CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
CHAPTER 1
ON SOME PECULIARITIES OF ENGLISH INTERJECTIONS------------------------------7
1.1 Definition of the Interjection--------------------------------------------------------------7
1.2 Classification of the Interjection----------------------------------------------------------13
CHAPTER 2
MORPHOLOGICAL AND SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF ENGLISH INTERJECTIONS------21
2.1 Morphological features----------------------------------------------------------------------21
2.2 Syntactic Features----------------------------------------------------------------------------28
2.3 Examples of Interjections-----------------------------------------------------------31
CONCLUSION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------35
BIBLIOGRAPHY--------------------------------------------------------------------------------37
 Introduction
Any language in its development acquires its structural and grammatical, communicative,

functional features that are related to the social, intellectual, emotional and other aspects of

human life, which are reflected in the units and categories of language. As the main means

of communication, language is a mean of transmitting information from the speaker to the

listener. Therefore, all items and categories of language respond to the needs and conditions

of the implementation of human communication, which is an important aspect of social

behavior.

In the process of communication a person not only conveys information but also

responds differently to the reality. One of the most important roles is played by those units

of speech that serve the expression of emotions, emotional evaluations, expression and

etiquette. These units are interjections , that include constant words that don't have special

morphological features except irrevocability and phrases and different phrase logical

sentences. Interjections are characteristic features of emotionally colored speech that

determines the accompaniment with paralinguistic, non-verbal means of communication:

intonation, gestures, mimicry.

Thus, the object of the present study is the interjection playing a unique language-

creating role in communication and forming an important part of intercultural

communication.

The purpose of the research is to disclose certain morphological and syntactic features

of English interjections.

Our objectives include:

• classifying types of interjections,

• defining morphological and syntactic features of English interjections,

• giving some examples of interjections and explaining their semantic meanings.

The first chapter of the study (Definition and Types of Interjections) presents the

different definitions of interjections, its types and classification. In this chapter we will

discuss the importance of interjection in English, and the types of interjections according to

their structure, meaning, or rather, according to the predominant semantic features.

In the second chapter (Morphological and Syntactic Features of English Interjections)

purpose is to define the thoughts of linguists according to the conceptualist and non-

conceptualist analyses of interjections; to present the structural (primary and secondary) and

semantic (motive, emotive, interjections of speech etiquette) peculiarities of interjections; to

give proper examples of interjections, in order to show the function they perform in the

sentences.

The results of the research are summarized in the Conclusion.

The list of References includes all the sources (both online and print) that have served

as basis for the present study.

6
 CHAPTER 1

ON SOME PECULIARITIES OF ENGLISH INTERJECTIONS

1.1 Definition of the Interjection

The most common definition of the interjection also known as an ejaculation or an

exclamation claims that an interjection is a short utterance that usually expresses emotion

and is capable of standing alone. It is also defined as a word, phrase, or sound used to convey

an emotion such as surprise, excitement, happiness or anger. Interjections express a speaker’s

current mental state or reaction toward an element in the linguistic or extra linguistic

context. Interjections may be defined using formal, semantic or pragmatic criteria. From a

formal point of view an interjection is defined as a lexical form that

• Conventionally constitutes a none elliptical utterance by itself.

• Does not enter into construction with other word classes.

• Does not take inflectional or derivational affixes.

• Is monomorphic (https://www.researchgate.net/29.03.2020)

It has to be taken for granted that all interjections have some kind of meaning, other-

wise they would probably not find their way in the language jungle and be soon discarded

as redundant. It may be argued, however, whether this meaning is intrinsic, the meaning

which people have assigned to these forms or only onomatopoeic, as echoism involves words

whose very form is imitative of the natural sounds and are only meant to refer to these

sounds and actions thereby. Probably both. The meaning of interjections has been fairly

established since each and every interjection is uttered in a particular language and
7
situational context. However, we have to admit that there are ex-acclamatory sounds which

stand only for representation of particular sonar segments, such as zoster!, for example, and

have no other special meaning.

