scholarly journals Тенденция к оптимальной организации системы видовых пара- дигм в русском языке

2018 ◽  
pp. 123-142
Author(s):  
Vladimir Klimonov
Keyword(s):  
Historical Development ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Initial System ◽  
Natural Languages ◽  
General Direction ◽  
Optimal Organization ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Russian Verb ◽  
Russian Aspect ◽  
Modern Russian

The reorganization of the initial system of aspect paradigms in Old Russian is investigated within the framework of the theory of natural grammar. It is claimed, in accordance with this theory, that the grammatical changes in morphological systems of natural languages are determined by a limited set of typologically relevant markedness principles (naturalness principles or preference laws). These principles explain the attested diachrony of grammatical changes in the system of aspectual paradigms of the Russian verb and predict the general direction in its development. During the historical development of the system of aspectual paradigms in Russian, optimal iconic perfectivizing paradigms are ousting non-optimal countericonic imperfectivizing paradigms as well as non-optimal non-iconic aspectual syncretic paradigms. In contemporary Russian, aspectual paradigms of perfectivization are preferable in terms of competitive aspectual paradigms of imperfectivization and syncretic aspectual paradigms. The share of optimal paradigms of perfectivization is constantly increasing in modern Russian. Consequently, there is direct evidence for the development of the system of Russian aspect paradigms towards optimal organization of aspect paradigms, i.e. towards economy.

scholarly journals Leksikaliseringsmønstre ved verber. Et komparativt-typologisk studie

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (35) ◽  
pp. 211
Author(s):  
Per Durst-Andersen
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Grammatical Categories ◽  
Russian Verb ◽  
Propositional Structure ◽  
Modern Russian

This paper combines two thematic areas which have been in the focus of linguists’ interest for some years, viz. studies in lexicalization patterns of verbs and grammaticalization studies. Instead of comparing lexicalization patterns of different lan guages I have chosen to compare various stages of the same language, namely Old Russian and Modern Russian. This enables me to analyze the interrelationship between lexicalization patterns and grammatical categories. The paper argues that it is important to distinguish between naming principle and lexicalization pattern. A language may describe an image or an idea and therefore has to make a semiotic choice between these two different naming principles. Having chosen a specific naming principle a language has to determine which parts of the image or which parts of the idea it wants to focus on or specify. My analysis shows that the Old Russian verb describes the idea, i.e. the ground-propositional structure, whereas the Modern Russian verb describes the image, i.e. the ground-situational structure. Moreover, it appears that Old Russian focuses on the state description without paying attention to the activity description, while Modern Russian takes into account both the state situation and the activity situation, but with the main focus on the former – the latter is only treated in prototypical terms. The shift in naming strategy and lexicalization pattern from Old Russian to Modern Russian can only be explained by the introduction of the new category of aspect, a determinant category in Modern Russian.

Replacing the Stressed [é] with the Stressed [ó]: Causes and Effects

2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
V. P. Moskvin
Keyword(s):  
Literary Form ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
National Language ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Literary Forms ◽  
Modern Russian

The article considers the positional conditions of the transition of [é] to [ó], the causes of this phonetic transformation, which can be traced back to the Old Russian language, as well as the conditions for its gradual weakening. On this basis, the A.A. Shakhmatov’s hypothesis, interpreting this transition as a type of regressive labialization, was defined more precisely. Stylistically and orthologically significant reflexes of transition [é] to [ó] in the literary form of the modern Russian national language and its non-literary forms have been characterized and systematized.

scholarly journals A corpus approach to the history of Russian po delimitatives

Diachronica ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanne Martine Eckhoff
Keyword(s):  
Derivational Morphology ◽  
Major Step ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Russian Aspect ◽  
History Of

Abstract This paper illustrates how enriched diachronic treebank data can shed new light on an old and vexed topic, even when that topic is primarily morphological and semantic in nature rather than syntactic. The topic is the rise of the Russian po delimitatives, a change seen as crucial in most accounts of the history of Russian aspect, since it represents a major step in generalising the derivational aspect system. Earlier accounts concur that the po delimitatives spread fairly recently, too recently for the development to be connected to the loss of the aorist tense, which also had delimitative readings with atelic verbs. Using treebank data from the Tromsø Old Russian and Old Church Slavonic Treebank, enriched with tags for derivational morphology and semantics, I show that the po delimitatives were not marginal even in the earliest Slavic sources, either in terms of frequency or semantics, and that they first complemented and then competed with the delimitative aorists. It can thus be claimed that the exotic po delimitatives grew organically out of the old Indo-European inflectional aspect system.

scholarly journals Jets in Molecular Clouds

1984 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 299-301
Author(s):  
Arieh Königl
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Clouds ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Optical Emission ◽  
Central Star ◽  
Radio Continuum ◽  
Low Mass Stars ◽  
General Direction ◽  
Low Mass ◽  
Motion Measurements ◽  
Infrared Sources

