A very unpredictable ‘person’: A corpus-based approach to suppletion in West Polesian

封面

如何引用文章

详细

In Slavic languages, as in many other languages, the noun for ‘person’ has a suppletive paradigm. Yet, as this study shows, in West Polesian (East Slavic) the noun ‘person’ is a typological outlier not only within Slavic but also cross-linguistically because it combines three stems with a very complex distribution. This paper looks for any regularities in the distribution of these suppletive stems, their cognates among other Slavic languages and how speakers use them in free texts. This survey provides novel insights into suppletion. First, suppletion involving more than two stems is typologically uncommon but the West Polesian noun ‘person’ combines three. Second, against any expectation of regularity for the sake of learnability, free-text data show that speakers do not distribute the stems homogeneously. Third, notwithstanding the diglossic situation in Western Polesie, the inter- and intra-speaker variation in the choice of stem does not seem particularly conditioned by sociolinguistic variables such as gender, age or social class. In sum, this corpus survey of the suppletive stems of ‘person’ in West Polesian and Slavic illustrates a rare case in morphological typology where there is a three-stem suppletion combined with overabundance and a vast amount of variation across speakers.

作者简介

Kristian Roncero

Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology; Friedrich Schiller Universität

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: kristianroncero@gmail.com
Deutscher Platz 6, 04103 Leipzig, Germany

