The Functional-Cognitive Characteristics of Interrogative Utterances in Modern Ukrainian

The article presents a comprehensive multifaceted description of interrogative sentences in terms of the interaction of their semantic-syntactic (syntaxeme) and formal-grammatical articulation with their communicative articulation (relevant). The syntaxeme structure of interrogative sentences is determined according to the communicative intentions of the speaker. In particular, the following substantial syntaxemes, which serve as a means of modelling questions, are outlined: 1) the indefinite-interrogative subject of an action (physical, locative, intellectual, verbal); 2) the indefinite-interrogative subject of a state (physical, psycho-emotional, intellectual, locative, emotional-evaluative attitude, possessive); 3) the indefinite-interrogative subject of qualification feature, identification; 4) the indefinite-interrogative subject of a qualitative feature; 5) the indefinite-interrogative subject of a process; 6) the indefinite-interrogative object of an action (physical, intellectual-mental, verbal, perceptual); 7) the indefinite-interrogative object of a state (desire, intellectual); 8) the indefinite-interrogative object of a process (physical, psycho-emotional); 9) the indefinite-interrogative object of a qualitative feature; 10) the indefiniteinterrogative addressee of an action or state; 11) the indefinite-interrogative means or instrument of an action; 12) the indefinite-interrogative locative. All of these syntaxemes replace the positions of controlled subordinate parts in the formalsyntactic structure of a simple sentence. The emphasis is placed on interrogative words in the field of adverbial syntaxemes, in particular time, reasons, purposes, conditions, manner, and sources of information, which at the formal-syntactic level remain in the position of determinants — subordinate parts of the sentence. The specifics of the thematic-rhematic articulation of interrogative utterances and their communicative variants are examined. It is found that the communicative intention of the speaker’s request determines the intonation type of the question (full dictal, partial dictal, full modal, partial modal), and the syntaxeme and formal structure of the interrogative sentence. The communicative intention also determines the semantic, morphological and positional variants of the interrogative marker. It is observed that interrogative words are usually positioned at the beginning of the sentence and form the rheme of the sentence.


Introduction
Among all the communicative types of utterances, a special role in the language system is assigned to interrogative constructions, which verbalize one of the most important illocutionary tasks of a speaker -the intention of request. Corresponding speech acts must include, in addition to the speaker, the addressee of speech to whom the request is addressed. Through questions, the speaker tries to obtain the information they need by encouraging the interlocutor to answer. Such characteristics of interrogative sentences to some extent bring them closer to imperative sentences, which express the will of the speaker. In addition, the illocution of interrogation contains the desired modality, the desire of the speaker to learn something or to fill information gaps in their competencies. Interrogative utterances, as well as imperative and narrative utterances, are the objects of study of communicative speech syntax, which first of all aims to establish the peculiarities of their intonation and semantic-syntactic articulation in a particular speech situation. However, any utterance, in addition to its communicative organization, has a semantic-syntactic and formal-grammatical structure in the language system. A multifaceted approach to the analysis of syntactic units and categories, based on the interaction of three main aspects -formalsyntactic, semantic-syntactic and communicative -dominates the modern linguistic paradigm. In Ukrainian linguistics, different constructions (fragmentary and interrogative) have been studied by I. R. Vykhovanets (Vykhovanets , 1993), K. H. Horodenska (Horodens ka, 1991), P. S. Dudyk (Dudyk, 1999), M. Ya. Pliushch (Pliushch, 2016), A. P. Zahnitko (Zahnitko, 2001), M. V. Mirchenko (Mirchenko, 2004), M. O. Vintoniv (Vintoniv, 2013), N. M. Kostusiak (Kostusiak, 2012), O. H. Mezhov (Mezhov, 2012), and others. In Ukrainian grammar, the first systematic description of sentences of direct (clarifying) and indirect interrogation, which forms the basis of textbooks on Ukrainian syntax, was proposed by L. O. Kadomtseva (Kadomtseva, 1972, pp. 128-133). In recent times, the studies of S. T. Shabat-Savky (Shabat, 2000(Shabat, , 2001Shabat-Savka, 2016, 2019 have been devoted to relevant issues of content, markers of the actualization of intentions of request, and the communicative-pragmatic and derivational potential of interrogative utterances. Noteworthy are the review articles by M. V. Pankova on the evolution of linguistic views on the semantic and communicative structure of interrogative sentences, and the features of their thematic-rhematic articulation (Pankova, 2009(Pankova, , 2013. The problems raised by previous research require in-depth study. Particular attention should be paid to the balance between the formal, semantic and communicative organization of interrogative sentences in modern Ukrainian. It is important to study the semantic-syntactic potential of words that are directly involved in the formation of interrogative content. Pronouns and adverbs are dominant among such lexical items yet have been analysed the least in comparison with other parts of speech. Most recent studies have analysed the semantic potential of adjectives (Dimitrova & Stefanova, 2018), verbs and nouns (Dziob & Piasecki, 2018;Kostusiak, 2012;Mezhov, 2012;Mirchenko, 2004;Zahnitko, 2001).
New source bases should be used for research, in particular mass media texts as they best reflect language dynamics. It is important to study how some interrogative sentences, formed by journalists, implement the communicative-pragmatic function. It is also important to identify the dominant formal means of expressing different intentions of request and to characterize them in terms of cognitive load and the thematic-rhematic articulation of utterances.
The purpose of the article is therefore to present a comprehensive multifaceted description of interrogative sentences in terms of the interaction of their semantic-syntactic (syntaxeme) and formal-grammatical articulation with their communicative articulation (relevant). Achieving this goal involves the following main tasks: 1) to establish the syntaxeme structure of interrogative sentences in accordance with the communicative intentions of the speaker; 2) to study the specifics of the thematic-rhematic articulation of interrogative utterances and to identify their communicative variants; 3) to characterize the formal means of expressing interrogative modality in different types of utterances. or knowingly provide false information, etc., the communication act must be considered to have been unsuccessful. S. T. Shabat-Savka states: "The linguistic form of expression of the category of interrogation represents a qualitative characteristic of the information gap in the knowledge of the subjects of communication -their desire to specify or clarify information, confirm or deny a fact of reality…" (Shabat-Savka, 2016, p. 105). This interpretation of the researcher served as the basis for distinguishing, following L. O. Kadomtseva (Kadomtseva, 1972, pp. 128-133), two typical expressions of intentions of request -specifying and clarifying (Shabat-Savka, 2016, p. 105).
R. Vykhovanets divides interrogative sentences according to the type of question and the expected answer into general interrogative (usually clarifying) and partial interrogative (specifying). Vykhovanets notes: "General questions are focused on either the affirmative answer (Yes), or the negative answer (No), or other modifications of these answers. Partial interrogative sentences are aimed at obtaining some new partial information" (Vykhovanets , 1993, p. 146).

