Valency: Grammatical and Lexical Valency

Introduction

The comprehensive study of the word as a main unit of the language system is an

important task of today’s linguistics. The word may be described as the basic unit of

language. Uniting meaning and form, it is composed of one or more morphemes, each

consisting of one or more spoken sounds or their written representation.

The theory of valency is one of the most actual directions of today’s linguistics.

During the time of its existence the theory of valency became one of the most important

directions of the syntax. In linguistics, valency, or valence, is the potential combinability

of linguistic elements (phonemes, morphemes, words, and so on), which defines their

ability to enter into combinations with other linguistic elements, mainly with those on

the same level.

The linguistic meaning of valence derives from the definition of valency in

chemistry. The notion of valency appeared in linguistics not long ago, but it had been

spread during the recent 50 years first of all under the influence of the French linguist

Lucien Tesnière. He was considered as the first who used this term in the field of

linguistics, in the context of his Dependency Grammar developed in Élementsde

syntaxestructurale. Although Tesnière is considered as the father of the valency theory,

nevertheless one may find the roots of the notion in the times of antiquity. The ancient

Greeks had already been familiar with the theory of syntax according to which words

have an ability to join the words of other classes which results in the creation of

independent sentences.

The full study of the notion of valency started in the 20th century, although the

term “valency” had not been widely used that time. Other terms, including the terms

“absolute” and “comparative” verbs have been used for the expression of the valency

characteristics.

Valency is seen as an ability of lexemes—the “atoms” of syntax—to bind a

number of certain other elements in a grammatical construction. This ability can

generally be observed in verbs, nouns and adjectives alike, to a lesser degree even in

other word classes. However, valency theories generally consider the verb the core of a

1

sentence and other elements as dependents bound by the verb’s valencies, because, as

traditional grammarians recognized a long time ago, the (finite) verb is almost

universally the only element of its kind in a clause and can thus be regarded as the

“glue” holding all other constituents together.

Valency theory takes an approach towards the analysis of sentences that focuses

on the role that certain words play in sentences with respect to the necessity of

occurrence of certain other elements. This largely, though not completely, coincides with

what is often called complementation.

There are different approaches to the notion of valency.

S. D. Katsnelson defined valency as an ability of word to be realized in the

sentence in a certain way and combine with other words.

Y. Apresyan developed the notion of syntactic valency. He divided valency into

three groups: semantic, lexical and syntactic valencies. According to him, the semantic

valency makes possible the combination of word units in case of the presence of one

certain semantic feature in the word, the lexical valency makes possible the combination

of words only with the certain quantity of words, the syntactic valency takes into

account the ability or separate word units to manage other units or be managed by

them.

B. M. Leikina widened the notion of valency and connected it not only to the word,

but also to the other language elements. She differentiated the linguistic probability

from valency. According to her, valency is a fact of the language, and connections in

speech are the realization of valency.

V. Admoni considers valency as a double phenomenon, dividing it to the

compulsory valency and the facultative valency. Admoni considers valency words as

combinative possibilities. Some of combinative possibilities are compulsory, i.e. the part

of speech cannot take place in expression without them. Other combinative possibilities

are facultative ones, i.e. their presence is not obligatory for the grammatically right

expression.

Word Groups

Word-groups according to the syntactic pattern have 2 types.

predicative which have a syntactic structure similar to that of a sentence

e.g. John went, he works

2

non-predicative – do not have a structure similar to a sentence

e.g. red flower, running John

Non-predicative is divided into

coordinative – elements of a word-group are coordinated with each other

e.g. day and night, do or die

subordinative – one member of a word-group is subordinated to the central element

e.g. red flower, a man of wisdom

The word group is formed on a syntactic pattern and based on a subordinating

grammatical relationship between two or more content words. This relationship may be

one of agreement, government, or subordination. The grammatically predominant word

is the main element of the word group, and the grammatically subordinated word the

dependent element.

Words belonging to the subsets of the native word-stock are for the most part

characterized by a wide range of lexical and grammatical valency, high frequency value

and a developed polysemy; they are often monosyllabic, show great word-building

power and enter a number of set expressions.

So, to get a better insight into the essentials of structure and meaning of word-groups

we must begin with a brief survey of the main factors active in uniting words into word-

groups. The two main linguistic factors to be considered in this connection are the

lexical and the grammatical valency of words.

