Transitivizing-detransitivizing typology and language family history
The transitivizing/detransitivizing typology of Nichols et al. 2004 also proves useful to historical linguistics. We focus on language families of northern Eurasia, chiefly the three oldest families (Indo-European, Uralic, Nakh-Daghestanian), some of their daughter branches aged about 2000-3000 years, and one younger family for which we have data on enough daughters to support a family phylogeny (Tungusic). We use the 18-pair wordlist of Nichols et al. 2004, which typologizes each pair of verbs depending on which of the two is derived. We make some improvements in the coding of grammatical properties and the typologization of pairs. NeighborNet trees based on this information reveal family-wide linguistic geography and areal trends. Adding minimal information about the cognacy or non-cognacy of the roots of the wordlist items produces Neighbor- Net trees which approximate well the known phylogeny of the family. Thus very small closed data sets, collected originally for typology, yield rich information about language family history - strikingly, a mere 18 verbs (9 pairs), coded for morphological type and cognacy, yield a very good genealogical tree - while historical methods have also improved the typology.
The paper considers semantic structure of emotion causatives and their interaction with negation, namely, its narrow or wide scope. Emotion causatives are defined as a group of causatives with their specific semantic properties that distinguish them from other groups of causatives. One of those properties concerns their relation with corresponding decausatives, which, unlike causatives, do not license wide scope of negation. There are several factors that enable negation to have scope over the causative element in emotion causatives – their imperfective aspect, generic referential status of the causative NP phrase, agentivity and conativity of the causative. Non-agentive causatives never license the negation of the causative component. Agentive conative causatives license the negation of the causative component more frequently and easily than agentive non-conative causatives, prompting the assumption that in their semantic structures the causative component has different statuses (assertion in the former, presupposition in the latter). It also has different forms for conatives and non-conatives. Conativity vs. non-conativity of emotion causatives is related to the emotion type, with conative synthetic causatives being limited to basic emotions. The greatest degree of conativity and, hence, the assertive status of the causative component characterizes three emotion causatives – zlit’ ‘to make mad’, veselit’ ‘to cheer up’, and pugat’ ‘to frighten’.
Key words: causative, decausative, agentive, conative, intentional, presupposition, assertion, semantic structure, basic emotions
In the paper I consider the causative constructions in Russian. I examine the use of tense and aspect in constructions with the verbs zastavit’ / zastavljat’ ‘make’ and pozvolit’ / pozvoljat’ ‘let, allow’. I also include the verb delat’ / sdelat ‘make’ in my analysis, though this verb has special syntactic and semantic characteristics.
The striking feature of the causative constructions with eventive subjects is that the tensed forms and temporal adverbs in these constructions do not obligatorily refer to the causing situation. The tensed forms and adverbials sometimes refer only to the caused situation.
I assume that it is the nature of events vs. participants that is responsible for these distinctions. Each dynamic event is associated with some result. I have shown that in some cases what the tense of the causative verb and temporal adverbials refer to is the result of the causing event, and not the causing event in the narrow sense.
The paper considers morphology, morphosyntax and semantics of causative formation in Agul, a Lezgic language of Southern Daghestan (Russia). In Agul, the two most frequent causative patterns, periphrastic and compound causatives, apparently share one source of grammaticalization. The former are combinations of ‘do’ with the infinitive of the lexical verb, while the latter put them together as two bound stems. However, semantically 'do'-compounds belong with non-productive causatives (labile verbs and lexical causatives) and are opposed to fully productive periphrastic causatives. All non-productive causatives – only available for intransitive verbs – have parallel periphrastic ‘do’-causatives, the distinction between the parallel forms conveys the semantic contrast of direct vs. indirect causation. The paper makes an attempt at decomposing these typological categories into simpler components (intentionality, physical interaction, event structure), and provides a detailed semantic analysis of labile verbs and semantically irregular causatives. Periphrastic causatives are peculiar in their own way: they may introduce locative or ergative Causee, the choice depending on the degree of the Causee's control over the caused situation. Basing on this morphosyntactic variability, we argue that periphrastic causatives are intermediate between bi- and monoclausal constructions.
In the paper, the phenomenon of recursion in morphology of Adyghe, a polysynthetic language of Caucaus is considered. We argue that recursion may be allowed to different extents in different parts of the word and be highly constrained exactly in contexts that are considered prototypical for recursion. Hence this property is not as natural as for syntax.
Causative derivation is the least recursable, concrete applicative derivation is the most, and general oblique applicatives and propositional operators occupy an intermediate place. These results are remarkable because they contrast with our intuitions about syntactic recursion.
The volume is dedicated to Viktor Khrakovsky's 80th anniversary. Viktor Khrakovsky is among the most prominent Russian typologists. He was among the creators of Peterburg typological school. The volume includes papers in typology, Russian lingusitics, Arabic studies and other domains of linguistics.
An attractor, in complex systems theory, is any state that is more easily or more often entered or acquired than departed or lost; attractor states therefore accumulate more members than non-attractors, other things being equal. In the context of language evolution, linguistic attractors include sounds, forms, and grammatical structures that are prone to be selected when sociolinguistics and language contact make it possible for speakers to choose between competing forms. The reasons why an element is an attractor are linguistic (auditory salience, ease of processing, paradigm structure, etc.), but the factors that make selection possible and propagate selected items through the speech community are non-linguistic. This paper uses the consonants in personal pronouns to show what makes for an attractor and how selection and diffusion work, then presents a survey of several language families and areas showing that the derivational morphology of pairs of verbs like fear and frighten, or Turkish korkmak 'fear, be afraid' and korkutmak 'frighten, scare', or Finnish istua 'sit' and istutta 'seat (someone)', or Spanish sentarse 'sit down' and sentar 'seat (someone)' is susceptible to selection. Specifically, the Turkish and Finnish pattern, where 'seat' is derived from 'sit' by addition of a suffix-is an attractor and a favored target of selection. This selection occurs chiefly in sociolinguistic contexts of what is defined here as linguistic symbiosis, where languages mingle in speech, which in turn is favored by certain demographic, sociocultural, and environmental factors here termed frontier conditions. Evidence is surveyed from northern Eurasia, the Caucasus, North and Central America, and the Pacific and from both modern and ancient languages to raise the hypothesis that frontier conditions and symbiosis favor causativization.
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.