Влияние категории одушевленности на разрешение синтаксической неоднозначности
The article analyzes archaic syntactic constructions in colloquial Russian when a noun in genitive appears as the direct object of a transitive verb (such as dat’ noža, etc.). The connection of such genitival constructions with the semantics of partitivity is demonstrated. The author concentrates on the origin and semantics of the approving or encouraging exclamation molodca! in the Russian spoken language. According to the author, it is a former genitive form of the direct object related to a verb of utterance (verbum dicendi), i. e. a part of a construction similar to such phrases as skazat’ duraka or pustit’ petuxa.
The paper examines the Russian construction Num + classifier + Ngen formed specifically with the numeral classifier shtuka (Num shtuk Ngen); this classifier occurs more frequently than other classifiers (chelovek, dush, edinic). I argue that the classifier shtuka undergoes a process of semantic bleaching: it occurs in the context of approximation (despite the literal meaning of the word shtuka ‘a single thing’) and animate nouns appear in this construction in colloquial speech. The paper focuses on the usage of the counting construction with the classifier shtuka with animate nouns in spoken Russian. Some restrictions on the usage of the numeral classifier shtuka with animate nouns are revealed. There is also substantial evidence in favor of a gradated semantic hierarchy of animate nouns.
The paper focuses on one syntactic restriction on the use of the interrogative pronoun čto ‘what’. Contrary to kto ‘who’, čto disfavours constructions where it is syntactically parallel and co-referent to the anaphoric pronouns on ‘he’, ona ‘she’, and ono ‘it’. For instance, in the construction kogo “ego” (lit. ‘who “he”’), which the Russian speakers use to find out what the antecedent of the anaphoric ego is, the pronoun čto cannot be used if its form differs from the form of the anaphoric pronoun. For example, the context — Ja ego kupil. — Čto “ego” ‘- I bought it. — What “it”’ is impossible, because the interrogative pronoun employs the “inanimate” inflection type, the accusative čto being identical to the nominative, while the anaphoric pronoun follows the “animate” type, where the accusative form ego is identical to the genitive one. I consider possible explanations of this fact and conclude that neither a purely formal explanation in terms of form identity, nor a semantic one, based on the referential properties of the pronouns, are satisfactory. The most plausible explanation is rather that in some constructions, grammatical characteristics of the two pronouns (including animacy and, to some extent, gender) must coincide, and the morphological animacy is even more important here than the semantic one. Key words: animacy, interrogative pronouns, anaphoric pronouns, inflection type.
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.