Keywords: mathematical logic apparatus, outerness, reflexivity, symmetry, transitivity.


The relevance of the topic is in the need to overcome the syncretism of the problem of subordinate parts of the sentence and come to a consistent system of their formation.

The purpose of the study is to offer a consistent system of subordinate parts of the sentence.

The object of study is a more adequate metalanguage of the syntax of the modern Russian language.

The factual material is school-oriented theory and practice of sentence analysis.

A description of the syntactic structure of a sentence can be built on very different and even completely different theoretical bases than in the classical grammar. And as linguistically significant, we consider it quite possible to qualify, first of all, such logical relations as outerness, reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity. Outerness is  such a relation between concepts, the volumes of which are completely mutually exclusive and at the same time they do not reflect all the objects of the studied area. Reflexivity is the relation, when each element of the set is in a given relation to itself (simplified: a = a and c = c). Symmetry, when the presence of this relation between objects a and b takes place even if these objects are interchanged (a and b = b and a). Transitivity is the relation, when the presence of this relation between objects a and b and between b and c implies its presence between objects a and c. In constructions of the same type, to read a book in the evenings and to love the brother very much, there are no transitive relations, because, firstly, there is no consistent subordination in them, and besides, words in the evenings and very are syntactically not connected by the proper semantic-grammatical relations with the words to read and to love as the syntactic dominants of the corresponding verbal formations. Thus, the methodology, theoretical apparatus, and specific methods of scientific research of one science may not always be effective and generally acceptable in another science, especially if this science is prospective one, has its own subject with its own history of its formation and development, and of course is demanded by society, which is linguistics. Linguistics is primarily linguistics, and if it refers to research practice and the apparatus of other sciences, then it is necessary for linguistics itself, and in only the volume that can give both procedural and, more importantly, subject knowledge essential for the science of language. As regards the subject of the proposed research itself, it should be noted that in the grammar there are, along with the described logical relationships, specific linguistic relationships that manifest themselves on the most diverse levels of the structure of the language, primarily in linguistics and only in linguistics.


1. Александров Н. М. (1963) Проблема второстепенных членов предложения в русском языке. Учёные зап. ЛГПИ им. А. И. Герцена. Т. 236. Ленинград. С. 3-392.
2. Андреев Н. Д. (1967) Статистико-комбинаторные методы в теоретическом и прикладном языковедении. Москва. 404 с.
3. Грамматика современного русского литературного языка (1970) / под ред. Н. Ю. Шведовой. Москва. 768 с.
4. Кондаков Н. И. (1971) Логический словарь. Москва. 638 с.
5. Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь (1970) /под ред. В. Н. Ярцевой. Москва. 688 с.
6. Ломтев Т. П. (1979) Структура предложения в современном русском язык Москва : МГУ. 200 с.
7. Меньшиков И. И. (2017) Совмещённая альтернатива в системе сложносочинённых предложений с разделительным союзами. Лингвистика. Лингвокультурология. Днепр : Рояль Принт. Т.11. 217 с.
8. Меньшиков И. И. (2005) Два уровня классификации второстепенных членов предложения в современном русском языке. Русский язык и литература. Проблемы изучения и преподавания в Украине. Киев. 404 с.
9. Меньшиков И. И. (2019) Лингвистическая конъюнкция в конструкциях сочинительной связью / Лексико-граматичні інновації в сучасних слов’янських мовах. ІХ Міжнародна наукова конференція. Днепр : Лира. 232 с.
10. Меньшиков И. И. (2019) Опыт описания синтаксических связей слов в терминах логических отношений. Лингвистика. Лингвокультурология. Днепр : Роял Принт. Т. 13. С.115 – 129.
11. Попова І. С. (2009) Фундаментальні категорії метамови українського синтаксису (одиниця, зв’язок, модель). Дніпропетровськ : ДНУ. 432 с.
12. Русская грамматика (1990) / под ред. Н. Ю. Шведовой и В. В. Лопатина. Москва : Русский язык. 640 с.
13. Русская грамматика: в 2 т. (1980). Москва : Наука. Т. 2: Синтаксис. 710 с.
14. Сланский В. (1887) Грамматика – как она есть и как должна бы быть: пять бесед, предложенных в Санкт-Петербургском педагогическом музее. СПб. : Типография Д та Уделов. 146 с.
How to Cite
Menshikov, I. (2020). RELATION OF OUTERNESS OF MEMBERS OF THE SENTENCE AS SYNTACTIC CATEGORIES. Linguistics. Lingvoculturology, (15), 91-102. Retrieved from