参考

  1. Akiner, Shirin. 1983. The Syntax of the numeral in Byelorussian, compared with Ukrainian, Russian and Polish. The Slavonic and East European Review 61 (1). 55-68
  2. Babby, Leonard H. 1987. Case, prequantifiers, and discontinuous agreement in Russian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 5 (1). 91-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00161869
  3. Bortnik, Ninel´. 1979. Nekotorye osobennosti osnov obrazuyushchikh dvoinye formy mnozhestvennogo chisla. Russian Language Journal 32. 43-58.
  4. Bybee, Joan L. 1985. Morphology. A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  5. Chumakina, Marina, Hippisley Andrew & Corbett Greville G. 2004. Istoricheskie izmeneniya v russkom yazyke: Sluchai chereduyushchegosya suppletivizma. Russian Linguistics 28. 281-315.
  6. Corbett, Greville G. 1978. Numerous squishes and squishy numerals in Slavonic. In B. Comrie, (ed.), Classification of grammatical categories, 43-73. Edmonton, Canada: Linguistic research INC.
  7. Corbett, Greville G. 1983. Hierarchies, Targets and Controllers: Agreement Patterns in Slavic. London: Croom Helm.
  8. Corbett, Greville G. 2005. The canonical approach to typology. In Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges & D. S. Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 25-49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  9. Corbett, Greville G. 2007. Canonical typology, suppletion, and possible words, Language 83 (1). 8-42
  10. Corbett, Greville G. 2008. Determining morphosyntactic feature values: The case of case. In G. Corbett & M. Noonan (eds.), Case and grammatical relations: Papers in honour of Bernard Comrie, 1-34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
  11. Daniel, M. & Spencer A. 2009. The vocative-an outlier case. In A. Malchukov, A. Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 626-634. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  12. Dorian, Nancy C. 2010. Investigating Variation. The Effects of Social Organization and Social Setting. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Franks, Steven. 1995. Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax. Oxford University Press.
  14. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. Generalizations about numeral systems. In J. H. Greenberg et al. (eds.), Universals of human language, 249-295. Stanford (CA): Stanford UP.
  15. Kim, Hyoungsup. 2009. The Sstructure and Use of Collective Numeral Phrases in Slavic: Russian, Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian, and Polish [PhD Thesis]. The University of Texas at Austin.
  16. Madariaga, Nerea & Igartua Iván. 2017. Idiosyncratic (dis)agreement patterns: The Structure and diachrony of Russian paucal subjects. Scando-Slavica 63 (2). 99-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/00806765.2017.1390922
  17. Matthews, P. H. 1991. Morphology. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  18. Mel´čuk, Igor A. 1994. Suppletion: Toward a logical analysis of the concept. Studies in Language 18 (2). 339-410.
  19. Nesset, Tore. 2019. Big data in Russian linguistics? Another look at paucal constructions. Zeitschrift für Slawistik 64 (2). 157-174. https://doi.org/10.1515/slaw-2019-0012
  20. Nesset, Tore & Maria Nordrum. 2019. Do Russian paucal numerals govern the genitive? Evidence from stress placement. Russian Linguistics 43 (2). 87-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-019-09209-7
  21. Nurmio, Silva & Willis David. 2016. The rise and fall of a minor category: The case of the Welsh numerative. Journal of Historical Linguistics 6 (2). 297-339. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.6.2.05nur
  22. Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2013. On number and numberlessness in languages without articles. In C. Cathcart et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society, 300-314.
  23. Roncero, Kristian. 2021. Revisiting numeral phrases in East Slavic: Insights from West Polesian. Slavonic and East European Review 99 (4). 601-646.
  24. Shevelov, George Y. 1964. A Prehistory of Slavic. Historical Phonology of Common Slavic. Heidelberg: Winter Univ. Verl.
  25. Thornton, Anna M. 2011. Overabundance (multiple forms realising the same cell): A non-canonical phenomenon in Italian verb morphology. In M. Maiden et al. (eds.), Morphological autonomy: Perspectives from Romance inflectional morphology, 357-381. Oxford: Oxford University Press
  26. Thornton, Anna M. 2013. La non canonicità del tipo It. braccio // braccia / bracci: Sovrabbondanza, difettività o iperdifferenziazione? Studi Di Grammatica Italiana 29-30. 419-477.
  27. Thornton, Anna M. 2019. Overabundance: A canonical typology. In F. Rainer et al. (eds.), Competition in inflection and word-formation, 189-224. Dordrecht: Springer.
  28. Vanhove, Claudia. 2017. A Diachronic View on Suppletion. Diachronical Research Regarding The Lexical Competition between Rebënok and Ditja [PhD Thesis]. University of Gent.
  29. Viellard, Stéphane. 2011. Problèmes de syntaxe des numéraux dans quelques langues slaves (vieux slave, vieux russe, BCMS, polonais, russe moderne), introduction. Revue des Études Slaves 82 (4). 597-603.
  30. Waldenfels, R. & Meyer R. 2011. ParaSol, a Corpus of Slavic and Other Languages. (Electronic resource): University of Bern/University of Regensburg. http://parasol.unibe.ch. (accessed 24 February 2022).
  31. Zaliznjak, Andrej A. 2002. Russkoe Imennoe Slovoizmenenie: S Priloženiem Izbrannyx Rabot Po Sovremennomu Russkomu Yazyku I Obščemu Yazykoznaniyu. Moscow: Nauka.
  32. Žolobov, Oleg F. 2003. K istorii malogo kvantitativa: Adnumerativnye formy prilagatel´nyx i suščestvitel´nyx. Russian Linguistics 27. 117-197.
  33. Hrvatski Jeyzčni Portal. 2006-2021. Srce; Znanje. Available from: http://hjp.znanje.hr (accessed 3rd Apr 2021)
  34. Leipzig Glossing Rules. 2015, May 31 update. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. https://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/resources/glossing-rules.php (accessed 24 February 2022)
  35. Oxford English Dictionary. 2018. OED Online. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com (accessed 24 February 2022)
  36. Rečnik na bălgarskija ezik. 2011-2018. Institutăt za bălgarski ezik. http://ibl.bas.bg/rbe/lang/bg/ (accessed 24 February 2022)

版权所有 © Roncero K., 2022

Creative Commons License
此作品已接受知识共享署名-非商业性使用 4.0国际许可协议的许可。

##common.cookie##