Words put together to form lexical units make phrases or word-groups. It will be

recalled that lexicology deals with words, word-forming morphemes and word-groups.

We assume that the word is the basic lexical unit. The smallest two-facet unit to be

found within the word is the morpheme which is studied on the morphological level of

analysis. The largest two-facet lexical unit comprising more than one word is the word-

group observed on the syntagmatic level of analysis of the various ways wordsare joined

together to make up single self-contained lexical units.

A word-group is the largest two-facet lexical unit comprising more than one word

but expressing one global concept.

The lexical meaning of the word groups is the combined lexical meaning of the

component words. The meaning of the word groups is motivated by the meanings of the

3

component members and is supported by the structural pattern. But it’s not a mere sum

total of all these meanings! Polysemantic words are used in word groups only in 1 of

their meanings. These meanings of the component words in such word groups are

mutually interdependent and inseparable (blind man – «a human being unable to see»,

blind type – «the copy isn’t readable).

Word groups possess not only the lexical meaning, but also the meaning conveyed

mainly by the pattern of arrangement of their constituents. The structural pattern of

word groups is the carrier of a certain semantic component not necessarily dependent

on the actual lexical meaning of its members (school grammar – «grammar which is

taught in school», grammar school – «a type of school»). We have to distinguish between

the structural meaning of a given type of word groups as such and the lexical meaning of

its constituents.

It is often argued that the meaning of word groups is also dependent on some extra-

linguistic factors – on the situation in which word groups are habitually used by native

speakers.

Words put together to form lexical units make phrases or word-groups. One must

recall that lexicology deals with words, word-forming morphemes and word-groups.

The degree of structural and semantic cohesion of word-groups may vary. Some

word-groups, e.g. at least, point of view, by means of, take place, seem to be functionally

and semantically inseparable. Such word-groups are usually described as set-phrases,

word-equivalents or phraseological units and are traditionally regarded as the subject

matter of the branch of lexicological science that studies phraseology.

The component members in other word-groups, e.g. a week ago, man of wisdom, take

lessons, kind to people,seem to possess greater semantic and structural independence.

Word-groups of this type are defined as free or variable word-groups or phrases and are

habitually studied in syntax. Here, however, we proceed from the assumption that

before touching on the problem of phraseology it is essential to briefly outline the

features common to various types of word-groups viewed as self-contained lexical units

irrespective of the degree of structural and semantic cohesion of the component words.

To get a better insight into the essentials of structure and meaning of word-groups

we must begin with a brief survey of the main factors active in uniting words into word-

groups. The two main linguistic factors to be considered in this connection are the

lexical and the grammatical valency of words.

4

Lexical Valency

The ability of a word to appear in various combinations with other words, or lexical contexts

e.g. question – vital/pressing/urgent/etc.,

question at issue, to raise a question, a question on the agenda

.words habitually collocated in speech make a cliché

e.g. to put forward a question

lexical valency of correlated words in different languages is different

e.g. flower ծաղիկ

garden flowers այգու ծաղիկներ

hot-house flowers ջերմոցի ծաղիկներ

pot flowers սենյակի ծաղիկներ

different meanings of one and the same word may be revealed through different type of lexical valency

e.g. heavy table, book

heavy snow, rain

heavy drinker, eater

heavy sorrow, sleep

heavy industry

It is an indisputable fact that words are used in certain lexical contexts, i.e. in

combination with other words. The noun question, e.g., is often combined with such

adjectives as vital, pressing, urgent, disputable, delicate, etc. This noun is a component

of a number of other wordgroups, e.g. to raise a question, a question of great

importance, a question of the agenda, of the day, and many others. The aptness of a

word to appear in various combinations is described as its lexical valency or

collocability.

5

The range of the lexical valency of words is linguistically restricted by the inner

structure of the English word-stock. This can be easily observed in the selection of

synonyms found in different word-groups. Though the verbs lift and raise, e.g., are

usually treated as synonyms, it is only the latter that is collocated with the noun

question. The verb take may be synonymicallyinterpreted as ‘grasp’, ’seize’, ‘catch’, ‘lay

hold of, etc. but it is only take that is found in collocation with the nouns examination,

measures, precautions, etc., only catch in catch smb. nappingandgrasp in grasp the

truth.