Everything in language has meaning which can be interpreted; if nothing else than as

representing this or that sound as produced by this or that entity. Therefore, saying that

particular interjections mean nothing is not utterly correct . In this respect, certain authors

claim that interjections “...are purely emotive words which have no referential content nor

any particularly significant grammatical function” (Ameka_Wilkins_2006_interjections)

Interjections have for a long time been an object of controversy. There has been some

doubt whether they are words of a definite language in the same sense as nouns, verbs, etc.

are, and whether they are not rather involuntary outcries, provoked by violent feelings of

pain, joy, surprise, etc., not restricted to any given language but common to all human beings

as biological phenomena are. In our days this controversy is outdated. We can now safely

say that interjections are part of the word stock of a language as much as other types of words

are. Interjections belonging to a certain language may contain sounds foreign to other

languages. Thus, for instance, the English interjection alas contains the vowel phoneme [ae],

which is not found either in the Russian or in the German language; the Russian interjection

ax contains the consonant phoneme [x], which is not found in English, etc. The characteristic

features which distinguish interjections from practically all other words lie in a different

sphere.

8
 The interjections, as distinct from nouns, verbs, prepositions, etc., are not names of

anything, but expressions of emotions. Thus, the emotion expressed by the interjection alas

may be named despondency, or despair, but of course it cannot be named alas.

Another characteristic feature of the meaning of interjections is, that while some of

them express quite definite meanings (for instance, alas can never express the feeling of joy),

other interjections seem to express merely feeling in general, without being attached to some

particular feeling. The interjection oh, for example, may be used both when the speaker feels

surprised and when he feels joyous, or disappointed, or frightened, etc. The meaning of the

interjection itself is thus very vague. The grammatical problems involved in the study of

interjections are to be considered on the usual two levels: that of phrases and that of the

sentence. On the phrase level the problem is whether an interjection can be part of any

phrase, and if so, what types of words can be connected with it. In the vast majority of cases

an interjection does not make part of any phrase but stands (in this sense) isolated. However,

that does not mean that it is impossible for an interjection to make part of a phrase. For

instance, the interjection alas can be connected with the group preposition + noun, naming

the person or thing which causes the feeling expressed by the interjection:

Alas for my friends!

The interjection can be followed by the adjective to form a phrase which itself is the

equivalent of an interjection (Oh dear!). However, on the whole the possibility of an

interjection being part of a phrase is very limited indeed. As far as we can see, an interjection

can only be the first component of a phrase and never occupy the second or any other place

within it.
9
Oh! she used awful grammar but I could see she was trying hard to be elegant, poor thing.

(https://bookfrom.net/28.03.2020)

Interjections are one of the traditional parts of speech, they are grammatically unrelated

to any other part of a sentence. Interjections are very common in spoken English, but they

appear in written English as well. An interjection is followed by an exclamation point, but

it can be followed by a comma if it’s part of a sentence. Interjections are among the first

words human beings learn as children - usually by the age of 1.5 years.

Interjections are commonly regarded as the outlaws of English grammar. Interjections

usually stand apart from normal sentences, definitely maintaining their syntactic

independence. They aren’t marked inflectionally for grammatical categories such as tense or

number.

Interjections are context-bound linguistic signs. They are tied to specific situations and

index elements in the extra-linguistic context. They can thus be thought of as a subclass of

the elements that have come to be known as situation bound utterances. The interpretation

of other interjections involves not only contextualization and substitution of elements, but

also complex processes of Conversational inference.

(https://www.researchgate.net/28.03.2020)

A property of interjections which is often taken to align them with other paralinguistic

elements is their intimate relationship with gestures. Interjections are connected with

gestures in at least two respects.

✓ First-some interjections seem to be the vocal equivalents of holophrastic gestures.

10
✓ Second, interjections tend to be accompanied by gestures and other non-verbal signals

such as facial expressions when they are produced in interaction.

Morphologically, interjections do not normally take inflections or derivations in those

languages that make use of such forms. Interjections tend to have an invariable form. This is

one of the reasons why they have been classified together with particles and other

uninflected words like adverbs. However, this is not an exceptionalness feature of

interjections and some interjections in some languages do take inflectional forms.

