Book chapter
Complementizers in Kalmyk
The paper examines syntactic and distributional properties of complementizers in Kalmyk, morphologically identical to non-finite forms of the verb 'say' (gi-), which is a common feature in Altaic languages. It is shown that when used as a complementizer the verb gi- still exhibits certain features associated with the verb 'say' as manifested in its distribution and restrictions on the interpretation of indexicals. At the same time, in its verbal uses the verb gi- shares a number of properties pertaining to functional elements. A unified analysis of both complementizer and verbal uses is proposed where gi- is a functional verb with impoverished semantic content.
Progressive periphrases in German are analyzed in a quantitative and qualitative way. The subject of the analysis is progressive constructions in the XVII–XIX centuries. It is stated that the process of their formation was not homogeneous, as there were two forms of progressive periphrases during the IX–XV centuries that were existing concurrently and were interchanging. It is determined that in any period the most frequent periphrases are im-construction and am-construction, moreover, the frequency of the latter is increasing. It is confi rmed that the process of grammaticalization mostly referred to contraction of locative prepositions and defi nite articles, which lost their lexical meaning in the development of progressive periphrases.
The paper presents a overview of Kalmyk language during 1950-1980 in context of Soviet language policy based on the interview and documents. The focus of this investigation is on the problem of influence the deportation had on the language situation in Kalmykia (using the materials of linguistic biographies of Kalmyks) and language attitudes in the society that suffered deportation.
This volume intends to fill the gap in the grammaticalization studies setting as its goal the systematic description of grammaticalization processes in genealogically and structurally diverse languages. To address the problem of the limitations of the secondary sources for grammaticalization studies, the editors rely on sketches of grammaticalization phenomena from experts in individual languages guided by a typological questionnaire.
Four electronic corpora created in 2011 within the framework of the “Corpus Linguistics: the Albanian, Kalmyk, Lezgian, and Ossetic Languages” Program of Fundamental Research of the RAS are presented. The interface and functionalities of these corpora are described, engineering problems to be solved in their creation are elucidated, and the promises of their development are discussed. A particular emphasis is made on the compilation of dictionaries and automatic grammatical markup of the corpora.
In Standard Average European (SAE), addressees of speech verbs are marked with dative or, in languages lacking cases, with dative-like prepositions. This merger is commonly explained through a metaphor: the information transferred in a speech act is said to be construed as the object being transferred, or Theme, and the addressee as its Recipient. This status of the addressee as a derived concept, a metaphor of the Recipient, and its dative marking in many languages rather than in SAE alone, is the reason why the addressee is usually not considered to be a separate semantic role. Based on data from East Caucasian languages that use different marking for Recipients and addressees of speech, I argue that speech addressees constitute a separate semantic role, also an animate Goal, but not a metaphor of the Recipient. Focusing on case marking assigned by the main speech verb, speech acts are shown to be construed in East Caucasian as spatial configurations: the crucial component is their directedness towards the addressee. In the conclusion, I come back to SAE and question the status of the dative addressees. Taking into account that the dative often develops from lative markers, it is suggested that, in the languages with dative addressees, one should also consider an alternative to the conventional explanation: merging the Recipient and the addressee in one marking may result not from a metaphorical extension but from formal under-specification of two different animate Goals.
Semantic roles have continued to intrigue the linguists for more than four decades now, starting with determining their kind and number, with their morphological expression, and with their interaction with argument structure and syntax. The focus in this volume is on typological and historical issues. The papers focus on the cross-linguistic identification of semantic-role equivalents, on the regularity of, and exceptions concerning change and grammaticalization in semantic roles, the variation in encoding the roles of direction and experiencer in specific languages, presenting evidence for identifying a new semantic role of speech addressee in Caucasian languages, on semantic roles in word formation, and finally a cross-linguistic comparison of the functions and the grammaticalization of the ethical dative in some Indo-European languages. The book will be of interest to anyone involved with case and semantic roles, with the syntax semantic interface, and with semantic change an grammaticalization.