Brief eines bulgarischen Geschäftsmannes aus dem 11. Jahrhundert
A parchment fragment from the medieval reliquary of Hildesheim Cathedral is shown to be an 11th century Bulgarian merchant’s letter.
The book is dedicated to the language of early Church Slavonic manuscripts of South and East Slavic provenance and dated back to the 11th - 14th centuries.
The paper deals with the semantics of Old Church Slavonic constructions хотѣти / имѣти + inf
This paper is devoted to Old Church Slavonic (OCS) and Old Russian (OR) compound verbs with stacked prefixes. Although prefixes are a well investigated topic as regards modern Slavic languages, multiple prefixation in ancient Slavic languages still needs to be extensively explored. This work is a further step in this direction: via a careful manual scrutiny of the relevant data automatically extracted from the TOROT Treebank, we compare OCS and OR prefix orderings and we analyze multiply prefixed verbs both semantically and syntactically. As regards semantics, prefix stacking only rarely results in a fully compositional compound. More often, the resulting compounds are partially compositional or lexicalized. However, OCS and OR prefixes still retain (at least partially) their lexical value and are far from being pure perfectivity markers. Consequently, this also affects their syntactic behavior: the lexical modifications brought about by prefixes sometimes have the side effect of modifying the case taken by verbal compounds.
This contribution consists of three parts. The first section is dedicated to a description of the complementizer system in Russian, whereas the second and the third section describe the same aspects of Polish and Bulgarian – though not in the same detail as for Russian. In the Russian part, the set of Russian complementizers is considered, each of them is described in short, and, finally, some problematic cases of multifunctional units are also mentioned.
ninteresting feature of Russian is its rich system of composed markers (those with the correlative to or with the subjunctive marker by) which in fact can be analyzed either as complex complementizers (this is more plausible for by-variants) or as combinations of markers (this seems to be plausible for to-variants).
Interestingly, Russian has no specialized complementizers, such as Polish że having only a complementizer use. All of the Russian markers analyzed also have other uses. Sometimes, as with polysemous adverbial clause markers kogda ‘when’, esli ‘if’ and the purpose marker čtoby ‘(in order) to’, the word order can serve as a distinctive feature: in the complementizer use, these units (and, correspondingly, the embedded clause itself) have a fixed position after the main clause, which is not true for adverbial uses. This fact confirms (at least for kogda and esli) the tendency observed for many languages: if a marker is used as a complementizer and as another type of subordinator, the complementizer use is often secondary, a result of grammaticalization.