Perfective, performative and present: Some non-standard combinations in Slavic and beyond

封面

如何引用文章

详细

The combination of perfective aspect and present tense is frequently considered as an example of semantically incompatible grams. If verbal forms including markers of both perfective aspect and present tense do exist in a language, they tend not to express present resp. perfective in the strict sense. Thus, in Russian such forms usually convey the future, as in napishu ‘I will write’. The article discusses a specific type of contexts where these forms develop a less trivial meaning of what can be called “prospective present”. Obligatory components of these contexts are first person of the verb and negation. We focus on three instances of this kind : ne skazhu (lit. ‘I won’t tell’), ne dam (lit. ‘I won’t give’) and ne pushchu (lit. ‘I won’t let’)’. With the data of Russian National Corpus (RNC) and notably of the parallel corpora within RNC, we demonstrate that in certain uses, these constructions correspond to speech acts of refusal or prohibition and can be viewed, accordingly, as expressing a kind of performative meaning. As performatives, these verbs refer to a present situation: the speaker’s refusal or prohibition comes into operation at the moment of utterance, and not at some point in the future. The present-tense reference is corroborated by the translational counterparts of ne skazhu / ne dam / ne pushchu from parallel corpora, as other languages regularly use present forms in these contexts. Thus, performative-like constructions provide new data on potential non-future meanings of perfective present forms.

作者简介

Vladimir Plungian

Vinogradov Institute of Russian Language, Russian Academy of Sciences; Lomonosov Moscow State University; Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: plungian@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2393-1399

Doctor Habil., full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Head of the Typology department at the Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and Head of the Department of corpus linguistics and linguistic poetics of Vinogradov Russian Language Institute. He is also Professor of the Department of theoretical and applied linguistics at the Philological faculty of Moscow State University

Moscow, Russia

Ekaterina Rakhilina

Vinogradov Institute of Russian Language, Russian Academy of Sciences; HSE University

Email: rakhilina@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7126-0905

Doctor Habil., Professor and Head of the School of Linguistics at the Faculty of Humanities at the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”. She is also a leading researcher at Vinogradov Russian Language Institute

Moscow, Russia

Tatiana Reznikova

HSE University

Email: tanja.reznikova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0976-224X

holds a Ph.D. in Philology and is Associate Professor of the School of Linguistics at the Faculty of Humanities at the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”.