Interjections also participate in some derivational processes in various languages. That is,

they can combine with other morphemes to change word classes. Interjections do not enter

into construction with other elements; they are not very well integrated into the clause

grammars of languages. However, they may be linked to other elements by parataxis. That

is, they may be linked as an act to another within a move or they may be an act that is

collateral within the main track of conversational interaction. When they are paratactic ally

linked, they function as a co-text and while constituting a prosodic unit on their own fall

under one sentence intonation contour with their collocates. The discussion above shows

that the formal properties of the elements that constitute the class of interjections vary from

language to language. Despite this, the phonological, morphological and syntactic

peculiarities of interjections are used by some researchers to claim that interjections are not

part of language .(https://www.twirpx.com/28.03.2020

Some English interjections do not contain any vowels, for instance, PSs!, Sh!. From the

point of view of the main sound system of English these are non-words. Furthermore,

interjectional words (like other attention-directing words) may also be associated with non-
11
systemic features such as extra lengthening and wide pitch range. Because of the association

of such extra-systemic features with some members of the class of interjections in some

languages, it has been argued that interjections are not part of language or that interjections

are non-words or semi-words or quasi linguistic vocal signs. However, phonological

aberrance is not restricted to interjections alone, but is a feature also of other elements in

natural languages, especially deictic elements such as pronouns and demonstratives, which

are considered by linguists to be part of the core of the language system. Similarly, in English

the sound [ð] occurs only word initially in pronouns, demonstratives and other deictic

elements such as this, that, they, there, then, thus . Such words are also thus phonologically

anomalous, but they have not been thought of as peripheral linguistic elements. The peculiar

phonology of some interjections should therefore not be used as an argument for considering

them as peripheral to the language system.

1.2 Classification of the Interjection

Now, let us make an attempt to present types of interjections according to their structure,

meaning, or rather, according to the predominant semantic features that their meaning is

composed of, along pragmatic dimension (one such dimension being in terms of the

communicative functions they are understood to serve) or some other criteria. The group of

interjections that have certain emotional expressive potential can be further diversified into

different emotions.

For a proper understanding of the phenomenon of interjections, it seems useful to

distinguish between those words that are primary interjections and secondary interjections.

12
✓ Primary interjections are little words or non-words which in terms of their distribution

can constitute an utterance and a discourse act by themselves and do not normally enter

into constructions with other word classes. They do not represent non-speech sounds.

They form a unique form-meaning unit. According to linguist Martina Dresher primary

interjections generally serve to “lubricate” conversations in a ritualized manner.

✓ Secondary interjections by contrast, are those words which have an independent

semantic value but which can be used conventionally as utterance by themselves to

express a mental attitude or state. Secondary interjections fall such alarms calls and taboo

words such as:

Help! Careful!

Shame! Bother! Drafts!

Secondary interjections are linguistic items that are used in two domains: one relates

primary to the referential domain and the other is interjectional form to the non-referential.

These expressions (such as bless you, congratulations, good grief, hey, hi, oh my, oh my God,

oh well, rats and shoot) are often exclamatory and tend to mix with oaths, swear words,

and greeting formulas.

Although some interjections, especially those based on onomatopoeia and back-

channeling, resemble nonlinguistic items and could be thought of as nonverbal, it is difficult

to extend such a view to all the items usually treated as interjections.

Interjections used by an interlocutor (in the addressee role) to signal that they are

monitoring the conversation or discourse and are attentive to and participating in the on-

going talk. Such interjections are of various types. Some interjections that belong to this
13
class may be used to positively affirm what is being said and possibly to encourage the speaker

to continue without the producer of the interjection assuming the floor. Another class of

interjections are those that are standardly used by an addressee to respond to something that

an interactional participant says. Unlike the interjections that are used to monitor on-going

talk which do not constitute a grounded conversational turn in themselves but are rather

minor contributions or collateral signals, the elements in this class constitute a turn on their

own and the responder assumes the floor, so to speak.

Adopting such an interactional perspective, one can classify interjections as follows:

⚫ Interjections with no real addressee that are an automatic expression of a speaker’s

mental states and actions. They are forms that are a natural out-flowing of a speaker’s

feelings, desires and attitudes and are not necessarily directed at an interlocutor. Several

expressive interjections belong to this category. Swear words which are not directed at

anybody and do not invoke anybody’s actions but express a speaker’s feeling at the time,

such as frustration like the English Fuck!, Shit! or Damn! are also members of this

class.

⚫ Interjections which are directed at an interlocutor and which require a behavioral

rather than a linguistic response from the interlocutor. Examples of such interjections

are the English attention getters Hey! or Yoo-hoo! Also included in this class are

interjections used to demand a non-linguistic action, such as the English Shh meaning I

want silence.

