The aspectual system of Russian Smith (1991/97)

May 7, 2007

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

2-component theory

I

situation types: states, activities, accomplishments, achievements, semelfactives

I

viewpoints: perfective, imperfective, neutral

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

situation types I

I

(predicational aspect, inner aspect, lexical aspect, Aktionsart) basic-level and derived-level situation types

I

verb + arguments (+ adverbials)

I

durativity vs. terminativity, atelicity vs. telicity telicity: inherent end-point

I

relevant features: ±dynamic, ±durative, ±instantaneous, ±telic

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

situation types II

I

states: -dynamic, +durative basic: love poetry, know the answer, be tall derived: generics, habituals, progressive sentences

I

activities: +dynamic, +durative, -telic basic: walk, eat, eat apples, push the cart

I

accomplishments: +dynamic, +durative, +telic basic: walk to Amsterdam, eat an apple, build 20 houses

I

achievements: +dynamic, +instantaneous, +telic basic: arrive in Amsterdam, win the race, find a treasure

I

semelfactives: +dynamic, +instantaneous, -telic basic: knock on the door (once), jump on the spot

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

viewpoints

(grammatical aspect, outer aspect) full or partial view on a situation I

universal category, but not grammaticalised in all languages (parametrised)

I

instantiations of imperfective aspect: English progressive, French imparfait

I

instantiations of perfective aspect: English perfect, French pass´ e simple, French pass´ e compos´ e (written)

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

imperfective meanings

I

progressive: a situation in its process / in a state of process We are drawing a circle. The red team was winning the race.

I

iterative: repetition of a situation She would knock on the door several times.

I

habitual: a situation that usually takes place Every year, they celebrate her birthday in Hamburg. It could happen that he would just sit there and not say a word.

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

perfective meanings

I

a situation reaches its inherent culmination point: She reached the top of the mountain.

I

a temporally delimited / bounded situation: He slept for two hours.

I

perfect: relevance of / focus on the result state I have baked a cake.

I

inchoative / ingressive: initial bound of the situation Suddenly, John knew the answer. Soudain, Jean sut la r´eponse.

I

R-time movement: chain / sequence of events in discourse She sat down, opened the book, read 20 pages, closed it again and left the room.

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

Russian tenses

I

past tense: ipf. On ˇcita-l knigu. ‘He was reading a/the book.’ pf. On proˇcita-l knigu. ‘He read a/the book.’

I

non-past tense: ipf. On ˇcita-et knigu. ‘He is reading a/the book.’ pf. On proˇcita-et knigu. ‘He will read a/the book.’

I

periphrastic future tense: ipf. On budet ˇcitat’ knigu. ‘He will read a/the book.’ pf. *On budet proˇcitat’ knigu.

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

introduction I

Every Russian verb form is either perfective or imperfective (including non-finite verb forms)

I

diagnostics: - only imperfective verbs have periphrastic future tense forms - only imperfective verbs can be complements of verbs like begin, start, continue, stop

I

Aspect is expressed by verbal prefixes and suffixes

I

There is no one morphological marker for either perfectivity or imperfectivity: - not all perfective verb forms contain prefixes - not all imperfective verb forms contain suffixes

I

Not all telic predicates contain prefixes and not all prefixes derive telic predicates.

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

morphological complexity of Russian verbs I

ipf. simple: byt’ ‘be’, znat’ ‘know’, pisat’ ‘write’, kriˇcat’ ‘shout’

I

pf. simple: dat’ ‘give’, kupit’ ‘buy’, sest’ ‘sit down’

I

ipf. suffixed: da-va-t’ ‘give’, by-va-t’ ‘(usually) be’

I

pf. prefixed: na-pisat’ ‘write’, po-pisat’ ‘write’, pod-pisat’ ‘sign’, u-znat’ ‘get to know, find out’

I

pf. suffixed: krik-nu-t’ ‘shout (once)’

I

ipf. prefixed-suffixed: pod-pis-yva-t’ ‘sign’, u-zna-va-t’ ‘get to know, find out’

I

pf. prefixed-prefixed-suffixed: On po-vy-da-va-l knigi. ‘He gave out books (for a while).’

I

pf. prefixed-prefixed-prefixed-suffixed: On po-na-vy-derg-iva-l markovki. ‘He pulled out, one by one, a lot of carrots.’ Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

Smith’s account: direct vs. augmented interpretations

I

semantics: both viewpoints are associated with a positive meaning (direct interpretation)

I

pragmatics: conventional uses, can be overridden by other information (augmented interpretations)

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

interpretations of the perfective aspect

perfective: includes both endpoints of dynamic situations; both bounds of the situation have to be specific I

direct interpretation: final emphasis - telic event has proceeded to its natural endpoint / atelic event has terminated

I

augmented interpretations: continuing result, sequentiality

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

interpretations of the imperfective aspect

imperfective: focuses part of a situation with neither initial nor final endpoints I

direct interpretation: ongoing

I

augmented interpretations: annulled result, discontinuity

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

The idea of aspectual pairs

Smith: ‘perfective and imperfective verb forms with the same lexical meaning, only difference in viewpoint’; implicit: have to describe the same situation type I

paradigmatic view: aspectual pairs in isolation from the context, one verb in the lexicon has different forms for perfective and imperfective aspect (Smith)

