Boguslavsky and. M. Coordinating conjunctions and syntactic conflicts52

And in the patched coat

1.1. The principle of single-functionality of composed members

1.2. Secondary Allied Link

2. Allied connections and single unions

3. Non-canonical coordinating constructions with conjunctions

3.1. Bias

3.2. asymmetrical contraction

4. Asymmetric "transfer without drop" design

4.1. Varieties of this design

4.2. Construction "Transfer without omission" as a way to resolve a syntactic conflict

4.3. Coordinating conjunctions and syntactic conflicts

6. Other ways to resolve the conflict

7. Conclusion

Control questions

Dmitriev b. A. On the question of homogeneous members of the sentence a Are the classics literate?58

Grammatical paradoxes

Where to look for an explanation

Control questions

Gavrilova G. F. Phenomena of syntactic transitivity in a compound sentence and their systemic relations76

§ 1. Constructions transitional between compound and simple sentences

Control questions

Cheremisina M. I. About “homogeneous predicates”95

Control questions

§ 2. Functional identity of words and coordinative connection

§ 3. Logical, lexico-semantic and morphological compatibility of words within the boundaries of a composed series

§ 4. On the limits of composed series

§5. Ways of linking word forms in composed rows and their main structural types

§ 6. Homogeneous and explicative members of a sentence

§7. Homogeneous and repeating members of a sentence

§8. Homogeneous verbal predicates and some varieties of the complicated simple predicate

§9. Simple sentences with homogeneous main members and similar complex sentences

Control questions

Offers with comparative turns Sannikov v.Z. Syntax of Russian composing constructions138

1. Two meanings of the term "homogeneity"

2. Types of homogeneity of composed terms

3. Types of homogeneity of compared members: functional and lexico-semantic

4. Types of coordinative and comparative constructions

Homogeneity types of composed terms and comparata

1. On the semantic similarity of coordinating and comparative constructions

2. About the rules of combination of composed or compared terms

3. On the structural proximity of coordinating and comparative conjunctions

4. Structural difference between coordinative and comparative constructions

1. Existing ways of presenting coordinative constructions

2. The proposed way of presenting coordinative and comparative constructions

3. Disadvantages of the proposed method

Control questions

Kartsevsky s. O. Comparison147

Control questions

Proposals with separate secondary members Peshkovsky a. M. Detached Minor Members148

IV. Detached adjoining members.

Control questions

10. What a. M. Peshkovsky understands the parallelism of stresses?

Separate members of the sentence153

§ 1. General information about separate members of the proposal

§ 2. Syntactic conditions for isolation

§ 3. Morphological conditions of isolation

§ 4. Semantic conditions of isolation

§ 5. Optional isolation

Control questions

Ryabova a. I., Odintsova, I. V., Kulkova d. A. Russian gerund in a functional aspect163

Chapter I Russian gerund and non-traditional categories for it

Chapter II Semantic-syntactic functions of the gerund

§ 1. Functions of gerunds determined by their direct (direct) connection with the subject

§2. Functions of gerunds determined by their indirect (indirect) connection with the subject

Chapter III Participle constructions and questions of syntactic synonymy. Participle action, its denotative and syntactic status

Control questions

Ryabova a. I. Periphrastic gerund constructions198

Control questions

Sentences with appeals, introductory and intercalary units

Predicative characteristics in the position of address212

Control questions

Leontiev a. P. Appeal as a component of an utterance231

1.1. Number

1.3. Face

1.4. case

Control questions

Kolosova T. A. Once again on the phenomenon of introductoryness and insertion253

Control questions

Content

Complicated sentence syntax Anthology for seminars on the course “Modern Russian language. Syntax of a Complicated Sentence"

630090, Novosibirsk, 90, st. Pirogov, 2.

1.2. Secondary Allied Link

The first direction of the destruction of the compositional canon is manifested in the absence of syntactic monofunctionality of composed members, which is compensated by their semantic one-dimensionality. This phenomenon has two varieties, differing in whether the semantic commonality of the members initially exists or whether it appears only in a situation.

The type of constructions most mastered by the language with composed members that have an initial semantic commonality are constructions with pronouns (interrogative, negative, indefinite and generalizing) (Beloshapkova 1977: 23):

(3a) NobodyAndneveraboutthisNotthought.