⚫ Interjections used by an interlocutor (in the addressee role) to signal that they are

monitoring the conversation or discourse and are attentive to and participating in the
14
 on-going talk. Such interjections are of various types. There are those that are used to

give positive feedback or back-channeling (the English mhmm). Some interjections that

belong to this class may be used to positively affirm what is being said and possibly to

encourage the speaker to continue without the producer of the interjection assuming

the floor.

⚫ Another class of interjections are those that are standardly used by an addressee to

respond to something that an interactional participant says. Unlike the interjections that

are used to monitor on-going talk which do not constitute a grounded conversational

turn in themselves but are rather minor contributions or collateral signals, the elements

in this class constitute a turn on their own and the responder assumes the floor, so to

speak. Such responses may be affirming or denying or rejecting what has been said. To

this class belong forms that one might call mitigated affirmatives, items in this class

indicate whether information is to be entered into the common ground of the

interaction or not.

⚫ Interjections that belong to a ritual pair or set from which speaker and addressee might

select. From the perspective of what the addressee is doing, we could say that this class

consists of those elements where the addressee-response to a speaker is selected from a

ritual adjacency pair as in salutations .

(https://www.researchgate.net/29.03.2020)

Interjections used by a speaker to give a meta-commentary during their own turn – a

kind of minor speaker contribution to signal, say, problems in formulation or

production. Prototypical forms that belong to this group are um-s and uh-s and other
15
 so called hesitation markers). They function to give an account of how the speaker is

using floor time.

As a classification based on pragmatic function, there are some items that might belong

to more than one class. The pragmatic classification proposed here points to the overlap and

relationship between interjections and other pragmatic markers and situation bound

utterances, especially the forms that have come to be known as discourse markers or

particles. In fact, because of the functions that interjections serve in discourse, there is a

widespread tendency to treat them as a sub-category of discourse or pragmatic particles or

markers. Thus, the pragmatic classification of the interjection is the following:

✓ Gender differences in interjection use

As the example from Somali cited earlier indicates, there can be different sets of interjections

for men and for women. Also, there are indications that the genders differ in the use of

interjections in discourse in different communities of practice.

✓ The acquisition of interjections

Studies of the acquisition of interjections are very rare, and this is certainly an area that

deserves more attention not only from a psycholinguistic perspective but more generally as

a component of language socialisation, and not only in European languages but in non-Indo-

European cultures as well. The studies that exist have focused on the emergence of

interjections in child language and their development.

For instance, Montes (1999) traced the emergence of Spanish interjections in the speech of

a child from age 1.8. It is observed that there was a development from more literal to

contextual uses to the more elaborated discursive functions.

use, production and comprehension of interjections. American English speaking children

were found in one study ranging from age 0.11 to 5.2 to acquire ouch , yuck, and oops early.

However they started using them at different ages because of phonological constraints. It

was also found that the uses of these interjections by the children differed from the use that

adult caregivers made of these interjections ( Asano 1997 ).

✓ The historical pragmatics of interjections

The relatively new field of historical pragmatics has had an impact on the study of

interjections. One question of concern is what the grammaticalisation and lexicalisation

processes that give rise to interjections are. One source that has long been identified and is

implicit in the category of secondary interjections, is that words with an expressive or

attitudinal semantics get used as utterances on their own and by losing any syntagmatic

combinatorial properties, they become interjections.

Similarly some interjections may develop from vocatives and other address terms. Thus some

interjections like French Mon Dieu! and German O Gott! Have evolved from ritual

vocatives used in prayers .

(https://scholar.google.ru/29.03.2020)

Another important source of interjections is where taboo or expressive words are modified

to ‘deform’ them, so to speak, so that they do not resemble the original words.

Apart from how interjections arise, another line of research in the historical pragmatics of

interjections is the study of their use and functions across historical periods in various

17
languages. Of course this is only possible for languages for which we have records that go far

back in history.

✓ The historical pragmatics of interjections

Interjections like other situation-bound routines diffuse and spread across language and

cultural borders. Although interjections and other pragmatic markers are not included in

hierarchies of borrow ability they are regularly borrowed. In fact, it seems that interjections

and other discourse particles commonly become shared features of linguistic areas. Like

other linguistic elements, when interjections diffuse to other languages they may not be

carried over in the same form or with the identical meaning and range of use. For instance,

English swear words like Fuck! and Shit! have spread into Dutch.

