional constructions in the role of definition [Дубенец 2003: 13]. One of the typical cases is staging descriptive titles before the noun – proper name: Foreign Secretary Michael Stuart ‘Міністр закордонних справ Майкл Стюарт’ (букв. ‘Закордонний міністр’) instead of Michael Stuart, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ‘Майкл Стюарт, міністр Департаменту закордонних справ’, eighteen-year-old plumber`s mate John Smith ‘вісімнадцятирічний помічник слюсаря Джон Сміт’ instead of John Smith, a plumber`s mate eighteen years of age ‘Джон Сміт, вісімнадцятирічний помічник слюсаря’ (in the latter case, in the Ukrainian equivalent difference is not noticeable if not take into account the word order). It is noteworthy that generally the number of adjectives in preposition to the signified word increases, and in the Ukrainian equivalent structure is usually not stored: an often-referred to book ‘книга, на яку часто покликаються’ instead of a book that is often referred to ‘книга, на яку часто покликаються’;

3)       in coordination predicate form with the subject native speakers follow "the proximity rule," ie, the predicate agrees in number with the subject the nearest to it, whereas in the Ukrainian language, this principle does not apply, example: You and I am friends ‘Ти і я – друзі’ (predicate is in the singular, not in the plural because of it agrees with last pronoun I); Neither you, nor I, nor anyone knows the answer ‘Ні ви, ні я, ніхто не знає відповіді’ (predicate is in the singular, not in the plural because of it agrees with last pronoun anyone) [Shay 2008];

4)       usage of ellipsis (syntactical reduction when part of nominative word combination functions instead of a phrase while preserving function and significance of the assembly), which is saved:

·         the first component, eg.: semi from semi-detached house ‘дім на дві родини’ (except of ellipsis in this case the reduction of the first component is determinate on the principle of apocope, ie truncation of the final of the word); zebra from zebra crossing ‘пішохідний перехід’;

·         the second component, eg.: Hill from Capitol Hill ‘Капітолій’; Later! from See you later! ‘Бувай! / Побачимося пізніше!’; probes from space probes ‘метеорологічні зонди’ [Putilina 2012a: 19-20].

Note that in elliptical formations may be changes of lexical and grammatical meaning: component of word combination – substitute of full phrase – can move in another grammatical category and change the paradigm. To this type belong substantivated adjectives with affixal structure, example, undesirable, unwanted ‘небажані елементи’ (about people), finals ‘випускні іспити’, supersonics ‘надзвукові літаки’, or lexical shortenings, for example, pre-fab from pre-fabricated house ‘збірний (тобто такий, що збирається) будинок’ (combination of ellipsis, substantivization and apocope), pop from 1) popular music ‘популярна (масова) музика’ or 2) popular culture ‘популярна (масова) культура’ [Barber 2000];

5)       differentiation of constructions with adverb there: constructions with epenthetic there report an information, and construction without there intended to provide physical perception by interlocutor or reader  a specific object from reality, cf.: As I recall, across the street there`s grocery ‘Наскільки я пам’ятаю, через дорогу є продовольча крамниця’ (report the information) and As you can see, across the street is a grocery ‘Як бачите, через дорогу – продовольча крамниця’ (focusing attention on the companion an object of reality – physical perception). This explains the lack of construction of the second type (without there) in stage directions [Вейхман 1990]: Between this door and the stem gallery are bookshelves ‘Між цими дверима і галереєю з колонами книжкові полиці’. In addition, in the grammars ([Radford 1997; Sag, Wason 2000] and others) does not mention the occurrences of compound there`s in constructions there`s a dear / there`s a (dear) love ‘будь ласка / будьте ласкаві / будьте такі люб’язні’, there`s a ‘будь ласка / будь(-те)…’, eg.: Oh, please, Ann, put on a coat, there`s a love ‘О, будь ласка, Енн, вдягни пальто, будь така ласкава!’; Whatever you were doing, stop it, there's a dear ‘Що б Ви не робили, облиште це, будьте такі добрі!’; There's a good girl. Don't cry ‘Ну, будь розумницею. Не плач’;