(3b.) WhoAndonHow manylate?

They are adjoined by constructions with a close type of meaning, but expressed by non-pronominal words; cf. pronominal combination AllAndAlways and non-pronominal

(4) ManyAndoften(arrivemoreworse).

The commonality of the meaning of composed members can be embodied in their lexeme identity (or the identity of the root morpheme):

(5a) I'm talkingWithpoetAndOpoet[example of V. Z. Sannikov].

(5 B) FelloniceNotWithhorses,AWithhorse:bigdifferenceFormyequestrianpride(A. S. Pushkin).

(5v) AlthoughdecryptionlinearletterswascompletedVEnglandAndEnglishman,ByhisimagethoughtsMichaelVentrislessTotallooked likeon"typicalEnglishman".

There are also such constructions in which the semantic commonality of the composed members is not initially set, but appears only in the situation:

(6a) clerk…VeryfastAndVdifferentdirectionsstirredfingers(example from Peshkovsky 1956).

(6b) I thinkmyselfentitledwriteto youpencil,VbedAndmosthomemadeletter(A. Blok).

(6v) foreverYouwriteletterspencilorVbed.

Thus, constructions of type (3)–(6) have the following common property that they contain such elements of the sentence that refer to the same element, but perform different roles with respect to it and, therefore, could be subordinated to it. At the same time, constructions (3)–(5) with a “soldered” semantic commonality of composed genes are grammaticalized to a greater or lesser extent, while constructions like (6) show the speaker’s special intention to point out the one-dimensionality of certain aspects of the situation with some actual at the moment points of view. This side of the matter was clearly described by A. M. Peshkovsky: realizing “certain subordinate members as homogeneous in some way, we get the opportunity to connect them with unions, no matter how far they are from each other both grammatically and logically” (Peshkovsky 1956 : 442). Sentence (6a) differs from the corresponding sentence of the essay in that speed and direction are perceived as one-dimensional characteristics of movement. In this regard, I would like to pay attention to constructions with interrogative pronouns of the type (3b) (Kreidlin 1983). In them, the difference from the corresponding sentence without an essay is not limited to an indication of the commonality of the composed interrogative elements. Let's compare (3b) and (7):

(3b) WhoAndonHow manylate?

(7) WhoonHow manylate?

In (3b) we are dealing with a simple set of two questions: Wholate?OnHow manylate? In (7) only one question is presented - the magnitude of the delay of each of the latecomers, or, more precisely, about the compliance between the (already known) set of latecomers and the set of time intervals that characterize the magnitude.

The next direction in which the writing canon is being blurred is associated with constructions containing the so-called secondary allied connection (Priyatkina 1977, Grammar 1980: 179):

(8a) Hesings,Andnot bad.

(8b) Boywalks,Butfew.

(8v) Uswas toshort-lived,Butparting.

In these sentences, the union connects elements that are already related to each other. subordination. Therefore, when the union is eliminated from the sentence, it does not lose its coherence: walks,Butfew=> walksfew. Such an allied connection is called secondary, since it is, as it were, "superimposed" on the subordinate connection, which is the primary basis of the phrase.

Constructions of type (3)–(7) and constructions of type (8) are usually considered as fundamentally different (Priyatkina 1977, Grammar 1980, Sannikov 1980). Indeed, there are serious differences between them, which we will dwell on later. However, it is impossible not to notice that the constitutive property of the secondary allied connection - the imposition of the composition on the subordination - is equally applicable to both types of constructions. True, this overlay occurs in several different ways. In (3)–(7), the terms connected by the union are subordinate to some third one, and in (8) one of them is subordinate to the other. Therefore, by the way, composed series of type (3)–(7) can consist of three or more terms, while series of type (8) are always two-term.

Thus, somewhat expanding the accepted word usage, we will say that there are two types of constructions with a secondary allied connection - constructions with primordial subordination of composed members (conditionally - type A) and constructions with primordial subordination (conditionally - type B). Let us turn to the similarities and differences between the constructions of type A and type B.

Constructions of both types are usually pronounced with a separate logical stress on each of the composed members. Consider the offer

(9) INthisyearHerestedonsouth,Butsavage.

