Sentences with uncoordinated attributes: their perception and understanding

2021 ◽  
pp. 269-282
Author(s):  
B. Ju. Norman ◽  
◽  

This paper aims at describing a fragment of the “dynamic syntax” of the Russian language, namely the function of the adverb and the case form with a preposition in the structure of the utterance. They often function as uncoordinated attributes resulting from the word form pass-ing from the sphere of direct verb submission to the noun phrase. Constructions of the type “okno naprotiv” (window opposite something) are differently evaluated by linguists and pro-voke discussion. However, in terms of cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics, it is more important that utterances appear with a syntactic homonymy – the possibility of a double (al-ternative) syntactic division. The general semantic interpretation of the utterance depends on the listener’s choice of one of the options. For example, the phrase “On ne nashel brauninga v rukave” (He did not find the browning in the sleeve) can be interpreted by establishing the connections “ne nashel – v rukave” (did not find – in the sleeve) or “brauninga – v rukave” (browning – in the sleeve). The author provides the actual examples from Russian fiction and journalism. The prerequisites affecting the perception and understanding of such patterns are investigated. It is shown that the choice of one of the variants of analysis is influenced by: a) common sense, that is, the cognitive and verbal experience of the listener, b) linguistic fac-tors, including the rules of combinatorics, word order, etc. A connection is established be-tween the internal structural transformations taking place in the speaker’s and the listener’s consciousness and general trends in the development of Russian syntax. Among these, consideration is given to the tendency to weaken syntactic relations, the activation of constructions based on lexical-semantic associations, centripetal and centrifugal tendencies in syntax, etc.

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. 23-33
Author(s):  
Galina I. Panova ◽  
Tatiana V. Viktorina ◽  
Antonina E. Kuzmina

The concept of “morphological / grammatical means” is widely used in studies on the Russian language, although there is no generally accepted interpretation. This work analyzes the reflection of this concept in Russian studies and clarifies the status of those linguistic units that are traditionally referred to as morphological means: form-building affixes, alternating sounds (internal inflection), stress, supplementary word stems, auxiliary words, intonation, as well as word order. Our research has shown that these linguistic units have different functional status in the morphological structure of the Russian language. First, these are categorical, or actually morphological, means, represented by formative affixes and auxiliary words. They are carriers of morphological meanings in the structure of abstracted morphological forms – the basic units of inflectional Russian morphology. Secondly, a non-categorical means, syncretic and accidental for morphology, are supplementary stems that contain not only lexical, but also morphological meaning and thus duplicate the expression of morphological information in a word form with a form-building affix. Thirdly, these are linguistic units that are not elements of the morphological structure, but have morphological significance, which is manifested in their ability to differentiate homonymous morphological forms in the structure of word forms (alternating sounds and stress) or utterances (intonation). Word order can also perform a similar function. The study allows us to clarify the definition of the concept under consideration: morphological means are linguistic units that are carriers of morphological meanings and constituents of morphological forms.


2021 ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
О.Ю. Дементьева ◽  
Ю. Мао

В статье обсуждаются вопросы о порядке слов в русском языке: что подразумевается под порядком слов, в чем его особенности, какие факторы на него влияют. Рассматривается понятие коммуникативной установки говорящего, а также взаимодействие коммуникативной, семантической и синтаксической структур предложения-высказывания. The article deals with the word order in the Russian language: what is meant by the word order, what are its features. what factors determine the word order. The concept of the communicative intention is considered, as well as the interaction of the communicative, semantic and syntactic structures of the utterance.


Author(s):  
Marharyta Alsultan

The definiteness and indefiniteness is an important communicative category. This category is universal and is expressed in different languages by various means. There are no special indicators of definiteness / indefiniteness such as articles in the Russian language. However, these values are expressed by various means related to different levels of the language. Due to this fact, word order is an important and an interesting subject for a linguistic research. As a grammatical means, word order can convey not only information, but also the attitude to this information or communicative situation of the speaker, and also to concretize the content of the spoken message from the point of view of definiteness / indefiniteness. This study focuses on describing the means of expressing the category of definiteness and indefiniteness in Russian and the ways of conveying its semantic shades.