Moscow, Russia

参考

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Robert M. W. Dixon. 1998. Dependencies between grammatical systems. Language 74 (1). 56-80 (also in: Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Robert M.W. Dixon. 2011. Dependencies between Grammatical Systems. Language at Large: Essays on Syntax and Semantics. Leiden: Brill. 170-204).
  2. Apresyan, Yurii D. 1988. Glagoly momental’nogo deistviya i performativy v russkom yazyke (Verbs of Instantaneous Action and Performatives in Russian). In Yurii D. Apresyan. 1995. Izbrannye trudy. T. 2: Integral’noe opisanie yazyka i sistemnaya leksikografiya. Moscow: Yazyki russkoi kul’tury. 199-241. (In Russ.).
  3. Biasio, Marco. 2019. The etiquette of aspect. How and why prositi stopped worrying and entered a pair. Lingue e Linguaggi 31. 191-218.
  4. Biasio, Marco. 2021a. Dictum erit factum? Vidovremennye svoistva performativov v sopostavitel’nom aspekte (na materiale russkogo i serbskokhorvatskogo yazykov) (Tempo-Aspectual Properties of Performative Verbs from a Crosslinguistic Perspective (based on Russian and Serbo-Croatian Languages)). Università degli Studi di Padova PhD. (In Russ.).
  5. Biasio, Marco. 2021b. Slavic performatives were originally marked for general aspect. In Ettorio Gherbezza, Vesselina Laskova & Anna Maria Perissutti (eds.), Le lingue slave: Sviluppi teorici e prospettive applicative. Atti del VIII incontro di linguistica slava (Udine, 10-12 settembre 2020). Roma: Aracne. 47-62.
  6. Buras, Maria M. 2022. Lingvisty, prishedshie s kholoda (Linguists who came in from the cold). Moscow: AST, Redaktsiya Eleny Shubinoi. (In Russ.).
  7. Buzarovska, Eleni. 2010. Izrazuvanie na segashnost vo grchkiot yazik. In Zuzana Topolinjska (ed.), Segashnost kako lingvistichki poim: Gramatichkite sredstva za izrazuvanie segashnost vo slovenskite i balkanskite zemii. Skopјe: MANU. 137-150. (In Maced.)
  8. Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  9. Bychkova, Polina & Ekaterina Rakhilina. forthcoming. Towards pragmatic construction typology: The case of discourse formulae. In Alessandra Barotto & Simone Mattiola (eds.), Discourse Phenomena in Typological Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  10. De Wit, Astrid, Frank Brisard & Michael Meeuwis. 2018. The epistemic import of aspectual constructions: The case of performatives. Language and Cognition 10 (2). 234-265.
  11. De Wit, Astrid. 2017. The Present Perfective Paradox across Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  12. Derganc, Alexandra. 2012. Performativnye glagoly v slovenskom yazyke (Performative verbs in Slovenian). Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 9. Filologiya 6. 228-236. (In Russ.).
  13. Dickey, Stephen M. 2016. The Aspectual Development of Performatives in Slavic. Zeitschrift für Slavische Philologie 71 (2). 249-304.
  14. Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary Catherine O’Connor. 1988. Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone. Language 64 (3). 501-538.
  15. Fortuin, Egbert. 2019. Universality and language-dependency of tense and aspect: Performatives from a crosslinguistic perspective. Linguistic Typology 23 (1). 1-58.
  16. Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
  17. Khrakovskii, Viktor S. 1990. Vzaimodeistvie grammaticheskikh kategorii glagola: opyt analiza (Interaction of grammatical categories of the verb: A tentative analysis). Voprosy yazykoznaniya 5. 18-36. (In Russ.).
  18. Khrakovskii, Viktor S. 1996. Grammaticheskie kategorii glagola (opyt teorii vzaimodeistviya) (Grammatical Categories of the Verb (Towards a Theory of Category Interaction)). In Aleksandr V. Bondarko (ed.), Mezhkategorial’nye svyazi v grammatike. Saint Petersburg: D. Bulanin. 22-42. (In Russ.).
  19. Khrakovskii, Viktor S. & Andrei L. Mal’chukov. 2016. Vzaimodeistvie i ierarkhiya grammaticheskikh kategorii glagola: vvedenie v temu i tipologicheskaya anketa (Interaction and hierarchy of verbal categories: Research program and a typological questionnaire). Voprosy yazykoznaniya 6. 51-83. (In Russ.).