6)       emergence of pseudo-subordinate independent sentences with unsemantic conjunction if / modal verb will or both components або обома компонентами simultaneously in the wishes: Will you come this way, please? ‘Чи не могли б Ви пройти сюди, будь ласка?’; Mr. Marlowe? If you will come this way, please ‘Містере Марлоу, сюди, будь ласка!’. In addition, these sentences can predict a cue-response, eg.: "I’ll speak to her and tell her to lay off." – "If you would" ‘«Я поговорю з нею і скажу, що її звільнено». – «Будь ласка / Будьте такі ласкаві»’;

7)   condensation of phrases is typical for attributive word combination, ie replacement of prepositional constructions on non-prepositional ones (nominative binomial (NB)), formed by model N + N, where the number of components can vary from 2 to 7 or more) that have different morphological features, in particular a prepositive definition, expressed by:

·         a noun in the singular in the common case: game laws – 1) ‘правила гри’ (direct value), 2) ‘правила полювання’ (НБ); a return train ticket ‘квиток туди й назад’; the United States nuclear defense umbrella ‘ядерний захист Сполучених Штатів Америки’; Scotland Yard fraud squad officers ‘офіцери загону Скотленд-Ярду для боротьби з шахрайством’ [Putilina 2012a: 21];

·         a noun in the plural in the common case, which includes the names of:

o    institutions and organizations: complaints office ‘бюро скарг’;

o    laws and regulations: Governments’s yourth opportunities programme ‘урядова програма працевлаштування молоді’;

o    posts: antiquities dealer ‘антикварний дилер / продавець антикваріату’;

o    books, magazines, etc.: appointments book ‘книга реєстрації прийому відвідувачів’;

o    relevant to English-language countries phenomena that still may not have a clear official name: wages and earnings figures ‘цифри (рівень) заробітної платні’; the aids package ‘пакет допомоги’; Recipes Department ‘рецептурний відділ’ [Sproat 1985];

·         a noun in the possessive case despite the fact the noun (under the rules of normative grammar) does not form a possessive case (though if the noun in such construction is the proper name, then there are two options of the use – in the possessive and in the common cases, and in Ukrainian translation form of the possessive case in such cases is absent, eg.: Ottawa’s political elite ‘політична еліта Оттави’ і Ottawa airport ‘аеропорт Оттави’), including names:

o    cars, airplane and other vehicles: the car’s front seat ‘переднє сидіння машини’; the aircraft’s engines ‘двигуни літака’;

o    institutions: the club’s reading-hall ‘читальний зал клубу’; the hospital’s board-room ‘кімната для персоналу в лікарні’;

o    buildings and facilities: the room’s deep silence ‘повна тиша в кімнаті’; the building’s lights ‘вогні будівлі’;

o    household items: the phone’s mouthpiece ‘телефонна слухалка’; the desk lamp’s glow ‘блимання настільної лампи’;

o    action: the war’s inevitability ‘неможливість уникнення війни’; the journey’s shortness ‘нетривалість подорожі’ [Putilina 2012a: 22].

It should be noted that the changes that affect the syntactic level of English (in comparison with Ukrainian), are common to all variants of English, but the main producers of these processes are still AmE and BE, at that their number is constantly growing, and areas of functioning are mainly broadcast media, advertising, scientific and technical literature, political speeches and colloquial speech.

On the whole, new processes and phenomena in a large number fixed by linguists from the second half of the 20^th century, prompted researchers to expand the list of the factors that influence the development and progress of language, especially vocabulary that on the principle of chain reaction provokes changes at other levels of language system [Stockwell, Minkova 2001].

One of the determining factors was considered social changes in society that realies certain language such as English or Ukrainian. In this context, Modern Anglicists distinguish 5 main tasks:

1)       determination of ways of distinguishing new lexical items and new meanings of existing units;

2)       an analysis of factors of their occurrence in relation to the pragmatic needs of society;

3)       study of models of their creation and restrictions on their use;

4)       development of principles of attitude to new units (their perception / rejection of society) in different social, professional, age groups, etc.;

5)       lexicographic treatment with the definition of pragmatic restrictions on their use in different situations of communication including social differentiation of language [Putilina 2012a: 22].

All this fits within the scope of functional approach to the study of innovations in English (in comparison with Ukrainian), i.e. the emergence of a new unit is due to pragmatic needs of a particular social group. Depending on the role relationships between participants of communication all situational types of communication are divided into symmetric, which have the same social status of communicants, one gender, one age, the same level of education, etc., and asymmetrical, which are characterized by different social status of communicants, different gender, different age, and under. In addition, the focus is primarily on unofficial (relaxed) communication.