The bilingual is the agent for the spread and diffusion of linguistic elements across languages.

The conversations of such bilinguals and the role of interjections and other pragmatic

markers in their speech have just begun to be researched. Another aspect of interjection use,

which also needs more attention, is the question of how to translate interjections across

languages.

CHAPTER 2
18
 MORPHOLOGICAL AND SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF ENGLISH INTERJECTIONS

2.1 Morphological Features

Those who support the sociolinguistic approach contend that an interjection “doesn't seem

to be a statement in the linguistic sense”. Rather, it is a “ritualized act, in something like

the ethological sense of that term”. (https://www.researchgate.net/30.03.2020)

In sociolinguistic viewpoint, interjections are not part of language, and are analyzed in

relation to the socio-communicative roles they play, rather than any linguistic content they

are likely to have. It is, after all, obvious that ouch and most primary interjections, while

being instinctive in some respects, are under our conscious control. If a person brings a

hammer down forcefully on his thumb, the four-letter word he says is unlikely to

commence with o. A person screaming in agony is not screaming ouch. Thus, it can be

stated that interjections do have some kind of meaning in spite of their neglected but

important aspect of foreign language learning and teaching expressive and instinctive

nature.

The linguists who support the semantic approach argue that interjections are

“semantically rich and have a definite conceptual structure which can be explicated”

(https://www.researchgate.net/30.03.2020).

They stress that interjections communicate complex conceptual structures, have a real

semantic content and communication is achieved mainly via encoding conceptual

structures.

Morphologically, the interjections are one of the parts of speech within the system of

English and realize a communicative function:

• expressing pleasure

Ah, that feels good.

• expressing realization

Ah, now I understand.

• expressing resignation

Ah well, it can't be hoped.

• expressing surprise

Ah! I've won!

Dear

• expressing pity

Oh dear! Does it hurt?

• expressing surprise

Dear me! That's a surprise!

Eh

• asking for repetition

It's hot today. Eh?

• expressing enquiry

What do you think of that, eh?

• expressing surprise

Eh! Really?

• inviting agreement
20
 Let's go, eh?

Er

• expressing hesitation

Lima is the capital of...er...Peru.

Hello, hullo

• expressing greeting

Hello John. How are you today?

• expressing surprise

Hello! My car's gone!

Hey

• calling attention

Hey! look at that!

• expressing surprise, joy etc

Hey! What a good idea!

Hi

• expressing greeting

Hi! What's new?

Hmm

• expressing hesitation, doubt or disagreement

Hmm. I'm not so sure.

Oh

• oh expressing surprise
21
 Oh! You're here!

• expressing pain

Oh! I've got a toothache.

• expressing pleading

Oh, please say yes!

Ouch

• expressing pain

Ouch! That hurts!

Uh

• expressing hesitation

Uh...I don't know the answer to that.

Uh-huh

• expressing agreement

Shall we go? Uh-huh.

Um, umm

• expressing hesitation

85 divided by 5 is...um...17.

Well

• expressing surprise

Well I never!

• introducing a question

Well, what did he say?

those languages that make use of such forms. Interjections tend to have an invariable form.

This is one of the reasons why they have been classified together with particles and other

uninflected words like adverbs. However, this is not an exceptionless feature of

interjections and some interjections in some languages do take inflectional forms.

Morphologically, the interjection as part of speech is rather amorphous. Heated disputes

still continue concerning the corpus of interjections and linguistic works on interjections

show significant divergence in interpretations of this part of speech. Among other

suggestions, some grammarians argue that politeness formulas and greetings should be

treated as interjections. Other scientists argue that these language units do not express the

speakers’ emotions, though sometimes they may convey emotional colouring. Moreover,

components within these expressions retain their lexical meaning. Besides, grammatically,

these word combinations may be interpreted as parts of other, larger constructions: Good

morning (I wish you good morning), thank you (I thank you), Goodbye (May God be with

you), etc. Thus, at present, the linguistic status of politeness formulas is hardly specified.

