Introduction. Syntax is 1 a system of rules and means of creating

part, while the rheme is rendered by the subject:
Through the open window came the purr of an approaching motor car. Who
is coming late but John! There is a difference of opinion between the parties.
Historically, the theory of actual division of the sentence is connected with
the logical analysis of the proposition. The principal parts of the proposition, as
is known, are the logical subject and the logical predicate. These, like the theme
and the rheme, may or may not coincide, respectively, with the subject and the
predicate of the sentence. The logical categories of subject and predicate are
prototypes of the linguistic categories of theme and rheme. However, if logic
analyses its categories of subject and predicate as the meaningful components
of certain forms of thinking, linguistics analyses the categories of theme and
rheme as the corresponding means of expression used by the speaker for the
sake of rendering the informative content of his communications.
Any part (or parts) of the sentence can be either the theme or the rheme
of the sentence, depending on the context or situation:
The book (theme) is on the table (rheme): answers to the question ‘Where
is the book?’
A book (rheme) is on the table (theme): answers to the question 'What is on
the table?'
Compare in Russian:
Книга (theme) на столі (rheme): answers to the question ‘Where is the
book?’
На столі (theme) книга (rheme): answers to the question 'What is on the
table?'
The actual division of the sentence is opposed to its formal-grammatical
division into the parts of the sentence. The components of the actual division of
the sentence can be singled out by means of:
- the intonation (type of stress, pauses);
- by word order, usually, in Russian the theme is placed in the beginning,
while the rheme is found in the end;
- In English we differentiate between the theme and the rheme by the use of
the definite and indefinite articles (the indefinite article usually introduces new
information, i.e. the rheme, while the definite article represents the theme of
the sentence);
- by the use of limiting adverbs;
- by rheme stressing constructions (It is… that…);
- by context.
If the logical stress is shifted in the sentence, the actual division of it is also
altered. In Russian the direct ‘theme – rheme’ order prevails and is
considered to be progressive, objective and non-emphatic, the reverse ‘rheme
– theme’ order is thought to be regressive, subjective, emphatic.
The initial position of the rheme can also be accounted for by the necessity
to preserve its positional contact with the previous sentence, rhythm, a
speaker's wish to say the most important thing first.
The actual division of the sentence finds its full expression only in a
concrete context of speech, therefore it is sometimes referred to as the
"contextual" division of the sentence. This can be illustrated by the following
example:
Mary is fond of poetry.
In the sentence, if we approach it as a stylistically neutral construction
devoid of any specific connotations, the theme is expressed by the subject, and
the rheme, by the predicate. This kind of actual division is "direct". On the other
hand, a certain context may be built around the given sentence in the conditions
of which the order of actual division will be changed into the reverse: the
subject will turn into the exposer of the rheme, while the predicate, accordingly,
into the exposer of the theme.
"Isn't it surprising that Tim is so fond of poetry?"-"But you are wrong. Mary
is fond of poetry, not Tim."
The actual division in which the rheme is expressed by the subject is to be
referred to as "inverted".
The close connection of the actual division of the sentence with the context
in the conditions of which it is possible to divide the informative parts of the
communication into those "already known" by the listener and those "not yet
known" by him, gave cause to the recognized founder of the linguistic theory of
actual division J. Mathesius to consider this kind of sentence division as a purely
semantic factor sharply opposed to the "formally grammatical" or "purely
syntactic" division of the sentence (in our terminology called its "nominative"
division).
One will agree that the actual division of the sentence will really lose all
connection with syntax if its components are to be identified solely on the
principle of their being "known" or "unknown" to the listener. However, we
must bear in mind that the informative value of developing speech consists not
only in introducing new words that denote things and phenomena not
mentioned before; the informative value of communications lies also in their
disclosing various new relations between the elements of reflected events,
though the elements themselves may be quite familiar to the listener. The
expression of a certain aspect of these relations, namely, the correlation of the
said elements from the point of view of their immediate significance in a given
utterance produced as a predicative item of a continual speech, does enter the
structural plane of language. This expression becomes part and parcel of the
structural system of language by the mere fact that the correlative informative
significance of utterance components are rendered by quite definite,
generalized and standardized lingual constructions. The functional purpose of
such constructions is to reveal the meaningful centre of the utterance (i.e. its
rheme) in distinction to the starting point of its content (i.e. its theme).
3. PARTS OF THE SENTENCE
All parts of the sentence in the contrasted languages have both isomorphic
functional meaning and lexical-grammatical nature. Common is also the
traditional subdivision of them into the main parts (the subject and predicate)
and the secondary parts (the object, attribute, adverbial modifier) of the
sentence.
Structurally, the parts of the sentence in the contrasted languages are
characterized by isomorphic features in the main. The common types of the