There is a certain norm of lexical valency for each word and any departure from this

norm is felt as a literary or rather a stylistic device. Such word-groups as for example a

cigarette ago, shove a question and the like are illustrative of the point under discussion.

It is because we recognize that shove and question are not normally collocable that the

junction of them can be effective.

Words habitually collocated in speech tend to constitute a cliché. We observe, for

example, that the verb put forward and the noun question are habitually collocated and

whenever we hear the verb put forward or see it written on paper it is natural that we

should anticipate the word question. So we may conclude that put forward a question

constitutes a habitual word-group, a kind of cliché. This is also true of a number of other

word-groups, e.g. to win (or gain) a victory, keen sight (or hearing).

Some linguists hold that most of the English in ordinary use is thoroughly saturated with cliches.(R. Quirk, op. cit., p. 206). The lexical valency of correlated words in different languages is not identical. Both the English word flower and its Russian counterpart — ծաղիկ, for example, may be combined with a number of other words all of which denote the place where the flowers are grown, e.g. garden flowers, hot-house flowers, etc. (cf. the Russian այգու ծաղիկներ, ջերմոցի ծաղիկներ , etc.). The English word, however, cannot enter into combination with the word room to denote flowers growing in the rooms (cf.pot flowers — սենյակի ծաղիկներ ).

One more point of importance should be discussed in connection with the problem of

lexical valency — the interrelation of lexical valency and polysemy as found in word-

groups.

Firstly, the restrictions of lexical valency of words may manifest themselves

in the lexical meanings of the polysemantic members of wordgroups. The adjective

heavy, e.g., is combined with the words food, meals, supper, etc. in the meaning ‘rich

and difficult to digest’. But not all the words with more or less the same component of

6

meaning can be combined with this adjective. One cannot say, for instance, heavy cheese

or heavy sausage implying that the cheese or the sausage is difficult to digest."

Secondly, it is observed that different meanings of a word may be describedthrough

the possible types of lexical contexts, i.e. through the lexical valency of the word, for

example, the different meanings of the adjective heavy may be described through the

word-groups heavy weight (book, table, etc.), heavy snow (storm, rain, etc.), heavy

drinker (eater, etc.), heavy sleep (disappointment, sorrow, etc.), heavy industry (tanks,

etc.), and so on.

From this point of view word-groups may be regarded as the characteristic minimal

lexical sets that operate as distinguishing clues for each of the multiple meanings of the

word.

Grammatical Valency

The minimal grammatical context in which the words are used when brought together to form a word-group is called the pattern of the word-group

restricted by the part of speech

e.g. an adjective + noun, infinitive, prepositional group

a kind man, kind to people, heavy to lift

limited by the inner structure of the language

e.g. to propose a plan – to suggest a plan

to propose to do smth -

grammatical valency of correlated words in different languages is different

e.g. enter the room - մտնել սենյակ

Classifications of word-groups

according to the distribution

according to the head-word

according to the syntactic pattern

Word-groups according to distribution

endocentric – central member functionally equivalent to the whole word-group

7

e.g. red flower ( I saw a red flower – I saw a flower)

exocentric – the distribution of the whole word-group is different from either of

its components

e.g. side by side, grow smaller, John runs

Word-groups according to the head word

nominal groups

e.g. red flower

adjectival groups

e.g. kind to people

verbal groups

e.g. to speak well

Word-groups according to the syntactic pattern

predicative – have a syntactic structure similar to that of a sentence

e.g. John went, he works

non-predicative – do not have a structure similar to a sentence

e.g. red flower, running John

Non-predicative and endocentric word-groups

coordinative – elements of a word-group are coordinated with each other

e.g. day and night, do or die

subordinative – one member of a word-group is subordinated to the central

element

e.g. red flower, a man of wisdom

8

Words are used also in grammatical contexts. The minimal grammatical context in

which words are used when brought together to form word-groups is usually described

as the pattern of the word-group. For instance, the adjective heavy discussed above can

be followed by a noun (e.g. heavy storm or by the infinitive of a verb (e.g. heavy to lift),

etc. The aptness of a word to appear in specific grammatical (or rather syntactic)

structures is termed grammatical valency.

The grammatical valency of words may be different. To begin with, the range of

grammatical valency is delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to. It follows

that the grammatical valency of each individual word is dependent on the grammatical

structure of the language.