If you pronounce it with the first logical stress on combinations onsouth, then the union will connect the elements onsouth And savage, and the construction will be of type A. If the logical stress falls on the verb, then the composed elements will be a combination restedonsouth And savage, and the structure will fall into type B.

The constructions of both types are opposed to the corresponding constructions without composition by their communicative organization. The secondary connection divides the sentence into as many separate statements as there are composed members. The multiplicity of logical stresses noted above is also connected with this. It is characteristic that in those cases when the subordinate elements each have such a large communicative weight that they are incompatible within the framework of one statement, the essay turns out to be obligatory:

(10a) HeleftfarAndfor a long time.

(10b) *Heleftfarfor a long time.

Let us now turn to the differences between constructions of type A and type B. The most significant of these is what semantic relationship is established between the composed members. Let us return, for example, to sentence (6b) (type A). The speaker informs us that in the situation described, he considers the elements “pencil”, “in bed” and “the most homely writing” as one-dimensional, brought, according to A. M. Peshkovsky, under the same rubric (“informal relations between the author letter and its addressee).

In example (8a) (type B), the speaker does not at all suggest that we consider the meanings “sings” and “not bad” at least in some sense to be semantically one-dimensional. Union And only turns a single statement "he sings well" into two separate ones - "he sings" and "he does it well". The difference between constructions of type A and type B is well reflected in the terms of V. Z. Sannikov: “semantic-composing construction” (type A) vs. "communicative-composing construction" (type B).

As example (8a) shows, the semantic components connected by the union in constructions of type B are not independent, but are nested one into the other. This explains another difference between types A and B: in constructions of type A, the union is allowed or(see (6c)), while in constructions of type B it is impossible.

(11)*Hesings,ornot bad.

The point here is that the union or is in principle able to connect only such statements about which the speaker admits that only one of them can take place, and at the same time it is not known in advance which one. If we speak

(12) TomorrowWelet's goVmovieorVtheater,

then we admit that each of the possibilities can be realized separately (although, perhaps, we do not exclude the possibility that both are realized at once). Otherwise, that is, if the speaker did not allow their separate implementation, he would have to use the union And:

(13) TomorrowWelet's goVmovieAndVtheater.

It is this property, the independent separate realizability of both alternatives, that is violated in (11). If the second alternative is fulfilled (“he sings well”), then the first one is certainly fulfilled (“he sings”).

Now that we have discussed the similarities and differences between Type A and Type B constructions, we can return to the question posed above, the question of the internal sources of decanonization in these constructions. In order to discover them, one should turn to a deeper - semantic - level of presentation of sentences, at which their meaning is revealed more explicitly. We will demand from this level that, in particular, the semantic spheres of action of valence words be presented explicitly on it (but the semantic decomposition of these words themselves has not been carried out).

Consider sentences (14a, b) with conjunction But:

(14a) Herestedonsouth,Butsavage(type A).

(14b) Herested,Butfew(type B).

First of all, it is important to emphasize that in the semantic structure of sentences (14a)–(14b) there is not one proposition, but two. This follows already from the very semantics of the union But, which characterizes the relationship between two events: R,ButQ= "it is natural to expect that the event R accompanied by an event Not-Q; in this case the event R accompanied by the event Q'" (Levin 1970: 78). Semantic structure of sentences with union But should explicitly indicate those events R and Q, the relationship between which is described by this union. Reconstructing these events, we obtain structure (15a) for sentence (14a), and structure (15b) for (14b):

(15a) "he rested in the south, but he rested as a savage";

(15b) "he rested, but he rested little."

Additional evidence in favor of the two-part structure of structures (15a)–(15b) is the fact that each of the elements connected by the union in (14a)–(14b) has a logical accent that marks separate statements.

Structures (15a)–(15b) obviously do not contradict the canon of the composition. In them, the union connects units of the same type - whole propositions. On the way from these structures to sentences (14a)–(14b) there must be a transformation similar in its tasks to the transformation of the coordinative abbreviation, but not coinciding with it in terms of application. Both transformations reduce identical components in composed propositions. But if the coordinative contraction requires that the composed terms resulting from the contraction have the same syntactic and communicative functions in the original propositions, then this condition is not satisfied for the transformation that generates constructions with secondary allied connections. In case (14a), the composed terms onsouth And savage perform different syntactic functions, although they are semantically matched. In case (14b), the difference from the coordinative abbreviation is even more significant: in the first proposition of the structure (15b) there is no component at all, semantically associated with the element “little”, and, in addition, the abbreviated component rested performs significantly different communicative roles in composed propositions (rheme in the first proposition and theme in the second). However, it is beyond our task to give a complete formal description of this transformation. It is more important for us to note that it is precisely at the moment when this transformation is carried out that the destruction of the compositional canon occurs.

