Introduction. The requirements for the organization of the modern educational process dictate the need to create conditions for the formation of stable subject competencies among students of philology: linguistic (the ability to carry out a linguistic analysis of linguistic units and linguistic phenomena) and linguistic (practical knowledge of the Russian language, its vocabulary and grammatical structure, observance language norms). The article analyzes the functional homonyms of the word no and the word no in various texts as polysemous. The choice for the analysis of this particular lexeme is due to the versatility and ambiguity of its semantic and grammatical features. Signs of delimitation of the word no as a part of speech are considered. The facts of the use of the word no as a polysemantic word are presented.

The purpose of the publication is to present the word no as capable not only of playing the role of different parts of speech, but also of being a base in the field of enrichment of the lexical and phraseological composition, the syntactic structure of the Russian language.

Materials and methods. Material for analysis — texts with the word no, extracted from the National Corpus of the Russian language. The material was analyzed using descriptive and comparative methods.

Results. The necessity of understanding the essence of transition processes, the results of transposition in the system of parts of speech is formulated; defined the semantic and grammatical possibilities of the word not present in the modern Russian language. The necessary signs of delimitation of the word no as a part of speech in different syntactic constructions are indicated.

Discussion. An important condition for the formation of linguistic competence is the improvement of methods and techniques aimed at enhancing the cognitive activity of students. The use of methods and techniques for analyzing the functioning of homonyms and polysemous words in the modern language, the principles of their differentiation, the ability to translate knowledge in practical activity are a manifestation of the formation of linguistic competence.

Conclusion. The study of parts of speech, understanding the criteria for their differentiation, understanding the essence of the phenomena of transitivity in the system of parts of speech are the fundamental aspects of the morphology of the Russian language. Comprehension of the part of speech belonging of the word is not associated with its functional and semantic characteristics. The need to use a set of proofs for the part-of-speech interpretation of the word no is not an easy task for students. In academic dictionaries and grammars of the Russian language, six varieties of the meaning of the lexeme are not recorded:

1) In the meaning of a particle (a particular word);

2) In the meaning of a predicate-predicate in an impersonal sentence;

3) In the role of a word-sentence, which can be interpreted as an indivisible syntactic construction;

4) In the function of an equivalent, a substitute for a word, phrase or whole sentence;

5) In the meaning of a concessionary union;

6) In the meaning of a noun. In addition, the lexeme no is a component of a significant number of phraseological units that differ in their semantic and grammatical properties.

The formation of linguistic competence among university students presupposes their mastery of the main sections of linguistics: "The morphology of the modern Russian language" and “The syntax of the modern Russian language”;

The ability to determine the part-of-speech belonging of a word, to apply the principles of differentiating functional homonyms in various linguistic constructions testifies to the formation of linguistic competence.

1. Khabusiyeva T.B. (2018), Lingvisticheskoye ponyatiye chasti rechi v sisteme morfologii [Linguistic concept of a part of speech in the system of morphology], Yevraziyskiy soyuz uchenykh, 8-6 (53), 66–68. (In Russian).

2. Kenzhayeva M.T. (2016), Chasti rechi v russkom yazyke [Parts of speech in Russianе], Vestnik sovremennoy nauki, 6-1 (18), 93–96. (In Russian).

3. Belyayev A.N. (2018), O kriteriyakh vydeleniya chastey rechi [On the criteria for the selection of parts of speech], Na peresechenii yazykov i kul'tur. Aktual'nyye voprosy gumanitarnogo znaniya, 3 (12), 17–23. (In Russian).

4. Kanevskiy Ye.A. & Boyarskiy K.K. & (2019), K voprosu o snyatii omonimii pri komp'yuternom analize tekstov [On the question of removing homonymy in computer analysis of texts], in Kuznetsov S.V. (ed.), Problemy preobrazovaniya i regulirovaniya regional'nykh sotsial'no-ekonomicheskikh sistem [Problems of transformation and regulation of regional socio-economic systems], Sankt-Peterburg, pp. 37–41. (In Russian).

5. Bogdanova-Beglarian N. & Cui L. (2019), “Word net (no) in mirror of colloquialism: about functioning in spoken language of one of most frequent words of everyday Russian discourse”, Cross Cultural Studies: Education and Science, 4, 2, 66–71.

6. Tsui L. (2018), Slovo net kak sposob vyrazheniya rechevykh aktov v russkoy ustnoy povsednevnoy rechi (na korpusnom materiale) [The word no as a way of expressing speech acts in Russian oral everyday speech (on corpus material)], Vestnik Buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2-2, 26–32. (In Russian).

7. Tsui L. (2019), Slovo net v roli ekvivalenta drugoy yedinitsy kak realizatsiya rechevykh aktov v russkoy ustnoy povsednevnoy rechi [The word is not in the role of the equivalent of another unit as the implementation of speech acts in Russian oral everyday speech], Kommunikativnyye issledovaniya, 6, 4, 1053–1071. (In Russian).

8. Karpov A.K. (2000), Slovoobrazovaniye sovremennogo russkogo yazyka (uchebnoye posobiye dlya studentov vysshikh pedagogicheskikh zavedeniy) [Word formation of the modern Russian language (a textbook for students of higher pedagogical institutions)], Izdatel'stvo Nizhnevartovskogo pedagogicheskogo instituta, Nizhnevartovsk, 288 p. (In Russian).

9. Molotkov A.I. (1956), Grammaticheskaya kharakteristika slova “net” [Grammatical characteristics of the word “no”], Russkiy yazyk v shkole, 6, 22–29. (In Russian).

10. Yermakova Ye.N., Yuzdova L.P. & Moskvitina T.N. (2021), Formirovaniye lingvisticheskoy kompetentsii studentov vuza v protsesse izucheniya funktsional'nykh omonimov [Formation of linguistic competence of university students in the process of studying functional homonyms], Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarno-pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 1 (161) 92–110. (In Russian).

11. Borger Ya.V. (2014), Kompleksnyy analiz rechevykh aktov negativnoy reaktsii (na materiale sovremennykh dramaticheskikh proizvedeniy) (avtoreferat dissertatsii na soiskaniye uchenoy stepeni kandidata filologicheskikh nauk [Comprehensive analysis of speech acts of negative reaction (based on the material of modern dramatic works) (Dissertation abstract for the degree of candidate of philological sciences)], Tyumen', 21 p. (In Russian).

12. Yershova B.N. (2011), Osobennosti funktsionirovaniya rechevykh aktov negativnoy reaktsii [Features of the functioning of speech acts of a negative reaction], Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiye yavleniya i protsessy, 5-6, 296–299. (In Russian).

13. Edr. Shvedova N.Yu (1970), Grammatika sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo yazyka [Grammar of the modern Russian literary language], Moscow, 767 p. (In Russian).

14. Tsui L. (2018), Nepartikulyarnoye slovo net v ustnoy povsednevnoy rechi: funktsional'no-semanticheskaya kharakteristika [Nonparticular word is not in everyday oral speech : functional and semantic characteristics], Vestnik Permskogo universiteta, 10, 1, 14–26. (In Russian).

15. Nazari F.T. (2020), Ucheniye o chastyakh v russkoy grammatike [Teaching about parts in Russian grammar], Baltiyskiy gumanitarnyy zhurnal, 9, 3 (32), 288–290. (In Russian).