Generally, the Modern English-language society shows an increasing tendency towards social differentiation, and best proof of it is the appearance of a large number of words to denote different walks of life, for example: belonger ‘представник середнього класу’ (well-off middle class), ‘прихильник консервативних поглядів, зацікавлений у матеріальному комфорті й стабільності, позбавлений авантюризму’ (social type  that includes different age categories); yuppie (young urban professional person) ‘молодий заможний мешканець міста, який прагне зробити кар’єру, досягти матеріального успіху й при цьому веде активне світське життя, має високооплачувану роботу й надзвичайно вимогливий до своєї зовнішності (дотримується ділового стилю), яку сприймає як візитівку’ (this type includes the following subtypes as buppie (black yuppie) ‘представник цієї групи, який є афроамериканцем за походженням’, muppie (middle-aged urban professional person) ‘представник цього типу, який досяг середнього віку’, ruppie (Republican urban professional person) ‘яппі, котрий підтримує республіканців’, etc.); survivers – букв. ‘ті, що виживають’ – representatives of the lowest social stratum, which includes nilky (no income, lots of kids) ‘безробітні з великою родиною’; sustainers – in one sense, an intermediate type that is neither quite poor nor wealthy, emulators – those who want to succeed in life and try to emulate achievers – the successful, including DINKY (double income, no kids yet) ‘успішна молода бездітна сімейна пара, у якій обидва члени подружжя працюють’, pippy (a person inheriting parents` property) ‘людина середнього віку’, Whanny (we have a nanny) ‘людина, яка наймає няню (може собі це дозволити)’ (букв. ‘У нас є няня’), etc., – all these segments of society are combined with concept VAL (value and lifestyles) ‘цінності й спосіб життя’.

However, social stratification of the vocabulary is also found in the presence of the words the usage of which is limited within a certain class, including:

·   broadcasting the middle class is characterized by units starting morpheme Mc (by analogy to McDonalds), fast, convenience, junk, that is a measure of the meaning of "inexpensive, convenient, standard", eg.: McLife ‘звичайне / повсякденне життя’, McNews ‘звичайні (нецікаві) новини’, fast food ‘швидка (неякісна) їжа або заклад, де її пропонують’, junk food ‘їжа-сміття / нездорова їжа / сурогати, а також люди, які вживають такі продукти і страви’, convenience-food ‘концентрати / консервовані продукти, що не потребують тривалого приготування / страви, які готують у кафе’, etc. [Елисеева 2003];

·    for speech of the working class are inherent lexemes cheers ‘до побачення’, dozen ‘сварка з родичами’, to badmouth ‘лаятися’, etc.;

·        in broadcasting of the unemployed were concepts workfare ‘ті, хто отримує виплати по безробіттю за умови, що вони беруть участь у роботах, що не оплачуються (у громадських роботах), зокрема прибирання вулиць і под.’, welfare mother ‘мати-одиначка, яка не працює і живе на виплати по безробіттю’, etc.

With professional differentiation of the language is associated the emergence of an entire group of words with morpheme speak denoting "the language of a certain professional group", for example: cablespeak ‘жаргон працівників телебачення’, educationspeak ‘жаргон працівників системи освіти’, sportspeak ‘жаргон спортсменів’ [Labov 2010], and so.

In addition, restrictions on the use of neologisms may be related to a belonging of native speaker to certain ethnic society – the use of racial profiling – and it usually imposes on bargains lexeme a negative marking, eg.: in broadcasting of Indians – apple ‘індіанець, який співпрацює з федеральним урядом’; in the speech of African Americans – whitie, paddy, blue-eyed devil, Mr Charley ‘біла людина’; in the speech of white people can appear such lexemes to indicate the African Americans as af, houtie, terr or banana ‘азіат’ on people from Asia.

The fact that the linguistic changes, that have sociolinguistic background, are systematic evidenced by the appearance of specialized suffixes that represent the condemnation by society the members of certain social groups or events, including:   -eer: profiteer ‘спекулянт’; -ster: wordster ‘віршомаз’; -nik: noodnik ‘зануда’; and semisuffixes (splinters) -hop: to jobhop ‘часто змінювати місце роботи’ and -gate: Clintongate ‘скандал довкола стосунків президента Клінтона і Моніки Левінські’ [Putilina 2012a: 24].