Author(s):  
Yana V. Datiyeva ◽  
Tatiana Yu. Tameryan

The paper covers a range of issues related to the specifics of Russian language mastering by Indian students studying in English and Russian. The research is based on an integrative methodological platform that combines approaches to multilingualism formation from the standpoint of psychological linguistics, cognitive linguistics, the theory of language contacts, discourse and communication science. The research involves the techniques of psychological and semantic analyses and verbal associations, the methods of contextual analysis and comparison. The material of the paper is the data obtained from online surveys of Indian students who have been studying at universities in North Ossetia-Alania for six years (elementary and pre-intermediate levels of Russian language proficiency). The study is aimed at identifying perception channels that represent the features of foreign students cognitive style in the Russian natural environment, descripting level-by-level interfering influence of native languages and weak interference of English. Based on text fragments and lexical units, vectors and methods of interlingual interference were demonstrated, its leading types were determined, that are phonetic, phonemic, graphemic, phonemic-graphemic, morphological and lexical. The role of English as a communicative mediator is defined. The analysis done confirmed complex application of auditory, visual and kinesthetic channels at the information input, and revealed the dominance of the auditory perception channel at the information output while learning the Russian language by Indian students. The Indian students cognitive style tends to be simplified through contamination of written and oral speech, compression, abbreviations usage, intensification of associative and semantic links. Strategies for using Internet translation, imitation of mastering the Russian language, literal translation from English into Russian, strategies for the implementation of graphic, phonetic-graphic principles of writing, phonemic and grammatical reduction were identified as the basic communication strategies of Indian students learning Russian.


Author(s):  
Alexander V. Kalashnikov

The research addresses the etymologies of 82 toponyms proposed by the Russian scholar V. Trediakovsky in the mid-1700s book Three Discourses on Three Most Important Russian Antiquities compared with 148 etymologies of the toponyms from The Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language by M. Vasmer, where the etymologies had been identified under the modern etymological approach. The article argues that the alternative etymologies proposed by Trediakovsky and the toponymic etymologies having been established under linguistic principles possess similarities in terms of general semantic features. Identifying the semantic features of toponyms from the two selections required the classification based on etymological and semantic features, with the principal division into natural and cultural place-names. The research showed that 5 out of 7 semantic features: hydronym, choronym, people’s activity, ethnonym, and type of settlement, corresponded in both selections. The alternative etymologies from the discourses revealed more semantic features related to the climate and soil. The semantic features of flora and fauna, which are part of modern semantic classifications, were found in rare cases in both toponymicons. The research showed that although generally Trediakovsky’s etymologies seemed to contradict the existing linguistic principles, the semantic features remained comparable with those of the place-name etymologies that were compiled at the later stages of scientific thought.


Litera ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 71-80
Author(s):  
Ellina Vechkanova

 This article is dedicated to studying thematic progression as a text-forming and discourse-forming phenomenon. The notion of thematic progression is analyzed in terms of the functional sentence perspective theory, theory of actual division of the sentence, and discourse linguistics. Thematic progression contributes to the cohesive development of discourse, distribution of given and new information that needs to follow certain patterns. That is why the article also dwells on the thematic progression patterns and peculiar characteristics of their themeatic-rhematic organization. Basic thematic progression patterns are: simple linear thematic progression, thematic progression with a continuous (constant) theme, thematic progression with derived themes and thematic progression with a split rheme. They are considered to be universal, peculiar to many languages. That is why thematic progression patterns of English discourse units translated into Russian language often remain the same. Their high informativity, grammatical complexity, as well as differences in grammatical systems of English and Russian languages, necessity to adapt these units to the norms and rules of the Russian language can cause changes in thematic progression patterns of the translated units. The abovementioned facts can also lead to compression / decompression of information, changes of the word order in Russian translations.


2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (26) ◽  
pp. 110-119
Author(s):  
Natalia Yudina

