1,721,043 research outputs found
Le marche di lista in russo. Segnali riformulativi, estensivi, generalizzanti... i vse takoe
No full textValentina Benigni
List Construction Markers in Russian: Riformulative Signals, General Extenders... I vse takoe
This paper offers a descriptive survey of list markers in contemporary Russian, i.e discourse markers that signal the presence of a list and at the same time fulfil specific semantic and pragmatic functions, such as generalization (и все такое ‘and things like that’, или что-то в этом роде ‘or something’), exemplification (типа ‘such as/kind of’, например ‘for example’) or reformulation of the list content (так сказать ‘so to speak, вернее ‘more precisely’).
It also explores the structural and functional properties of general extenders (Overstreet 1999) within the framework of CxG, focusing particularly on the process of lexicalization and grammaticalization of the discourse marker и все такое ‘and things like that’. The survey allows to make some generalisations about the multifuncionality of these discourse marker from both a monolingual and a contrastive perspectiv
O.N. Ljaševskaja, S.A. Šarov Častotnyj slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo jazyka (na materiale Nacional’nogo korpusa russkogo jazyka), Azbukovnik, Moskva 2009, pp. 1112.
No full textDeclino della cooccorrenza di genitivo e accusativo nell’espressione dell’oggetto diretto in russo
No full textThis work considers the phenomena of genitive/accusative alternation in the case of the object in russian and proposes a unified analysis of the three different uses of postverbal genitive: genitive of negation, genitive partitive, and intensional genitive. The paper originates from the semantic oppositions traditionally associated with the genitive/accusative alternation: - indeterminacy vs determinacy of the object (ja ne poluČal pisem / ja ne poluČal pis'ma; on prosit deneg / on prosit den'gi) - non existence vs existence of the object (ja ne vižu maŠin / ja ne vižu maŠiny) - indefinitness vs definitness of the object (on dobavil saxaru / on dobavil saxar) and shows, through the results of an empirical study, that the interaction of the different factors that influence the selection of the genitive case (i.e. intensional verbs, negation, partitivity) can obscure the semantic interpretation of the object
Arto Mustajoki, Teorija funkcional’nogo sintaksisa. Ot semantičeskich struktur k jazykovym sredstvam, Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury, Moskva 2006, pp. 509
No full textAd hoc categorization in Russian and multifunctional general extenders
No full textRussian, as well as many other languages, displays a wide number of strategies to name non-lexicalized categories, that is, categories which have a conceptual reality, but are not encoded as single lexical items (e.g. fruit, furniture) or set phrases (e.g. equipment for sport, food for dog). One way to address this lack of lexical means is to provide one or more concrete exemplars of the intended category, in an attempt to capture the superordinate non-lexicalized concept. This paper aims to provide an overview of the different generalizing means used in Russian for the online construction of exemplar-driven categories, and, at the same time, to explore the interplay between discourse resources (e.g. exemplification, listing and reformulation) and system-resources (e.g. collective affixation, co-compounding and discourse markers) in the process
of categorization. Particular attention will be focused on the description of schematic general extenders, that is, partially lexicalized syntactic patterns, realizing the different extending, generalizing and similative functions of general extenders. The last part of the paper is devoted to a discussion of the processes of grammaticalization and pragmaticalization of the general extender i vse takoe ‘and so on’ (lit. ‘and all such’). The form is interesting because of its discursive multifunctionalit
È stato un mezzo disastro… Points of Convergence Between Approximation and Intensification: A Contrastive Italian-Russian Study
No full textBased on the case-study of the Italian downtoner mezzo, ‘half of’, the present work aims to highlight, through a usage-based approach, interesting points of semantic and functional convergence between approximation and intensification, which are traditionally considered divergent meaningconstruction strategies. Mezzo functions both on the semantic level, by modulating the referential force of nouns, verbs, and adjectives, and on the pragmatic level, where it acts as a discourse marker, enabling the speaker to reduce the illocutionary force of their assertions and helping the receiver to make the inferences necessary to recognise the speaker’s communicative intentions in cases of “loose talk” (in Relevance Theory terms), such as understatement and overstatement. In the second part of the article, the results of a contrastive analysis with Russian are discussed, based on the assumption that the identification of functional equivalences between different languages is a valid heuristic method to explain the semantic and pragmatic multifunctionality of certain lexical elements, also from a cross-linguistic perspective.A partire dal case-study dell’approssimante italiano mezzo ‘metà di’ e attraverso un approccio basato sull’uso, il presente lavoro si propone di evidenziare interessanti punti di convergenza semantica e funzionale tra approssimazione e intensificazione, strategie di costruzione del significato tradizionalmente considerate divergenti. Mezzo agisce sia a livello semantico, modulando la forza referenziale di nomi, verbi e aggettivi, sia a livello pragmatico, dove funziona come marca discorsiva che consente al parlante di ridurre la forza illocutiva delle sue affermazioni e al ricevente di compiere le inferenze necessarie a interpretare correttamente le intenzioni dell’interlocutore dietro ad usi non letterali (o cosiddetti loose dalla Teoria della Pertinenza), quali, ad esempio, l’understatement e l’iperbole. Nella seconda parte dell’articolo verranno discussi i risultati di un’analisi contrastiva con il russo, partendo dal presupposto che l’identificazione di equivalenze funzionali tra lingue diverse è un metodo euristico valido per spiegare la multifunzionalità semantica e pragmatica di alcuni elementi lessicali, anche in una prospettiva interlinguistica
Ja ždu avtobus: i verbi intensionali in russo tra norma e uso
No full textThe aim of this paper is to verify if the referential ambiguity induced by intensional verbs (chotet’ ‘to want’, želat’ ‘to wish, to desire’, trebovat’ ‘to demand, to request’, prosit’ ‘to ask for’, ždat’ ‘to wait’, iskat’ ‘to look for’, bojat’sja ‘to fear’ etc.) can be
resolved in Russian by grammatical means, assigning accusative case to [+ specific] objects and genitive case to [- specific] objects (Partee 2005), or accusative case to [± specific] objects and genitive case [- specific] objects (Kagan 2005).
This hypothesis is verified on the basis of empirical data, by analizing a corpus of 476 concrete occurrences of the VP ždat’ avtobus
- …