So, constructions with a secondary allied connection are constructions whose semantic structures still have the properties of a canonical composition, while surface structures already lose them.

However, the canon has a certain stability, and incentives of sufficient strength are needed to go beyond it. In constructions of type A and B, these stimuli seem to be different.

Type A constructions are based on the speaker's desire to find something in common in the different, to bring heterogeneous phenomena under a single heading, if this meets his communicative needs in this situation. This factor works the easier, the easier it is to find commonality in subordinate elements, the more “on the surface” this common lies, the less it depends on the context (cf. the chain (3)–(4)–(5)–(6)) .

Type B constructions, as we have already noted, do not impose on us the view that the elements connected by the union are one-dimensional. For these elements, the only thing that is common is that they perform the same communicative role - the role of a rheme - in the corresponding propositions of the semantic structure. Here the actor is responsible for decanonization, requiring the most compact expression of two communicatively independent propositions.

ALLIED COMMUNICATION. Such a connection between individual words and phrases, which is expressed by unions (see, for example, table and chair); I bought two pencils and a box of pens; the door opened and Marya Pavlovna entered; or rain, or snow, or will, or No; in the old But clean dress; That the sun will hide That shines too brightly; the prisoner turned pale, When he was called; He did not come, because his father died; papa says What he will buy me a horse, etc.

- between Prussia and Russia signed on 3 November. in Potsdam after the surrender of the Austrian army near Ulm. To P. s. Austria joined ...
- Team work bodies of the Union State and bodies state power participating states, reflecting the political, social and economic interests of the union state, ...
Emergency Glossary
- whale. revolutionary organization founded by Sun Yat-sen in 1905. See Tongmenghui...
Soviet historical encyclopedia
- connection of two or more circuits using a common magnetic flux. See induction law...
Marine vocabulary
- Pondicherry, Puttucci, a union territory within India. The area is 0.5 thousand km2. Population 0.5 million people . Administrative center‒ City of Pondicherry...
between Russia and Prussia. Signed in Potsdam on October 22 on the part of Russia by Prince A. A. Czartorysky, on the part of Prussia by the state and cabinet minister Baron K. A. Hardenberg ...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- Chinese revolutionary organization founded by Sun Yat-sen in 1905; see Tongmenghui...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- in the USSR, a sovereign national Soviet socialist state, voluntarily united for the purpose of mutual assistance in the field of economic, political and defense with others ...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- secret, between Russia and France. Developed during the negotiations between Alexander I and Napoleon I in Erfurt...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- between Russia and France, confirmed the Treaty of Tilsit in 1807. Napoleon I recognized Russia's rights to Finland, Moldavia and Wallachia ...
Big encyclopedic Dictionary
- The connection of homogeneous members or parts of a complex sentence with the help of unions. see homogeneous members of a sentence, a compound sentence ...
Dictionary of linguistic terms
- HF communication / s, ...
merged. Apart. Through a hyphen. Dictionary-reference
- HF-sw "...
- KV-sv "...
Russian spelling dictionary
Synonym dictionary
- noun, number of synonyms: 1 connection ...
Synonym dictionary

"Allied bond" in books

Chapter nine. Union army

From the book Fifty Years in Service author Ignatiev Alexey Alekseevich

Novgorod - sovereign union community

From the book Course of Russian History (Lectures I-XXXII) author Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich

Novgorod - a sovereign union community Novgorod did not have its own permanent princes. In theory, the common property of the princely family, owned in turn by its senior representatives, the grand dukes, he became a draw in practice. Choosing princes arbitrarily on terms of hire and feed,

Allied diplomacy

From book one World War author Utkin Anatoly Ivanovich

Allied Diplomacy On the evening of January 19, 1915, the Germans launched their first Zeppelin raid against Britain. The war has acquired certain contours in the air, on land, sea and under water. Strange as it may seem to review it now, but by the spring of 1915 an optimistic

allied cavalry

From the book The Army of Alexander the Great the author Second Nick

Allied cavalry Greek cities - members of the Corinthian Union - were required to supply reinforcements to the expeditionary army in the form of cavalry and infantry contingents. However, obviously not all of these states had their own cavalry. Diodorus talks about the presence in the army

Allied conference in Sparta (432 BC).