This is not to imply that grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of

speech is necessarily identical. This can be best illustrated by comparing the

grammatical valency of any two words belonging to the same part of speech, e.g. of the

two synonymous verbs suggest and propose.

Both verbs can be followed by a noun (to propose or suggest a plan, a resolution). It is

only propose, however, that can be followed by the infinitive of a verb (to propose to do

smth.); The adjectives clever and intelligent are seen to possess different grammatical

valency as clever can be used in word-groups having the pattern: Adjective-Preposition

at+Noun(clever at mathematics), whereas intelligent can never be found in exactly the

same word-group pattern.

Specific linguistic restrictions in the range of grammatical valency of individual

words imposed on the lexical units by the inner structure of the language are also

observed by comparing the grammatical valency of correlated words in different

languages. The English verb influence, for example, can be followed only by a noun (to

influence a person, a decision, choice, etc.). The grammatical valency of its Russian

counterpart влиятьis different. The Russian verb can be combined only with a

prepositional group (cf. ազդել մարդու վրա, ընտրություն , . . ., etc.).

No departure from the norm of grammatical valency is possible as this can make the

word-group unintelligible to English speakers. Thus e.g. the word-group mathematics at

9

clever is likely to be felt as a meaningless string of words because the grammatical

valency of English nouns does not allow of the structure Noun+at+Adjective.

It should also be pointed out that the individual meanings of a polysemantic word may

be described through its grammatical valency. Thus, different meanings of the adjective

keen may be described in a general way through different structures of the word-groups

keen+N, — keen sight (hearing, etc.), keen + on + N — keen on sports (on tennis, etc.),

keen+V(inf.) — keen to know (to find out, etc.).

From this point of view word-groups may be regarded as minimal syntactic (or

syntagmatic) structures that operate as distinguishing clues for different meanings of a

polysemantic word.

Conclusion

Summarizing the work we can come to the following conclusions:

Words put together to form lexical units make up phrases or word-groups. The

main factors active in bringing words together are lexical and grammatical valencyof

the components of word-groups.

In linguistics, valency, or valence, is the potential combinability of linguistic

elements (phonemes, morphemes, words, and so on), which defines their ability to enter

into combinations with other linguistic elements, mainly with those on the same level.

Lexical valency is the aptness of a word to appear in various collocations. All the

words of the language possess a certain norm of lexical valency. Restrictions of lexical

valency are to be accounted for by the inner structure of the vocabulary of the English

language.

Lexical valency of polysemantic words is observed in various collocations in

which these words are used. Different meanings of a polysemantic word may be

described through its lexical valency.

Grammatical valency is the aptness of a word to appear in various grammatical

structures. All words possess a certain norm of grammatical valency. Restrictions of

grammatical valency are to be accounted for by the grammatical structure of the

language. The range of grammatical valency of each individual word is essentially

10

delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to and also by the specific norm of

grammatical valency peculiar to individual words of Modern English.

The grammatical valency of a polysemantic word may be observed in the

different structures in which the word is used. Individual meanings of a polysemantic

word may be described through its grammatical valency.

Bibliography

1. I.V.Arnold, A.I.SmirnitskyandinA. V.Kunin, Англо-русский

фразеологическийсловарь. М., 1967.

2. А. И. Смирницкий. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956,

3. R.S.Ginzburg , S. S. Khidekel,G. Y. Knyazeva, A. A. Sankin, A Course in

Modern English Lexicology, second edition, Revised and Enlarged, Moscow,

1979

4. Арнольд И.В.Лексикология современного английского языка: Учеб. Для

ин-тов и фак. иностр. яз. — 3-е изд.,перераб. идоп. — М.:Высш. шк., 1986. —

295 с.,ил. — На англ. яз.

5. Vinogradov V.V. “Voprosy izucheniia slovosochetanii.” Voprosy iazykoznaniia,

1954, no. 3.

6. D.J.Allerton. Valency and the English Verb. Academic Press Inc., London, New

York, 1982.

7. Arnold J.V. The English Word. M., 1986.

8. Blokh M.Y.A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. – M.,1983

9. Беляева Т.М. Словообразовательная валентность глагольных основ в

английском языке.-М., 2009.

10. Каращук П.М. Аффиксальное словообразование. М.:Высшая Школа, 1965.

11. Каращук П.М. Словообразование английского языка.М.:Высшая школа,

1987.

11