The Classification of Words

§ 361. According to their meanings coordinating conjunc­tions are divided into

1. 
   copulative (and, both... and, neither ... nor, not only ...
   but also, as well as, etc.) denoting addition, combination,
   interdependence,
   
2. 
   adversative (but, still, yet, however, nevertheless, etc.)
   denoting contradiction,
   

c) disjunctive (or, either ... or) denoting separation,
choice.
§ 362. Though for and so are considered coordinating con­junctions, they are in fact intermediate between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions.
Like subordinating conjunctions they introduce clauses of cause and result. They are not used in simple sentences.
Like coordinating conjunctions they are always placed be­tween the units they connect. The clauses they introduce are more independent than the corresponding clauses introduced by subordinating conjunctions. This is expressed by the in­tonation and punctuation marks: the for and so clauses are often separated by a semicolon ².
§ 363. The conjunctions are not numerous, but of very fre­quent occurrence in speech.
¹ See В. Н. Ж и г а д л о, И. П. И в а н о в а, Л. Л. И о ф и к,
ор ей., р. 205.
² В. Л. Каушанская and others, op. cit., p. 214.
213
In different situations and speech environments conjunc­tions may acquire various shades of meaning. The conjunc­tion and, for instance, connotes 'consequence' in The nudges were biting, an A he walked on (Galsworthy) and 'contrast' in She is the beauty of the family a n d I am quite plain. (The Times).
THE ARTICLE
§ 364. The two words a(n), the form a separate group or class characterized by
a) the lexico-grammatical meaning of '(in)definiteness', •b) the right-hand combinability with nouns, c) the function of noun specifiers.
§ 365. The lexical meaning of a(n) in Modern English is a very weak reminder of its original meaning (OE. an = one). In spite of the long process of weakening there remains enough of the original meaning in a(n) to exclude the possi­bility of its being attached to a 'plural' noun.
The lexical meaning of the in Modern English is a pale shadow of its original demonstrative meaning.
The general lexico-grammatical meaning of these words, as usual, is not identical with their individual lexical meanings. It abstracts itself from the meaning of 'oneness' in a(n) and the 'demonstrative' meaning in the. Perhaps, the names ofjhe articles ('definite', 'indefinite') denote Jh_e„nearest approach to this lexico-grammatical meanTngT wBich, for lack of a bet­ter term, might be defined as that of 'definiteness — indefi-niteness'.
§ 366. One might be tempted to regard the two articles as members of an opposeme, and the meanings of 'definiteness', 'indefiniteness' as the particular meanings of some grammati­cal category. Language facts, however, contradict such views. As we know, the members of an opposeme must belong to the same lexeme and have identical meanings (barring those opposed). Now a(n) and the do not belong to one lexeme and their meanings are not identical. Besides the meaning of 'indef­initeness' a(n) possesses the meaning of 'oneness' not found in the. The 'demonstrative' meaning of the is alien to a(n).
For similar reasons a book — the book are not analytical members of some noun opposeme, and (he, a(n) are not gram­matical word-morphemes.'
214

1. 
   A(n) and the are not devoid of lexical meaning as
   grammatical word-morphemes are.
   
2. 
   Their meanings are not relative. The has the meaning
   of 'definiteness' not only when opposed to a(n). Cf. snow —
   the snow, books — the books.
   

All this corroborates the view that the articles are individual words with individual lexical meanings united by the general lexico-grammatical meaning of '(m)defi-niteness'.