Поди знай, что это значит: конструкция трудновыполнимого действия поди VIMPER
The paper briefly describes the formal and semantic properties of Russian construction composed of поди and a second imperative form VIMPER. The construction поди VIMPER may represent either unrealizable action from the speaker’s point of view or an action perceived by the speaker as very difficult. The theoretical framework used in this study is based on Construction Grammar. Поди VIMPER construction inherits its properties both from Russian non-directive imperative readings (or pseudo-imperative constructions) and from discourse word поди.
Nearly two thousand perfective verbs in Russian are formed via the addition of so-called "empty prefixes" (čistovidovye pristavki) to imperfective base verbs. The traditional assumption that prefixes are semantically "empty" when used to form aspectual pairs is problematic because the same prefixes are clearly "non-empty" when combined with other base verbs. Though some scholars have suspected that the prefixes are not empty but instead have meanings that overlap with the meanings of the base verbs, proof of this hypothesis has eluded researchers. With the advent of corpora and electronic resources it is possible to explore this question on the basis of large quantities of data. This article presents a new methodology, called "radial category profiling", in which the semantic network of a prefix is established on the basis of its "non-empty" uses and then compared, node by node, with the semantic network of base verbs that use the same prefix as an "empty" perfectivizing morpheme. This methodology facilitates a comprehensive analysis of ten prefixes, comparing their meanings in "non-empty" and "empty" uses and showing precisely how in the latter case overlap produces the illusion of emptiness. We are able to fully specify the semantic network of each prefix, and discover that for some prefixes there is overlap throughout the network, while for others overlap is restricted to a contiguous subsection of the network. We investigate the dynamic interactions among prefixes, and identify what meanings are incompatible with the "purely aspectual" function of the so-called "empty" prefixes. The results of our analyses, including complete lists of verbs, are publicly available at: http://emptyprefixes.uit.no/ and http://emptyprefixes. uit.no/methodology-eng.htm.
This article is devoted to the analysis of communicative strategy Invitation in English discourse. The historically formed peculiarities of English-speaking communicants’ attitude toward the ways of expressing invitation are also distinguished in order to highlight their culturological originality. The main focus is directed towards the lingual expressions of invitation in different communicative situations. Considerable emphasis is given to the means of softening unambiguous invitations as part of the strategy of distancing. The empiric material for our research is represented by authentic literature of English-speaking countries of the 21-st century.
The form whose main function is to express indirect commands, called the third person Imperative, Jussive or Exhortative, when compared to the prototypical (second person) Imperative, shows semantic and formal similarities and distinctions at the same time. The study describes formal and functional patterns of Jussive and places this category within the typology of the related categories, such as Imperative and Optative, based on data from six East Caucasian languages (Archi, Agul, Akhvakh, Chechen, Icari and Kumyk). Five formal patterns of Jussive are attested in these languages, including a specialized form, constructions derived from want, from tell him to do and from make him do and the Optative. Jussive forms may express such meanings as third person command, indirect causation, permission, indifference towards the accomplishment of an action and an assumption. While the Jussive is crucially different from the second person Imperative in that it introduces a third participant, this article shows that it is the addressee, not a third person, who is the central participant of a Jussive situation from both formal and functional points of view.