Overall, today can be characterized by a number of functional-semantic groups of vocabulary that emerged as a result of social processes and phenomena and firmly entrenched in the minds of the English language speakers, including:

·   Euronotions (due to the emergence of the European Union): MEP (Member of the European Parliament) ‘член Європейського Парламенту’; Euro-sceptic (a person who is skeptical about the value of closer connection among European countries) ‘мешканець Великої Британії, який скептично ставиться до об’єднання європейських країн у Євросоюз’;

·   dress code (as a pledge of a prestigious job, and hence a higher status in society): dress-down-Friday ‘стиль одягу, що допускається для появи на роботі по п’ятницях’; power dresser ‘людина, яка дотримується певного стилю одягу для роботи’;

·    attitude to work: fast-tracker ‘людина, яка швидко просувається службовою драбиною, жертвуючи багатьма речами або усім у своєму особистому житті’; downshifter (a person who makes a change of career or lifestyle to a mode less pressured and demanding) ‘людина, яка між кар’єрою і особистим життям (чи родиною) обирає останнє’;

·  computer technology: bogusware ‘програма, написана для руйнування інших програм’; toolsmith ‘фахівець з коригування програм’;

·   exploration of Space: link-up ‘стиковка космічних кораблів’; chiken soup not in the meaning ‘суп з курчати’, but as ‘розчин амінокислот, вітамінів, використовуваний в експериментах з метою виявлення метаболічної діяльності на Марсі’;

·   medicine: Americanophobia ‘страх перед усім американським’, vanity surgery ‘пластична хірургія’ [Müller 2008];

·  ecology and its deterioration: clean-up groups ‘групи із зачистки ділянок зараженої місцевості’, environmentalist ‘борець за охорону довкілля’;

·   phenomena of social life that have changed under the influence of social movements, processes and groups – the tendency to undesignation of sex (cf. Ukrainian counterpart, where gender is formally presented, unlike the English version): stewardess → flight attendant ‘стюардеса → бортпровідник / бортпровідниця’; fireman → fire fighter ‘пожежник → букв. борець з вогнем, тобто пожежник’. It also includes a large group of lexemes (compound nouns) with the second component person in the value ‘особа, людина’, for example: freshperson ‘новачок’; policeperson ‘полісмен, поліцейський’;

·    ethical standards: open marriage ‘шлюб, у якому кожен з подружжя має повну свободу (соціальну, етичну тощо)’, contract marriage ‘шлюб, укладений на певний період’;

·    discrimination on grounds of:

o    appearance: fattism ‘дискримінація товстих’;

o    age groups: youthism ‘дискримінація молодих при прийомі на роботу’, etc.;

·     politics: velvet revolution ‘безкровна революція’ (cf. concept of the Velvet Revolution, which is a copy (loan translation) of the English construction), START (Strategic Arms Reduction Talks) ‘перемовини щодо скорочення стратегічного озброєння’. To this group belong euphemisms – words that gained prominence in the period of social development related to activities of individual politicians or under the influence of certain political events, eg.: Watergatism ‘політичні скандали’ (from the name of the hotel Watergate, which is connected with a scandal that ended with the resignation of Richard Nixon, the President of the United States); megadebtor ‘країна з великим зовнішнім боргом’ (the lexeme came during a discussion about the country's debt at the UN (the United Nations)) [Lass 1994];

·  art: ABC art ‘мистецтво спрощення і розкладання кольору і форми на елементарні складники’, action painting ‘розбризкування фарби для створення картини’;

·     theater: black theatre ‘негритянський театр’, revolve ‘сцена, що обертається’;          

·    movie and television: HDTV (high definition TV) ‘телевізор з високою роздільністю зображення’, chat show ‘інтерв’ю зі знаменитістю (переважно в прямому ефірі)’ (as in the U.S. for years went Oprah Winfrey`s Show) [Putilina 2012a: 25];

· music: MC (Master of Ceremony) ‘особливо видатний репер’; sampling ‘використовування в електронній музиці фрагментів раніше створеної музики у новому творі’;

·  changes in education: sink schools (schools situated in deprived areas in inner city) ‘школи з дуже низьким рівнем викладання в гетто / бідних районах, де мешкають переважно емігранти’; licensed teachers ‘учителі, які не мають вищої освіти’ (this category was due to lack of teachers);

· life (mainly food): longlife milk ‘молоко тривалого зберігання’, clingfilm ‘плівка для упаковки продуктів, які швидко псуються’;

·   sport: slimnastics ‘гімнастика для зменшення ваги’, a free-fall ‘стрибок з парашутом у поєднанні з акторбатикою’, etc.

