Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 83. kötet (1981)

Tanulmányok - Varga László: A magyar névszói állítmány kérdéséhez. [On the Nominal Predicate in Hungarian] 79

A MAGYAR NÉVSZÓI ÁLLÍTMÁNY 95 Irodalom ANTAL LÁSZLÓ 1977: Egy új magyar nyelvtan felé. Budapest. BALOGH D.—GÁLFFY M.—J. NAGY M. 1971: A mai magyar nyelv kézikönyve. Bukarest. CHAFE, WALLACE L. 1970: Meaning and the Structure of Language. Chicago. DEZSŐ LÁSZLÓ 1965: Notes on the word order of simple sentences in Hungárián. Computa-tional Linguistics 4: 3—59. ELEKFI LÁSZLÓ 1964: Az aktuális mondattagolás egyik alapformája a magyarban. NytudKözl. 66: 331—370. FEB = KUNSÁGI E. (szerk.) 1978: A FEB táborok munkája. A Bölcsészettudományi Karok Felvételi Előkészítő Bizottsága. Szeged. HALL, R. A., JR. 1944: Hungárián Grammar. Language 20/4 Suppl., Language Monograph 21. LYONS, JOHN 1971: Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge. MÉKSz. == JUHÁSZ J. és mások (szerk.) 1972: Magyar Értelmező Kéziszótár. Budapest. MMNy. — RÁcz E. (szerk.) 1976: A Mai Magyar Nyelv. Budapest. MMNyR = TOMPA J. (szerk.) 1961—1962: A Mai Magyar Nyelv Rendszere. Budapest. OROSZ, R. A. dátum nélkül: Contrastive Analysis of English and Hungárián Grammatical Structure. Final Report for US Office of Education, Contract No. OEC-0-8-0800036-3692 (014). RÁcz E.—TAKÁCS E. 1978: Kis magyar nyelvtan. Budapest. ÜML = BEREI A. (szerk.) 1959—1962: TJj Magyar Lexikon. Budapest. VARGA LÁSZLÓ 1980: Tényszerű és véleményszerű modalitás a mértékkifejező magyar állítmányi szerkezetben. MNy. 76: 331—338. On the Nominal Predicate in Hungárián by LÁSZLÓ VARGA This paper consists of four parts. In the first the author suggests that the traditional terms "nominal" and "nomino-verbal predicate" should be abandoned in favour of the single terni "nominal predicate", which can be further differentiated as "simple" (when referring to a nominal predicate whose copula is deleted) and "compound" (when referring to a nominal predicate whose copula is not deleted). The common term is necessary because the two variants are in complementary distribution. The second part is a réfutation of the claim that inverted and interrupted compound nominal predicates are no longer predicates in their entirety, the predicate part being reduced in them to the copula. The author claims that the whole compound nominal predicate counts as predicate, irrespective of its word order or internai cohérence. The third part is an attempt to explain why the copula may be présent in circumstances in which it is normally deleted from the surface structure (indicative mood, 3rd person, présent tense). The author's conclusion is that the copula is preserved when the nominal predicate expresses quantity or a degree of quality in the modal category of valuation, but is deleted in factual modality. In the last part the 'cop (+..)+ N form of the nominal predicate is analysed and is found to be correct only when it expresses a non-permanent feature of the subject. The author claims that this form, with the copula being in the past or future tense, is the carrier of the gênerai perfect aspect in nominal predicates. It is contrasted with the basic form: 'N + cop> which can express various other aspects.