Interjections also participate in some derivational processes in various languages. That

is, they can combine with other morphemes to change word classes. The English interjection

like Wow! ‘I am surprised’ undergoes zero conversion to be used as a verb, as in “She wowed

them during the talk’’ or “You should wow them at the interview” . Other English

interjections like Yum! ‘I like this’ or Yuck! ‘I feel disgusted, I don’t like this’ can be

adjectivalised by the addition of derivational suffixes and used in utterances such as:

This is yummy or
23
 That is a yuckie thing.

Interjections do not enter into construction with other elements; they are not very

well integrated into the clause grammars of languages. However, they may be linked to

other elements by parataxis. That is, they may be linked as an act to another within a move

or they may be an act that is collateral within the main track of conversational interaction.

When they are paratactic ally linked, they function as cotext and while constituting a

prosodic unit on their own fall under one sentence intonation contour with their

collocantes. Some hailing interjections such as hey (English) may be paratactically linked

to other vocatives as in ‘’Hey John!’’. The use of some interjections in spontaneous speech,

however, poses a challenge to their (prosodic) independence.

The discussion above shows that the phonological, morphological and syntactic

peculiarities of interjections are used by some researchers to claim that interjections are not

part of language. In fact, some would argue that since interjections, together with other

emotive response cries like grunts, are natural and universal, they are innate rather than

being culturally transmitted. Of course such an idea has played a pivotal role in arguments

about the evolution of language.

2.2 Syntactic Features

The usual interpretation is that the interjection stands outside the structure of the sentence

(https://www.researchgate.net/30.03.220).

Another view is that it is syntactically a kind of parenthesis at least in some cases The

controversy cannot be decided by objective investigation and the answer only depends on

what we mean by sentence structure on the one hand, and by some element or other being
24
outside the sentence structure, on the other. We will start on the assumption that no element

belonging to a sentence can be outside its structure, and we will treat the syntactical

functions of interjections accordingly. An interjection, then, is, syntactically, a part of the

sentence loosely connected with the rest of it, and approaching a parenthesis in its character.

However, an interjection can also stand quite apart and form a sentence by itself, as in the

following passage: "He refused to marry her the next day!" "Oh!" said Scarlett, her hopes

dashed. (M. MITCHELL) Phrases consisting of two or more words and equivalent to

interjections, such as Dear me! Goodness gracious! Well I never! etc., will be discussed in the

chapter on phrases. After having considered in some detail the morphological and syntactical

peculiarities of different types of words described as parts of speech, we will now turn to

certain words which have not been included in our classification. The possibility , and even

probability of such words existing in a language has been convincingly shown by

Academician L. Ščerba in his paper on parts of speech in Russian, published in 1928. 4 He

pointed out that there may be words in a language which are not included under any

category, and then, as he aptly put it, they would belong nowhere. It would indeed be no

more than a prejudice to suppose that every word of a language "must" belong to some part

of speech. There is nothing in language structure to warrant that assumption. Academician

Ščerba's idea is fully confirmed by some facts of Modern English. If, for instance, we take the

word please, used in polite requests, we shall be at a loss to say to what part of speech it

belongs. Traditionally, it was described as an adverb, but there appears to be no reasonable

ground for this, either in the meaning of the word or in its syntactical function. (The

morphological criterion of course yields nothing here, as the word is invariable like many
25
words belonging to various parts of speech.) Rather than "squeezing" the word into some

part of speech at whatever cost, we had better put up with the fact that it does not fit into

any of them, and leave it outside the system. Another case in point are the words yes and no.

These were also traditionally treated as adverbs, though this was far less justified than even

in the case of please. These two words can form sentences without any other word being

joined on to them. It might be possible, after all, to take this as their basic feature, and to say

that they form a special part of speech, namely, sentence words. However, such a procedure

is extremely doubtful, both because that feature seems hardly sufficient for constituting a

part of speech, and because the number of words involved is so small. It seems therefore

preferable to leave these two words, like the word please, outside the system of parts of

speech. Other words deserving similar treatment may be found, and the possibility of being

left outside the system of parts of speech should be left open to them.

English interjections tend to be used as independent word sentences either in the

principal clause, which they make more emotional, or in isolation. Used with the principal

clause, interjections occur, as a rule, in preposition, or sometimes in postposition. Used in

isolation, an interjection retains its relations with the utterance, since this part of speech is

always defined by a situation. Interjections, occurring independently, in isolation, are treated

by some grammarians as exclamatory sentences.