From the book Volume 1. Diplomacy from ancient times to 1872. author Potemkin Vladimir Petrovich

Allied conference in Sparta (432 BC). After that, the Corinthians, Potideans and Perdikkas sent embassies to Sparta demanding the immediate convening of an all-union meeting (syllogos) regarding Athens’ violation of the treaty of 445. This protest was supported by

Allied diplomacy

From the book The Forgotten Tragedy. Russia in World War I author Utkin Anatoly Ivanovich

Allied Diplomacy On the evening of January 19, 1915, the Germans launched their first Zeppelin raid against Britain. The war has acquired certain contours in the air, on land, sea and under water. Strange as it may seem to see it now, but by the spring of 1915 an optimistic attitude prevailed in the West.

Allied intervention and white politics

author

Allied intervention and white politicians Allied intervention was for white politicians and the military both a great success and an exorbitant political burden. As early as the spring of 1918, many opponents of the Bolsheviks seemed to expect nothing with such impatience as the intervention

Allied intervention and the white army

From the book Provincial "counter-revolution" [White movement and Civil War in the Russian North] author Novikova Ludmila Gennadievna

Allied intervention and white army The dissatisfaction and opposition to the intervention, which was quite clearly manifested among northern politicians and the public, was perhaps nowhere so obvious as in the white army. Conflicts between white officers and allies escalated

Union Territory of Chandigarh (Chandigarh, 238 km north of Delhi) Telephone code (STD) - 172chandigarhtourism.gov.incitco.nic.inPopulation - about 0.9 million people. (2001) Territory - 100 km2 Main languages - Hindi, Punjabi, English. Airport - 11 km south of the city center. Flights to Delhi daily. Railway

Operation Allied Force

From book big war author

Operation " Allied Force» Operation Allied Force is a NATO military operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from March 24 to June 10, 1999. NATO has invaded Yugoslavia before. In 1995, for the first time, NATO aircraft launched heavy air strikes against

Operation Allied Force

From the book Tomorrow there will be war author Burovsky Andrey Mikhailovich

Operation Allied Force Operation Allied Force is a NATO bloc's military operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from March 24 to June 10, 1999. NATO has invaded Yugoslavia before. In 1995, for the first time, NATO aircraft launched heavy air strikes on Serbs to

ALLIED COMMUNICATION

The connection of homogeneous members or parts of a complex sentence with the help of unions. see homogeneous members of a sentence, compound sentence. cf. : unionless connection.

Dictionary of linguistic terms. 2012

What is a complex sentence?

Difficult sentence - a sentence, which consists of two or more grammatical bases, is an intonation-shaped semantic unity that expresses a certain meaning. Depending on the ratio of parts, complex sentences are distinguished with a coordinating subordinating and non-union connection.

Compound sentences with coordinating link

Compound sentences - allied sentences, which consist of equal parts connected by a coordinating link. Parts of compound sentences are combined into one whole with the help of coordinating, adversative or divisive conjunctions. In a letter, a comma is placed before the union between parts of a compound sentence.

Examples of compound sentences: The boy shook the tree, and ripe apples fell to the ground. Katya went to college, and Sasha stayed at home. Either someone called me, or it seemed.

Compound sentences with subordinating link

Complex sentences - allied proposals, consisting of unequal parts, which are connected by a subordinating relationship. In complex sentences, the main part and the dependent (subordinate) part are distinguished. Parts of the NGN are interconnected with the help of unions and allied words. In a letter, between parts of a complex sentence, a comma is placed before the union (union word).

Examples of complex sentences: He picked a flower to give to his mother. Those present were wondering where Ivan Petrovich came from. Misha went to the store that his friend was talking about.

