(То,) что называется: между относительной конструкцией и устойчивым вводным оборотом
The constructions čto nazyvaetsja ‘what is called’ and to, čto nazyvaetsja ‘that what is called’ share properties with both parentheticals and relative clauses, especially transparent relatives. The construction čto nazyvaetsja ‘what is called’ is extremely close to parentheticals and highly lexicalized. The construction to, čto nazyvaetsja ‘that what is called’ patterns in some respects with relative clauses, e. g. it is more frequent if the designation is a NP and it is avoided in postposition to the designation. During the 18th–19th centuries the construction čto nazyvaetsja ‘what is called’ acquired some common features with parenthetical clauses. For instance, the lexical constraints became stricter, and non-NP designations became more frequent. The data allows to suggest that the observed constructions constitute intermediate stages on the cline of change from relative clauses to parentheticals.
Gradience in syntax is often described as having prototype-based architecture. However, the syntactic prototypes postulated in literature are not all alike. In this paper, we distinguish between (i) true prototypes, which are based on clear linguistic evidence, (ii) liminal prototypes, which are associated with diachronically unstable patterns and hence cannot be precisely determined, and (iii) fake prototypes, which are based on effects that only reflect the diversity of sources of a phenomenon. In relation to these three kinds of concepts, we discuss relative clause constructions, serial verb constructions and the notion of subject.
Ingrian Finnish admits inverse attraction, the head of the relative clause being marked for case according to the position of the corresponding participant in the subordinate clause. Until now, the study of inverse attraction has been limited almost exclusively to the data of dead languages, which has resulted in a number of hypotheses based solely on written text frequencies. These hypotheses can be checked against Ingrian Finnish data. In particular, Ingrian Finnish shows a difference between inverse attraction constructions and correlatives, which are often regarded as equal or similar. Inverse attraction constructions, as opposed to correlatives, are characterized by compatibility with demonstratives and quantifiers in the head, appositive relative clauses and different kinds of agreement mismatches between the head and the relative pronoun. Arguably, these properties indicate a relatively low level of integration of the head into the relative clause.
The paper enters the controversy between different approaches to East Caucasian relativization. In one analysis, East Caucasian relativization is constrained only by the semantic and pragmatic frame of the situation. However, our analysis of the data shows a divergence between corpus data on relativization that can only be explained in syntactic terms: Udi reflexivization prefers A over P, and Archi relativization prefers P over A. We suggest that Udi the reason of this asymmetry is that Udi morphosyntax might have been strongly influenced by the contacting accusative languages such as Azerbaijani and Armenian.
In polysynthetic West Caucasian languages, the morphological verbal complex amounts to a clause, with all kinds of participants cross-referenced by affixes. Relativization is performed by introducing a relative affix in the cross-reference slot which corresponds to the relativized participant. However, these languages display several cross-linguistically rare features of relativization. Firstly, while under the view of the verbal complex as a clause this affix appears to be a relative pronoun, it is an unusual relative pronoun because it remains in situ. Secondly, relative affixes may appear several times in the same clause. Thirdly, relative pronouns are not expected to occur in languages with prenominal relative clauses. Fourthly, in the Circassian branch, relative pronouns are identical to reflexive pronouns. These features are explained by considering relative prefixes to be resumptive pronouns. This interpretation finds a parallel in the neighboring East Caucasian languages, where reflexive pronouns also show resumptive usages. Finally, since in some West Caucasian languages the relative affix is a morpheme with a dedicated relative function but still shows properties of a resumptive pronoun, our data suggest that the distinction between relative pronouns and resumptive pronouns may not be so clear as is usually assumed.
The paper deals with long-distance relativization (relativization of an element of an embedded clause in a complex sentence) in a number of different languages and proposes a typology of long-distance relativization based on various morphosyntactic changes in the matrix and subordinated clauses as well as on the changes in syntactic relations between the parts of the polypredication.
We discuss the data from Adyghe (Northwest Caucasian), Udi and Tanti Dargwa (Northeast Caucasian) related to the presence and absence of constraints on relativization from syntactic islands.
The paper is focused on the study of reaction of italian literature critics on the publication of the Boris Pasternak's novel "Doctor Jivago". The analysys of the book ""Doctor Jivago", Pasternak, 1958, Italy" (published in Russian language in "Reka vremen", 2012, in Moscow) is given. The papers of italian writers, critics and historians of literature, who reacted immediately upon the publication of the novel (A. Moravia, I. Calvino, F.Fortini, C. Cassola, C. Salinari ecc.) are studied and analised.
In the article the patterns of the realization of emotional utterances in dialogic and monologic speech are described. The author pays special attention to the characteristic features of the speech of a speaker feeling psychic tension and to the compositional-pragmatic peculiarities of dialogic and monologic text.