Dydyk-Meush H. Combinatorics in the Ukrainian language of the 16th–18th centuries: theory, practice, vocabulary (adjective-substantive phrases).

On the basis of the Ukrainian written sources of different styles and genres the сombinatorics (compatibility) of the Ukrainian language of the 16th–18th centuries in accordance with combinatory linguistics and cognitive linguistics, was studied. Scientific novelty of the thesis is that the first time combinatorics (compatibility) in the Ukrainian language of the 16th–18th centuries was studied comprehensively on the basis of combinatorial linguistics in combination with cognitive linguistics; substantive phrases. In this paper, for the first time, a scale of combinatorial (compositional) semantics was proposed for analyzing the compatibility in diachrony; for the first time the principles of the combinatorial dictionary of the Ukrainian language of the 16th–18th centuries were developed. The Ukrainian language of the 16th–18th centuries was described on the basis of 2000 texts – different in size and genre, due to which a complete description of the Ukrainian language of that time was obtained, as well as analysis of the features of lexical-semantic compatibility. The thesis is devoted to two main aspects: combinatorial lexicology and combinatorial lexicography. That is why the basic concepts of combinatorial linguistics are syntax in the dissertation: syntagmatics, combinatorics, valence, compatibility, context and distribution. Syntagmatics combines valence (level of language; language syntagmatics) and compatibility (level of speech; speech syntagmatics); context and distribution are compatible and form a private opposition. Combinatorics in the Ukrainian language of the 16th and 18th centuries can be studied only by the example of ancient texts that testify to the Ukrainian language of that period. Compatibility is speech-level valency. The decisive factor was the distribution of compatibility between active and passive (which corresponds to active and passive valence). In the case of active valence, one word “fills” the valence of the word, syntactically dependent on the most valence word, and the word can add an element that is ready to obey; in the case of passive valence, one word “fills” the valence of a word that does not obey it, on the contrary, subordinates it to itself. Passive compatibility is decisive, in particular, for the adjectival attribute, which is important in accordance with the theses set forth below.