If an interjection is part of a principal sentence, it is usually regarded as parenthesis.

If it is the case, links within the syntactic structure of the sentence are tighter than in

sentences, where interjections are used in isolation. In very rare cases, the interjection may

become a syntactic nucleus, functioning in agreement with a noun, e.g. Alas for my hopes! It
26
should be noted that the interjection is always used in preposition in the sentences of this

type.

2.3 Examples of Interjections

Ahem - The sound of someone clearing their throat in an attempt to get your

attention

• Aah - Used as a call for help or when someone is scared

• Boo - Used to scare someone or to voice disapproval

• Eh - Used when you didn't hear or understand what someone said

• Eww - Conveys dislike or disgust

• Hmm - Can mean you're thinking or hesitating

• Jeez - Could indicate you can't believe something or you're exasperated

• Ooh-la-la - A slightly comical way to refer to something as fancy or special

• Oops - An exclamation people use when they do something by accident

• Phew - Expressing relief or gladness something is over

• Whoa - Can show surprise or amazement

• Yahoo - Expresses joy or happiness

• Yeah - Demonstrates a very strong affirmation or approval

• Yoo-hoo - An expression used to get someone's attention

• Zing - Usually used comically to emphasize a clever statement or comeback

Here are some more interjections, this time used in the context of an accompanying sentence:

• Ahh, that feels wonderful.

• Bah! That was a total waste of time.

• Bless you! I couldn't have done it without you.

• It's time for me to go. Cheerio!

• Congrats! You finally got your master's degree.

• Crikey! Do you ever think before you speak?

• Gesundheit! Are you starting to get a cold?

• Good grief! Why are you wearing shorts in the winter?

• Grrr. I'm going to get back at him for that.

• Humph. He probably cheated to make such good grades.

• Oh dear! I don't know what to do about this mess.

• Shoot! I forgot my brother's birthday.

• Well, duh! That was a stupid thing to do!

• Yowza! That is a gorgeous gown.

28
 Conclusion
From this paper we make a conclusion, and say that interjections have a great role and

importance in English. They make language more beautiful and flexible. After this work we

can mention several features of interjections that are used in oral and written speech.

• Thus, the combination of semantic and syntactic features proves that the interjection

is undoubtedly a separate independent part of speech. Its Status within the parts-of-

speech system is quite peculiar: the interjection may not be treated either as lexical

or as functional words, since, strictly speaking, it does not have the property of either.

The interjection, however, is characterized by a number of properties, similar to those

of modal words and particles.

• They are words that show emotion either being positive or negative.

• Generally, interjections are sounds or utterances that express the speaker’s feelings.

They are used intuitively and should, therefore, not present a real problem

in conversation.

• The only difficulty that may arise is to interpret the uttered emotion correctly. These

words don’t carry a lot of linguistic importance and are not grammatically related to

the sentence that they are in, but are still widely used in the English language.

• Bear in mind that all interjections can be used with a comma, exclamation

mark, question mark etc. It’s completely subjective to the person using it. In speech

they basically act as separate units, syntactically independent of the main sentence.

they may signify different moods and, above all, communicate irony.

29
• Likewise, the list illustrates only a few examples and could, of course, be amended at

will due to unlimited possibilities of showing feelings. There are

many more exclamatory words in English.

30
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Ameka, F. (1992) Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal

of Pragmatics 18: 101-118.

2. Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.

3. Wilson, D. & D. Sperber (1988) Mood and the analysis of non-declarative sentences.

In Dancy, J., J

4. Bach, K. & R. Harnish. (1979) Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

o
5. Vladimir Ž. Jovanović Linguistics and Literature Vol. 3, N 1, 2004, pp. 17 – 28

6. D. Blaganje, I. Konte (1979) Modern English Grammar, Državna Založba Slovenije,

Ljubljana.

7. G. Broughton (1990) Penguin English Grammar A-Z, Penguin Books,

Harmondsworth.

8. D. Crystal (1985) A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, Basil Blackwell,

Oxford.

9. G. O. Curme (1947) English Grammar, Barnes & Noble Books, New York.

10. J. R. Eckersley, J. M. Eckersley (1966) A Comprehensive English Grammar for

Foreign Students, Longman, London.

31