It is noteworthy that it is very difficult to make a detailed analysis of the new items that appear in English (in comparison with Ukrainian) because responsiveness of native speakers to changes in social life is high [Algeo, Pyles 2009; Millward, Hayes 2011], and many new lexemes for a long time can be exclusively is in the spoken area, such as within the slang, so only then they can go to the media through speech of which such units usually fall in the range of attention of linguists. Definitely we can only assert that the absolute champion in this process today remains AmE, while other variants of English gradually master new units providing that there is common social situation in the sense that influenced the rise of new lexemes.

Thus, complex analysis of Present-day English language (in comparison with Ukrainian) is impossible without taking into account not only consistent intralinguistic but extralinguistic factors that influence of the speakers, and therefore – also on the language itself, thus and so  a social factor is extremely important in the linguistic sense in English-language society and it demonstrates the national language specifics.

The whole development of Present-day English language (without regard to a particular variant of it) at this stage shows the active cooperation of all levels of language (as well as it does in Present-day Ukrainian language), because the appearance of new lexical items consistently provokes the changes, at that  systematic, on the grammatical level, often having sociolinguistic motivation, but the changes apply to all instances of verbal and semantic manifestations  of a linguistic unit – from pronunciation to stylistic constraints and graphic design.

Perspective of this study is to analyze the processes that deepen the internal stratification of Present-day English and Ukrainian vocabularies as a whole system within each of the languages the whole and its individual variants in English (AM) (British, American, Australian, etc.), the latter more deeper trends in the breeding options for English as a relatively independent entities and strengthening of the modern sociolinguistic factors that determine the formation of vocabulary as well as language forms exist mainly in the Ukrainian language (UM) (literary and spoken forms (UM) and literary / common, colloquial (AM)) taking into account the relationships between regional, social and situational parameters that lead to the selection of specific lexical items by carriers of  both compared languages based on communicative situation. 

References. 

References

Вейхман 1990: Вейхман, Г.А. Новое в английской грамматике [Текст] / Г. А. Вейхман. – М. : Высшая школа, 1990. – 128 с.

Дубенец 2003: Дубенец, Э.М. Лингвистические изменения в современном английском языке [Текст] / Э. М. Дубенец. – М. : «Глосса-Пресс», 2003. – 256 с. – ISBN 5-7651-0088-0

Елисеева 2003: Елисеева, В.В. Лексикология английского языка [Текст] / В. В. Елисеева. – СПб. : Изд-во СПбГУ, 2003. – 80 с. – ISBN: 5-8465-0135-4

Путіліна 2011: Путіліна, О.Л. Інновації в сучасних українській та англійській мовах (Фонетика. Лексикологія. Фразеологія). Навчальний посібник для студентів вищих навчальних закладів [Текст] / О. Л. Путіліна / За ред. А. П. Загнітка. – Донецьк : ДонНУ, 2011. – 277 с.

Algeo, Pyles 2009: Algeo, J., Pyles, Th. The Origins and Development of the English Language [Text] / J. Algeo, Th. Pyles. – Boston : Cengage Learning, 2009. – 347 pp. – ISBN-13: 978-1-4282-3145-0

Barber 2000: Barber, Ch., Barber, Ch.L. The English Language : A Historical Introduction [Text] / Ch. Barber, Ch. L. Barber. – Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2000. – 299 pp. – ISBN 0-521-785-70-7 (paperback)

Jespersen 1922: Jespersen, О. Language : Its Nature and Development [Hardcover] [Text] / О. Jespersen. – New York : H. Holt Publishing, 1922. – Access mode : URL :

http://www.archive.org/stream/languageitsnatur00jespuoft/languageitsnatur00jespuoft_djvu.txt. – Title from the screen.