I

syntagmatic view: two verbs / verb forms can constitute an aspectual pair in one context but possibly not in all contexts (Paduˇceva 1996, Mlynarczyk 2004)

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

In support of the syntagmatic view

Under the syntagmatic view, there are aspectual pairs for basically all verbs and situation types. I

in favour of syntagmatic view: there are contexts where Russian allows only one aspect

I

sequence of unique events: only perfective

I

habituality, historical present: only imperfective

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

examples for aspectual pairs under the syntagmatic view I

imperfective statives and perfective inchoatives (states): (u)videt’ ‘see’, (u)slyˇsat’ ‘hear’

I

imperfective ongoing processes and perfective terminated processes (activities): (po)sidet’ ‘sit’, (po)pisat‘ (pis’mo) ‘write (a/the letter)’, (po)kriˇcat’ ‘shout’

I

imperfective culminating processes and perfective culminated processes (some accomplishments): (na)pisat’ *(pis’mo) ‘write a/the letter’

I

imperfective ongoing culminations and perfective completed culminations (some accomplishments, achievements): otkry(va)t’ okno ‘open a/the window’

I

imperfective ongoing unitisable process and perfective minimal unitisable process (semelfactives): kriˇcat’ / krik-nu-t’ ‘shout’

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

Lexical and superlexical prefixes

lexical prefixes have lexical meaning as well, superlexical prefixes convey perfective viewpoint only (distinction goes back to Isaˇcenko 1962) I

Not all prefixed verb forms are perfective ... in the presence of an imperfective suffix, the verb form is imperfective unless another prefix is attached.

I

Not all perfective verb forms contain prefixes ... but most do.

I

Not all prefixes derive telic predicates ... only lexical ones do.

I

Not all telic predicates contain prefixes ... but almost all do.

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

example On po-na-vy-derg-iva-l markovki. ‘He pulled out, one by one, a lot of carrots.’ I

simple verb: On d¨ergal (ipf) markovki. ‘He pulled (the) carrots.’

I

+ lexical prefix vy- ‘out’: On vy-dergal (pf) markovki. ‘He pulled out (the) carrots.’

I

+ imperfectivising suffix -(y)va-: On vy-derg-iva-l (ipf) markovki. ‘He pulled out (the) carrots.’

I

+ superlexical accumulative prefix na-: On na-vy-derg-iva-l (pf) markovki. ‘He pulled out a lot of carrots.’

I

+ superlexical distributive prefix po-: On po-na-vy-derg-iva-l (pf) markovki. ‘He pulled out a lot of carrots, one by one.’

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

lexical prefixes I

Lexically prefixed verbs are lexically distinct from the unprefixed verb and the semantic contribution of the prefix can be highly idiosyncratic: bit’ ‘beat’ - u-bit’ ‘kill’

I

Lexical prefixation affects argument structure: dat’ +dat +acc ‘give’ vs. iz-dat’ +acc ‘publish’

I

Lexically prefixed verbs derive imperfectives with suffix -(y)va-: u-bi-va-t’ ‘kill’, iz-da-va-t’ ‘publish’

I

Lexical prefixes cannot stack: (po-)na-vy-dergivat’ but *vy-na-dergivat’, *vy-po-dergivat’, *u-vy-dergivat’ ‘away-out-pull’

I

Lexically prefixed verbs derive complex event nominals: na-pisa-nie ‘the writing’

I

Lexical prefixes induce telicity: On na-pisal pis’mo *(za) ˇcas. ‘He wrote a/the letter in an hour / *for an hour.’ Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

superlexical prefixes I

Superlexically prefixed verbs are not lexically distinct from the unprefixed verb and the semantic contribution of the prefix is predictable: pisat’ ‘write’ - po-pisat’ ‘write for a while’

I

Superlexical prefixation does not affect argument structure: pisat’ (ˇcto) ‘write (what)’ and po-pisat’ (ˇcto) ‘write (what)’ (vs. lexically prefixed na-pisat’ *(ˇcto) ‘write *(what)’)

I

Superlexically prefixed verbs cannot derive imperfectives with the suffix (y)va: *po-pis-yva-t’

I

Superlexical prefixes can stack

I

Superlexically prefixed verbs do not derive complex event nominals: *po-pisa-nie

I

Superlexical prefixes do not induce telicity: On po-pisal (pis’mo) (*za) ˇcas. ‘He wrote (a/the letter) *in an hour / for an hour.’ Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian

superlexical prefixes - examples

Superlexical prefixes constitute a small closed class. I

delimitative po- ‘for a while’

I

perdurative pro- ‘for a longer while’

I

ingressive za- - supplies an arbitrary initial bound

I

egressive ot- - supplied an arbitrary final bound

I

accumulative na-

I

distributive po-

Smith (1991/97)

The aspectual system of Russian