There is now growing evidence that the cosmic jet phenomenon manifests itself in a remarkable way in regions of active star formation embedded in dense molecular clouds. The first indications for oppositely directed, supersonic outflows from young stars were provided by molecular line observations (most notably of CO) which detected spatially separated regions of redshifted and blueshifted emission in association with embedded infrared sources. About twenty sources of this kind have been identified so far, and more are continuously being discovered; they typically have radii ∼1018 cm, velocities ∼10–50 km s−1, dynamical ages ∼104 yr, and energies ∼1046-1047 erg s−1 (see Bally and Lada 1983 for a review). Statistical arguments indicate that energetic outflows of this type are probably a common feature in stellar evolution, and that they occur in both massive and low-mass stars. Direct evidence that the outflows in many cases are highly collimated was subsequently provided by the detection of high-velocity Herbig-Haro objects (optical emission clumps with typical masses ∼10−5M⊙) along the axes of the bipolar CO lobes. Proper-motion measurements are now available for a number of these objects (e.g., Herbig and Jones 1981), and they invariably reveal that the velocity vectors (of typical magnitudes 200–400 km s−1) point away from the central star. The clumps are often found to consist of many sub-condensations which move independently with disparate speeds, but which nevertheless travel in the same general direction with an angular spread ≲ 10°. Finally, radio continuum observations (e.g., Cohen et al. 1982) and deep CCD images (e.g., Mundt and Fried 1983) have shown that the collimation of the outflows is already well established on scales of ≲ 1015 cm.

Relics of Some Old Russian Linguistics Features in Modern Russian

2018 ◽  
Vol 79 (8) ◽  
pp. 59-65
Author(s):  
E. A. Galinskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Language ◽  
Russian Linguistics ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Colloquial Language ◽  
Linguistic System ◽  
Russian Linguistic ◽  
The Russian Language ◽  
Modern Russian ◽  
Indefinite Pronouns

This paper‘s aim is to identy some Old Russian lingustic relics in present-day Russian. For this purpose, the method of comparison of synchronous linguistic levels is used. Most elements of the Old Russian linguistic system have undergone some kind of evolution; some of them disappeared completely (e.g., relativizers to and že), or stayed unchanged (e.g., the declension in singular of feminine *ĭ-stem nouns), or survived only in some dialects (e.g., infinitive r’uti), or are absent from the standard language, but exist in the colloquial language and dialects (e.g., indefinite pronouns identical to interrogative pronouns). Some features are present in the Russian language as unique relics only. Such relics are manifold and sometimes not easily recognizable.

THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF LINGUISTICS TO THE STUDY OF HISTORY IN AFRICA

1997 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
DEREK NURSE
Keyword(s):  
Historical Development ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Historical Events ◽  
The Past ◽  
Language History ◽  
Simple Classification ◽  
Common Activity ◽  
Contact Models ◽  
The One

The work of historical and comparative linguists has long interested African historians. By classifying languages into families, linguists provide models of their historical development that may point to historical events and processes that occurred among peoples speaking those languages. Once classified, linguists can then reconstruct earlier forms of present languages, thus providing direct evidence of words, their meanings and historical influences in the past. Finally, linguists seek to explain innovations that are revealed in their reconstructions by pointing to a combination of internal linguistic developments and different forms of contact that occurred among speakers of different languages.Simple classification, based largely on counting cognate words in related languages (a technique known as lexicostatistics), is still a very common activity, however, and thus the one most historians rely on, but lexicostatistics gives only a very limited, and often deceptive, view of language history. Historians should thus be aware of its limitations as well as the potential of a number of important techniques now employed by linguists, including the Comparative Method, reconstruction of ancestral languages, and contact models.

Historical development of labile verbs in modern Russian

Linguistics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Letuchiy
Keyword(s):  
Historical Development ◽  
Main Group ◽  
Semantic Change ◽  
Verbs Of Motion ◽  
Restricted Type ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Modern Russian

AbstractThe article deals with the phenomenon of lability (ambitransitivity), in other words, the ability of a verb to be either transitive or intransitive. I analyze the historical development of verbs which are currently labile in modern Russian. The main group of Russian labile verbs includes verbs of motion. On the basis of corpus and dictionary data, I conclude that the behavior of the lexemes under analysis is far from being uniform. However, interestingly, for most of them, e.g.,In the cases when the intransitive use becomes more frequent, the semantic change matches the statistical one. In the beginning, verbs of this subtype were only used intransitively in a restricted type of contexts (e.g., for

scholarly journals ZERO FORMS IN MORPHOLOGICAL PARADIGMS: THE VERB “BE” IN RUSSIAN

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. V. Zimmerling ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Corpus Analysis ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Oral Discourse ◽  
Alternative Models ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Russian Verb ◽  
Present Tense ◽  
Syntactic Annotation ◽  
National Corpus

