Аңдатпа
A brief review of the linguistic literature on the problem of attachment and parceling in the form of direct quotations, extracted from the publications of the authors who deal with this problem, is presented in the article for the first time. A review of the papers has shown that the connection, expressed by connecting compound constructions that are outside the main sentence, after a dot, is interpreted by scientists ambiguously. The status of connection structures is interpreted in three ways. The main reason is the views of scientists on the nature of attachment and parcellation. The first point of view is typical for the majority of researchers who consider connecting compound constructions to be parceled. They are widely represented in the language of fiction, the media, advertising, less often in the language of journalism. The second point of view is expressed by scientists who see transitivity (syncretism, asymmetry) in the connecting compound constructions. The reason is the discrepancy between form and content, as opposed to traditional. The third point of view belongs to linguists who recognize connecting compound constructions as connecting elements independent of parceling, located outside the main sentence, after the dot. The presented three points of view indicate that the problem of distinguishing between accession and parceling is still relevant. Therefore, research on these and similar issues will continue for a long time. This is evidenced by the transformation of the views of authoritative scientists regarding their linguistic status, and the emergence of new interesting works on these constructions in Russian and other languages. I hope that a short review of quotations will allow the reader to save the time needed to search for the relevant scientific literature, and to quickly navigate the problem of connecting compound constructions.