Kastovsky 1991: Kastovsky, D. Historical English Syntax [Text] / D. Kastovsky. – Berlin ; New York : Walter de Gruyter, 1991. – 510 pp. – ISBN 3-11-012431-9

Labov 2010: Labov, W. Principles of Linguistic Change, Cognitive and Cultural Factors [Text] / W. Labov. – Chichester : John Wiley & Sons, 2010. – 424 pp. – ISBN 978-1-4051-1215-4 (hardback)

Lass 1994: Lass, R. Old English : A Historical Linguistic Companion [Text] / R. Lass. –  Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1994. – 300 pp. – ISBN 0 521 43087 hardback

Millward, Hayes 2011: Millward, C.M., Hayes, M. A Biography of the English Language [Text] / C. M. Millward, M. Hayes. – Boston : Cengage Learning, 2011. – 478 pp. – ISBN-13: 978-0-495-90641-4

Müller 2008: Müller, S. The Mental Lexicon [Text] / S. Müller. – GRIN Verlag, 2008. – 56 pp. – ISBN 978-3-638-94517-2

Putilina 2012: Putilina, O. Historical and Contemporary Factors of Innovative Processes in the Present-Day English Language in Comparison with Ukrainian One : Conflict or Cooperation? [Text] / О. Putilina // Лінгвістичні студії : Зб. наук. праць. – Донецьк : ДонНУ, 2012. – Випуск 25. – С. 89-94.

Putilina 2012a: Putilina, O. Innovations in Present-day Ukrainian and English Languages (Morphology. Syntax. Sociolinguistics). Book 2 [Text] / Oksana Putilina : Educational Supply for Students of Higher Educational Institutions / Ed. by Anatoliy Zahnitko. – Donetsk : Donetsk National University, 2012. – 306 pp.

Putilina 2013: Putilina, Oksana. Derivation in Modern English in comparison with Ukrainian : Путіліна Оксана. Деривація в сучасній англійській мові у зіставленні з українською [Текст] / Оксана Путіліна : Навчальний посібник для студентів вищих навчальних закладів / За ред. А.П. Загнітка. – Донецьк : ДонНУ, 2013. – 100 с.

Radford 1997: Radford, A. Syntactic theory and the structure of English : a minimalist approach [Text] / A. Radford. – Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1997. – 558 pp.

Sag, Wason 2000: Sag, J., Wason, T. Syntactic Theory : A Formal Introduction [Text] / J. Sag, T. Wason. – Stanford : CSLI, 2000. – 211 pр.

Shay 2008: Shay, S. The History of English : A Linguistic Introduction [Text] / S. Shay. – San Francisco, CA / Washington, DC : Wardja Press, 2008. – 232 pp. – ISBN 978-0-6151-6817-3

Sproat 1985: Sproat, R. Welsh Syntax and VSO Structure [Text] / R. Sproat // Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. – Vol. 3. – 1985. – Pp. 173-216.

Stockwell, Minkova 2001: Stockwell, R.P., Minkova, D. English words : history and structure [Text] / R. P. Stockwell, D. Minkova. – Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2001. – 208 pp. – ISBN 0 521 79362 9 (paperback)

Стаття присвячена характеристиці етапів і причин формування граматичних, зокрема синтаксичних, змін як підґрунтя інноваційних процесів у сучасній англійській мові (у зіставленні з українською), встановленню природи і першооснови змін у граматичному складі (власне-синтаксичного характеру), а також на соціолінгвістичному і лексико-семантичному рівні англійської мови на етапі її сучасного становлення (порівняно з українською), розмежуванню форм функціонування англійської мови в британському та американському варіантах (у зіставленні з українською), кваліфікуванню інтралінгвістичних / екстралінгвістичних причин синтаксичних і соціолінгвістичних змін інноваційного типу в обох зіставлюваних мовах.

Ключові слова: конкурування, конденсація фрази, розповідне речення, еліпсис, функційно-семантична група, глобальна інтеграція, граматичні зміни, інноваційний процес, професійна диференціація, псевдопідрядне незалежне речення, расова ознака, напівсуфікс (сплінтер), соціальна диференціація словника, соціолінгвістичний рівень, синтаксичний рівень, варіант, порядок слів.

Available 22 July 2013.