This paper offers a corpus analysis of the Russian verb быть ‘be’ which has an abnormal present tense paradigm including a zero form ØBE.PRES and overt forms естьBE.PRES and сутьBE.PRES which do not discriminate person and number and are distributed syntactically. I discuss different approaches to the grammar of быть and argue that Apresjan’s model which recognizes ØBE.PRES, естьBE.PRES and сутьBE.PRES as parts of one and the same lemma is superior to alternative models splitting быть split into two lemmas representing copula vs content verb ‘be’. The peripheral status of overt present BE-forms compared with ØBE.PRES in the Russian National Corpus is confirmed by three measures: 1) dispersion of texts where a BE-form occurs; 2) uneven coverage in different persons and numbers; 3) ratio of copular uses vs content verb uses. 1–2 person present tense BE-forms attested in RNC are internal borrowings from Old Russian and Old Church Slavonic, while естьBE.PRES and сутьBE.PRES are inherited 3rd person elements which take over 1–2 person uses. The historical 3Pl суть is redundant in a system, where a more frequent 3rd person form есть is licensed in the plural: it survives by a minority of speakers either as an optional 3Pl copula in formal discourse or as an emphatic copula in oral discourse. The form естьBE.PRES occurs in all persons and numbers both as content verb and as copula but is underrepresented as 3Pl copula: this gap is filled by ØBE.PRES. The frequency of the zero copula ØBE.PRES can be measured in corpora without syntactic annotation on the basis of systemic proportion between present vs past tense uses of быть and on the basis of approximation samples for contexts where overt copulas alternate with ØBE.PRES.

scholarly journals On the Problem of Subject Identity in the ‘Adverbial Participle + Main Clause’ Construction in Modern Russian

Slovene ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-273
Author(s):  
Fedor B. Albrekht
Keyword(s):  
Main Clause ◽  
Main Role ◽  
Nominative Case ◽  
Old Russian ◽  
Grammatical Subject ◽  
Dative Case ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Given ◽  
The Village ◽  
Modern Russian

The article discusses the subject matching between the adverbial participle construction and the main clause in Russian. Russian normative grammar requires the main clause and the adverbial participle construction within one utterance to express an action or a state of one and the same subject, as the Russian деепричастие (adverbial participle)= is typologically related to an implicit-subject converb. The adverbial participle has developed from a copredicative participle, and now it mostly expresses a subordinate action (or a subordinate state) of the main clause's subject, which has the form of the nominative case. But, according to numerous real language examples, both oral and written, the grammatical subject (if any) in the main clause does not always coincide with the semantic subject of the whole situation. Besides, there are cases when the subjects of the main clause and the adverbial participle construction are different. There exists a wider sphere of semantic and pragmatic relations between participants of the main situation and of the subordinate situation, where the communicative subject, and not the formal one, plays the main role. Several main types of constructions are analysed, in which the semantic and communicative subject, while being the same for both situations, is not expressed by means of the nominative case in the main clause. First, the semantic subject may have the form of the dative case, and that is sometimes = omitted when the subject is clear from the context: Uvidev (see-ADVP.PST) zadaniia, mne (I-DAT) stalo boiazno ‘After seeing the tasks, I became frightened’, Sidia v netoplenoi kvartire, bylo holodno ‘While sitting in the unheated apartment, I (we, etc.) was (were) cold’. Second, there can occur passivisation of the main clause: Vsio eto bylo sdelano (PASS), pod’ezzhaia (approach-ADVP.PRES) k derevne ‘All of this was done (by the author of the sentence) when he was approaching the village’. Third, the semantic subject may be expressed by different possessive constructions: Zakanchivaia (finish-ADVP.PRES) stat’iu, u menia (I-GEN) slomalsia komp’iuter ‘While I was finishing an article, my computer broke down’. The fourth case is represented by the removal of the subject, which is implicit in the given situation: Potrativ (spend-ADVP.PST) vsio na vypivku, na edu ne ostalos ‘Having spent all his/her/our etc. money on booze, nothing was left for food’. In addition, two rare types of using the adverbial participle construction are analysed: 1) when the latter neither morphologically nor semantically relates to the subject of the main clause: Rebionok gladil sobaku, viliaia (wag-ADVP.PRES) hvostom ‘The child caressed the dog (which was) wagging its tail’; 2) when the construction relates to the grammatical object of the main clause: Pozdravliaiu vas, grazhdanin, sovramshi (lie-ADVP.PST) ‘My congratulations, comrade: you’ve just lied!’. While focusing on Russian utterances, the paper also includes data from other Slavic (including ancient) and, in several cases, from Baltic languages. Comparison shows that the given phenomena are not specific to Russian. Besides, the comparative data helps us to avoid deducing some modern structural phenomena directly from older constructions. For example, there seems to be no reason to connect such structures as Rebionok gladil sobaku, viliaia (wag-ADVP.PRES) hvostom ‘The child caressed the dog (which was) wagging its tail’ directly to the absolute predicative use of participles in Old Russian. We come to the conclusion that the lack of formal and grammatical congruence (in other words, of categorial agreement) between the adverbial participle construction and the main clause is the reason why in modern Russian the adverbial participle construction is able to disconnect from the grammatical subject of the main clause. Therefore, the adverbial participle construction can now be used in any situation when the speaker has a communicative intention to designate a subordinate action and the subject of this action is clear from the context.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document