Peculiarities of the Syntaxeme Structure of Partial Interrogative Sentences
The semantic-syntactic structure of partial interrogative sentences is determined by the nature of the information that the speaker seeks to obtain: information about the performer of the action or the bearer of the process, a state, qualitative and quantitative features; the person (other being) or object to whom/which an action, process, state is directed; the person to whom an action is addressed; the instrument or means of transportation; the location of a person (another being), the location of an object, the direction and mode of movement; the circumstances under which (or contrary to which) certain actions took place, or processes, states (time, cause, condition, etc.) took place; about an event, process or state. In order to clarify the required partial information, the following syntaxemes are used: All of these interrogative forms refer to unknown, unclear, or unspecified (for the speaker) objects, features, and circumstances, which the speaker intends to learn from the interlocutor by structuring interrogative sentences and waiting for specific answers.
The main feature of the semantic-syntactic organization of partial interrogative sentences is that interrogative words or phrases are usually located at the beginning of the construction, regardless of their syntactic function or mode of expression. The representatives of semanticsyntactic functions in a simple sentence are syntaxemes distinguished on the basis of semantic relations -minimal syntactic units of semantic variety, which reflect the relationship between objects and phenomena of the extralinguistic world (Vykhovanets , 1993, p. 245).
All of the previously characterized substantial syntaxemes replace the positions of the controlled subordinate parts in the formal-syntactic structure of a simple sentence due to the valence of basic predicates.

The Thematic-Rhematic Articulation of Partial Interrogative Utterances
The thematic-rhematic articulation of partial interrogative utterances is peculiar, and is closely related to the semantic-syntactic articulation. If in narrative utterances the theme usually precedes the rheme, then in partial interrogative utterances the theme follows the rheme. This means that in the thematic-rhematic articulation of partial interrogative utterances, any interrogative markers fall into the communicative position of the rheme: substantive, adverbial and predicate syntaxemes, expressed by pronominal words (nouns, adjectives, numerals and adverbs) or other units that "form the semantic centre of interrogative utterances, reflect the intentional horizons of the speaker…" (Shabat-Savka, 2019, p. 266).
Thus, the number of possible communicative variants of a partial modal question is directly proportional to the number of syntaxemes within it.
If the speakers do not know the event in general, then their so-called complete dictal question (in the terminology of S. Balli), is not directed to part of the information, but to the entire content of the utterance (Balli, 1955, p. 47

Summary
The selected and analysed source base made it possible to identify some differences from the previously proposed theoretical statements. In particular, in addition to the previously stated division of interrogative constructions into those which implement full and partial dictation questions, we may talk about the existence of complete and partial modal questions. It was also found that interrogative utterances from headlines and from journalistic texts differ slightly. I headlines the intention of the request is usually partially levelled out. The communicative-pragmatic potential of such sentences, however, does not decrease. The illustrative material made it possible to identify a number of specific features of the analysed syntactic items.
Compared to the narrative sentences in headlines, the interrogative sentences are more aimed at interesting readers, encouraging them to read the article. The study of syntactic units with different functional potentials with the intention of request allows us to state that the headlines are dominated by sentences focused on obtaining new information about the subject. In accordance with the illocutionary purpose, the authors often use questions about the circumstances of events. The implementation of this function is often oriented to interrogative pronominal adverbs, which serve as a means of expressing adverbial syntaxemes, in particular time, reason, purpose, condition, and manner. Quantitatively, they are much inferior to sentences in which the speaker formulates questions about objects, recipients and sources of information. The structures that implement questions about means of transportation, instruments and locatives are on the periphery. At the same time, the similarity of all the partial interrogative utterances is revealed in their communicative structure, which consists in the preposition of the rheme to the theme and in forming the rheme with the different partial linguistic status of interrogative words, which indicates their informational significance. This pattern is slightly broken in general interrogative constructions, where the main emphasis is on the expression of modal shades of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, hesitation, and surprise through the use of interrogative particles.
The communicative organization of interrogative sentences is closely related to their semanticsyntactic organization. The communicative intention of the speaker's request determines the intonation type of the question (full dictal, partial dictal, full modal, partial modal), and accordingly the syntaxeme and formal structure of the interrogative sentence, and the semantic, morphological and positional variants of the interrogative marker.
Prospects for further research lie in the study of the communicative and semantic-syntactic organization of improper-interrogative sentences (rhetorical questions, interrogations, imperative questions), which are significantly close to narrative or imperative sentences.