Theoretical grammar of english

There are some debatable questions:
1) words of category of state (awake, ajar)
Semantically they express state, but some grammatitians argue that they should be grouped separately. Adj-s always express state.
2) some grammatitians suggest that we should treat modal words as a separate part of speech (certainly, possibly). In fact, they appear to be functionally and structurally close to adverbs; though they have certain peculiar positional characteristis.
3) particles (only, merely).
By nature, they seem to be modifiers. If we analize their use in actual speech, we will see that they are a subclass of limiting adv-s.
4) articles (см. про существительные)
Princilpes of classification of words into parts of speech remain unspecified. Many grammatitians try to present the system of parts of speech in which they tried not to imitate the Greek classification. These attempts were productive with languages which were different from Greek. These attempts can be distributed among known approaches of language description.
I. Semantic approach
The noun denotes objects. The verb denotes actions. It is not satisfactory. Jespreson: traditional grammar says that by means of the verb some thing is said about sth or sb but :(“You are a scounderl”) – it is the noun “scoundrel” that says sth about sb. →”scounderl” – verb. The noun denotes object.
Functional criterion.
Some grammatitians believe that the only criterion is functional. So words can only be devided into parts of speech depending on their ability to take inflections. →
Noun – the word that takes the plural inflection “-s”, the inflaction “’s” in the genitive case. Among words we will have to classify different invariable parts of speech (than, for, etc).
One classification was worked out within this approach.
H.Sweet worked out a classification in which he tried to stick to the form of words. Besides, he tried to break from the traditions of classical grammar. He claimed that he represented the facts the way they really existed. Declinable and indeclinable words.
Declinable words: (склоняемые)
1) nouns → n-pronouns, n-numerals, infinitives; gerunds, noun proper.
2) adjectives → adj-proper, adj-pronouns, adj-numerals; participles
3) verbs → finite forms; verbals.
Indeclinable words(несклоняемые)
Adv., prepositions, conjunctions, interjections.
The principles were inconsistent. He started from form (the ability of a word to take inflection). But adj and numerals are indeclinable. Pronouns have few formal exponents. So he violates his basic principles here. He made an attempt to show the double nature of verbals. By him, verbals get into different groups depending on their syntactic features. With numerals and pronouns, he also considered their positions in word-combinations. So words get into different morphological clases depending on their combinability. His classification presents a mixture of formal and meaningful features.
It is hardly possible to creat an idea of an independent word classification