Usually a question can be posed from the main clause to the subordinate clause. Examples: I came home (when?) when everyone had already sat down to supper. We learned about (what?) what happened yesterday.

Compound sentences with non-union connection

Unionless complex sentences are sentences, parts of which are connected only with the help of intonation, without the use of unions and allied words.

Complex sentences with different types of connection

Mixed complex sentences may include several sentences connected by a coordinating, subordinating and non-union connection. In writing in mixed complex sentences, punctuation is observed, which is characteristic of complex, complex and non-union sentences.

Examples: Vitya decided: if the teacher asks him to answer the question, he will have to admit that he did not prepare for the lesson. To the right hung a picture depicting a blooming garden, and to the left stood a table with carved legs. The weather worsened: a strong wind rose and it began to rain, but it was warm and dry in the tent.

If complex sentences as part of a mixed sentence form logical-syntactic blocks, a semicolon is placed between such blocks. Example: On the porch, a sparrow was pecking at grains that grandmother had accidentally scattered; at this time, papa came out, and the bird hastily flew away.

What have we learned?

Compound sentences can include simple and complex sentences.
In terms of meaning, parts of complex sentences can be equal and unequal.
According to the type of connection of parts, compound, compound and non-union sentences are distinguished.
In mixed complex sentences, the punctuation characteristic of complex sentences with the corresponding type of connection is preserved.

Topic quiz

Article rating

Average rating: 4.7. Total ratings received: 711.

Allied connection

N.D. Literary encyclopedia: Dictionary of literary terms: In 2 volumes / Edited by N. Brodsky, A. Lavretsky, E. Lunin, V. Lvov-Rogachevsky, M. Rozanov, V. Cheshikhin-Vetrinsky. - M.; L.: Publishing house L. D. Frenkel, 1925

See what the "Allied connection" is in other dictionaries:

Allied connection- UNION COMMUNICATION. Such a connection between individual words and phrases, which is expressed by unions (see, for example, table and chair); I bought two pencils and a box of pens; the door opened and Marya Pavlovna entered; either rain, or snow, or will be ... Dictionary of literary terms

The connection of homogeneous members or parts of a complex sentence with the help of unions. see homogeneous members of a sentence, compound sentence. cf .: unionless connection ...

allied bond- Such a connection between individual words and phrases, which is expressed by unions (see, for example, table and chair); I bought two pencils and a box of pens; the door opened and Marya Pavlovna entered; either rain or snow, either it will or it won't; ... ... grammar dictionary: Grammar and linguistic terms

The connection of homogeneous members or parts of a complex sentence without the help of unions, through one intonation. see homogeneous members of a sentence, non-union complex sentence. cf .: allied connection ... Dictionary of linguistic terms

syntactic connection of parts of a complex sentence, formalized by unions and union-free way- In general, unionlessness is characteristic of colloquial and aphoristic artistic speech. Particularly characteristic of them (and at the same time uncharacteristic of scientific and business styles) are unionless complex sentences of time (I will learn - I will go to work), reasons ... ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Foal

UNION, a, husband. 1. Close unity, connection of classes, groups, individuals. C. democratic forces. 2. Association, agreement for which n. joint goals. Military s. Conclude with. 3. State association. Australian s. S. cantons (in ... ... Dictionary Ozhegov

Gagauz language. It belongs to the southwestern (Oguz) group of Turkic languages. Distributed in the southern regions of Moldova and Ukraine (former Bessarabia), in the North Caucasus, partly in Kazakhstan and Central Asia; outside the USSR in the north ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Not to be confused with the Ainu language. Ainu language Self-name: アイヌイタク, Aynu itak (Ainu itak) Countries ... Wikipedia

Stylistic paradigmatics- is a set of multi-level units that make up the stylistic resources of the language and provide the speaker with the opportunity to choose to carry out an act of communication in accordance with the goals of communication and the whole complex of extralinguistic ... ... Stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language

Ainu language- (Ainu) one of the languages East Asia whose relationship has not been clarified. It was distributed over most of the Japanese Islands (Hokkaido Island and the eastern part of Honshu Island), in the southern part of Sakhalin Island, on the Kuril Islands, on ... ... Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary

Meaning of allied connection in the dictionary of linguistic terms. allied connection allied connection

1.2. Secondary Allied Link