  20. Korn, Agnes & Irina Nevskaya (eds.). 2017. Prospective and Proximative in Turkic, Iranian and beyond (Iran - Turan 18). Wiesbaden: Reichert.
  21. Kozlov, Aleksei A. 2021. K semanticheskoi tipologii prospektiva (Towards a semantic typology of prospective aspect). Voprosy yazykoznaniya 2. 28-52. (In Russ.).
  22. Malchukov, Andrej. 2009. Incompatible categories: Resolving the “present perfective paradox.” In Lotte Hogeweg, Helen de Hoop & Andrej Malchukov (eds.), Cross-linguistic semantics of tense, aspect, and modality, 13-32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  23. Malchukov, Andrej. 2011. Interaction of verbal categories: Resolution of infelicitous grammeme combinations. Linguistics 49 (1). 229-282.
  24. Malchukov, Andrej L. 2019. Interaction of Verbal сategories in a Typological perspective. Gengo Kenkyū 156. 1-24.
  25. Mel’chuk, Igor A. 1961. O nekotorykh tipakh yazykovykh znachenii (On some types of linguistic meanings). O tochnykh metodakh issledovaniya yazyka. M.: MGU. 33-39. (In Russ.).
  26. Mel’chuk, Igor A. 1968. Stroenie yazykovykh znakov i vozmozhnye formal’no-smyslovye otnosheniya mezhdu nimi (The structure of linguistic signs and possible formal-semantic relations between them). Izvestiya Akademii nauk SSSR. Seriya literatury i yazyka 27 (5). 426-438. (In Russ.).
  27. Mel’chuk Igor A. 1972. O suppletivizme (On Suppletion). In Sebastian K. Shaumyan (ed.), Problemy strukturnoi lingvistiki 1971. Moscow: Nauka. 396-438. (In Russ.).
  28. Mel’chuk, Igor A. 1975/1997. Opyt razrabotki fragmenta sistemy ponyatii i terminov dlya morfologii (k formalizatsii yazyka lingvistiki) (Experiments on elaborating a fragment of the system of notions and terms for morphology (towards the formalization of the language of linguistics)). Semiotika i informatika 35. 15-58. (In Russ.).
  29. Mel’chuk, Igor A. 1995. Russkii yazyk v modeli «Smysl ↔ Tekst» (The Russian Language in the Meaning ↔ Text Perspective). Moscow-Vienna: Shkola “Yazyki russkoi kul’tury”. (In Russ.).
  30. Mel’chuk, Igor A. 1997-2006. Kurs obshchei morfologii (Course in General Morphology). Vol. I-V. Moscow: Yazyki russkoi kul’tury. (In Russ.).
  31. Mel’chuk, Igor A. 2004. Actants in semantics and syntax. Linguistics 42 (1), 42 (2).
  32. Michaelis, Laura A. 2004. Type shifting in Construction Grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics 15 (1). 1-67.
  33. Rakhilina, Ekaterina V., Polina A. Bychkova & Svetlana Yu. Zhukova. 2021. Rechevye akty kak lingvisticheskaya kategoriya: diskursivnye formuly (Speech acts as a linguistic category: The case of discourse formulae). Voprosy yazykoznaniya 2. 7-27. (In Russ.).
  34. Shluinskii, Andrei B. 2012. Faktativ i smezhnye kategorii: opyt tipologii (The factative and related categories: A tentative typology). Acta Linguistica Petropolitana 8 (2). 950-996. (In Russ.).
  35. Slavkova, Svetlana. 2014. Performativnoe upotreblenie glagolov prosit’ / poprosit’ i molya / pomolya v russkom i bolgarskom yazykakh: pragmaticheskaya rol’ vida i vremeni (The performative use of the verbs prosit’ / poprosit’ and molya / pomolya in Russian and Bulgarian: The pragmatic role of aspect and tense). Scando-Slavica 60 (2). 231-252. (In Russ.).
  36. Voeikova, Maria D. 1996. Kategorial’nye priznaki performativnykh vyskazyvanii v russkom yazyke (The categorial features of performative utterances in Russian). In Aleksandr V. Bondarko (ed.), Mezhkategorial’nye svyazi v grammatike, 153-167. Saint Petersburg: D. Bulanin. (In Russ.).
  37. Wiemer, Bjorn. 2014. Upotreblenie sovershennogo vida v performativnom nastoyashchem (The use of the perfect form in the performative present). Acta Linguistica Petropolitana X (3). 90-113. (In Russ.).
  38. Wierzbicka, Anna. 1987. English Speech Act Verbs: A Semantic Dictionary. Sydney: Academic Press.
  39. Zaliznyak, Andrei A. 1990. Ob odnom upotreblenii prezensa sovershennogo vida («prezens naprasnogo ozhidaniya») (On one type of present perfect use (“present of vain expectation”)). In Zygmunt Saloni (ed.), Metody formalne w opisie języków słowiańskich, 109-114. Białystok: W-wo Univ. Warszawskiego. (In Russ.).

版权所有 © Plungian V., Rakhilina E., Reznikova T., 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##