The article is devoted to the analysis of one of the most important terms in modern linguistic usage – the definition of a language personality. It was introduced in Russian-language scientific use in the 1930s by academician V. Vinogradov, and has been related to the ever-increasing interest in the anthropocentric factor in language, as well as to changes in the scientific linguistic paradigm, since the 1980s. Resuming some terminological and conceptual descriptions of language personality, as represented in the Russian-language linguistic literature, this article comes to the conclusion that language personality theory is presently reviewed in linguodidactics, linguoculturology, cognitive linguistics, ethnolinguoculturology, psycholinguistics, lexicography, stylistics, pragmatics, and other intra- and extralinguistic disciplines.The complex analysis makes it possible to identify verbal-semantic (lexicon), linguocognitive (thesaurus), motivational (pragmaticon; cf.Y. N. Karaulov), stylistic, communicative-pragmatic, linguoculturological, emotional, articulatory, and other levels. In addition to language personality, the terms verbal and communicative personality must also be specified and systematized. Further conceptual and terminological research in the description of language personality seems highly necessary for modern linguistics. The process of developing and establishing a language personality appears to be an essential component of the objective and subjective transformations of the information society. Further inquiry into the study of language personality will contribute to a better understanding of the social-political, economic, socio-cultural and linguistic processes occurring in the 21st century.


Slovene ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 554-563
Author(s):  
Elena Ivanova

[Rev. of: Gradinarova Alla A., Essays on the Comparative Syntax of Bulgarian and Russian, Sofia: Iztok-Zapad, 2017, 500 pp.] This article presents a review of the book by a major Bulgarian researcher of Russian, professor of Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” Alla Gradinarova, whose scholarly interests focus mainly on the contrastive syntax of Bulgarian and Russian. In the new monograph, the author concentrates largely on the points of divergence in these languages stemming from their typological differences: passive voice and syntactic impersonality, word order, communicatively marked phrasal templates, various types of multi-clause structures ranging from verbal adverb phrases to complex and asyndetic sentences, etc. The contrastive analysis of the language data helps to reveal significant characteristics of the studied phenomena. This allows the use of the obtained results and data not only in typology and contrastive linguistics, but also in the study of the Russian language, as the approach of the author in her studies is based on a profound analysis of Russian data. The book constitutes a major contribution to studies in contrastive syntax of Slavic languages.


Author(s):  
Ellina Vechkanova

 This article is dedicated to studying thematic progression as a text-forming and discourse-forming phenomenon. The notion of thematic progression is analyzed in terms of the functional sentence perspective theory, theory of actual division of the sentence, and discourse linguistics. Thematic progression contributes to the cohesive development of discourse, distribution of given and new information that needs to follow certain patterns. That is why the article also dwells on the thematic progression patterns and peculiar characteristics of their themeatic-rhematic organization. Basic thematic progression patterns are: simple linear thematic progression, thematic progression with a continuous (constant) theme, thematic progression with derived themes and thematic progression with a split rheme. They are considered to be universal, peculiar to many languages. That is why thematic progression patterns of English discourse units translated into Russian language often remain the same. Their high informativity, grammatical complexity, as well as differences in grammatical systems of English and Russian languages, necessity to adapt these units to the norms and rules of the Russian language can cause changes in thematic progression patterns of the translated units. The abovementioned facts can also lead to compression / decompression of information, changes of the word order in Russian translations.


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 74-84
Author(s):  
Johanna Viimaranta ◽  
Oksana Kanerva ◽  
Alina Timofeeva ◽  
Gustaf Olsson

В данной статье мы анализируем функцию падежных окончаний в русском языке с помощью двух лингвистических экспериментов. Целью первого является выяснить, насколько хорошо русскоязычные, проживающие в Финляндии (как носители языка,  так и те, для кого русский язык не является родным, но владеющие им на высоком уровне), понимают, к какому падежу или числу принадлежит слово в том случае, если правильная форма является омофоном с хотя бы одной другой грамматической формой. Второй эксперимент призван ответить на вопрос, нужны ли падежные окончания носителям русского языка, чтобы определить синтаксические связи между словами. Полагаясь на результаты первого эксперимента, мы утверждаем, что категория числа в восприятии носителей языка более развита, чем падеж; а результаты второго эксперимента предполагают, что в случае падежного синкретизма, другие факторы влияют на определение синтаксических связей между словами внутри предложения. In this article we analyze the function of case endings in the Russian language by means of two linguistic experiments. In the first one we aim to discover how well Russian speakers living in Finland (native speakers and non-natives highly proficient in the language) understand which case or number a word belongs to when the correct word form is homophonous with at least one other form. The second experiment seeks to answer the question of whether native Russian speakers need case endings to be able to distinguish syntactic connections between words. The results of the first experiment show that the category of number is more developed than the category of case in the perception of the native speakers, while the second experiment suggests that in the event of case syncretism other factors influence the identification of syntactic connections between the words in a sentence.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document