A prototype account of the development of
      delimitative po- in Russian

Dickey, Stephen M.

doi:10.1515/9783110198799.4.329

Cited by 36 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Dickey and Hutcheson (2003) and Dickey (2011Dickey ( , 2015 show that the very development of these specialized (po-) forms from the seventeenth century on points to a closer association between contexts of sequential connection and the pf in Russian and as such can be considered one of the most important developments in the Russian aspectual system, setting it apart from, among others, the Czech aspectual system. This is in accordance with the observation made by Ružička (1962, p. 316) that in older versions of Russian, the use of the ipf was more common in sequences of past events (see also Dickey 2007Dickey , 2011. 46 The data in the case of pres tense narratives are to some extent clearer than in past narrative contexts.…”

Section: Evaluation Of the Explanation Of Narrative Contexts Within Tsupporting

confidence: 89%

The typology of Slavic aspect: a review of the East-West Theory of Slavic aspect

Fortuin

Kamphuis

2015

Russ Linguist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Until recently, differences between the verbal aspectual systems of the individual Slavic languages have not received much attention and data was often interpreted to hold for all Slavic languages. Only in the past decades has this situation changed and to date a number of studies comparing two or more Slavic languages have seen the light of day. Independently from each other, Barentsen and Dickey have devised theories which account for the observed differences between respective Slavic languages. Their approaches are so similar that we think it is justified to speak of a single, comprehensive theory which attributes the differences in the functioning of the systems to differences in the meaning of the perfective and imperfective aspect for the individual languages. This leads to a typology in which there is an Eastern and a Western type of Slavic verbal aspectual system, hence the name 'EastWest Theory'. In this paper, we provide a critical analysis of this theory, focusing on three context types: habitual contexts, narrative contexts and retrospective contexts. Our analysis shows that the theory adequately and convincingly explains most of the data. However, we will also demonstrate that there are still areas in which the theory needs to be developed further, and we provide some suggestions as to how this can be approached.Аннотация Различия в употреблении глагольного вида в разных славянских язы-ках долгое время не привлекали особого внимания. Однако в последние десятилетия появилось несколько работ, направленных именно на выявление различий между дан-ными видовыми системами. Среди них наиболее последовательным и детальным под-ходом можно считать теорию противопоставления восток-запад в славянском видеWe would like to thank Adriaan Barentsen, Stephen Dickey and Hana Filip for commenting on earlier drafts of this paper. We are also grateful to the members of the 'Amsterdam Slavic Aspect Circle' of the University of Amsterdam (besides Adriaan Barentsen, Magda van Duijkeren-Hrabová, René Genis, Janneke Kalsbeek, Radovan Lučić), with whom we have discussed this paper on various occasions. We are especially grateful to Iztok Mikulan and Magda van Duijkeren-Hrabová for their willingness to discuss the Slovene and Czech examples respectively with us. Any remaining mistakes are our own. ('теория восток-запад'). Эту теорию развивали (независимо друг от друга) голланд-ский славист Барентсен и американский славист Дики. Данная теория объясняет системные различия в употреблении глагольного вида в славянских языках, предла-гая разные определения общего значения видов в тех или иных группах этих языков. Противопоставляются восточный и западный типы славянского вида. В настоящем исследовании проводится критический анализ этой теории. При этом в основном рас-сматриваются три типа аспектуального контекста, играющих наиболее важную роль в теории: многократность, повествовательность и ретроспективность. Наш анализ по-казывает, что теория адекватно и убедительно объясняет имеющийся фактический материал. Однако некоторые...

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of the Explanation Of Narrative Contexts Within Tsupporting

confidence: 89%

The typology of Slavic aspect: a review of the East-West Theory of Slavic aspect

Fortuin

Kamphuis

2015

Russ Linguist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aspect and the prefixes are considered in turn. Dickey (2000) applied basic principles of cognitive semantic analysis in a study of the variation in Slavic aspectual systems, organizing and analyzing the variation as the consequence of two conceptually contiguous categories, totality and temporal definiteness (i.e., uniqueness in time, cf. Leinonen [1982]).…”

Section: Variation Across Meaning and Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shull (2003) combined cognitive semantics and video experiments to analyze differences between the Russian and Czech systems of prefixation. Dickey and Hutcheson (2003) and Dickey (2005Dickey ( , 2007 have analyzed the function of po-and s-/z-. Šarić (2014) presents cognitive analyses of prepositions and prefixes in B/C/S.…”

Section: Variation Across Meaning and Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Linguistics: A Neat Theory for Messy Data

Janda¹,

Dickey²

2017

Journal of Slavic Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We outline some recent highlights in the application of cognitive linguistic theoretical and methodological approaches to the analysis of Slavic languages. A principal strength of cognitive linguistics is the way it focuses our attention on the continuous nature of linguistic phenomena. Rather than positing rigid categories and strict definitions, cognitive linguistics addresses the messy realities of language, facilitating the extraction of coherent patterns from the noise of human communication.We follow a thematic arrangement motivated by the types of variation we observe in language and the analyses proposed by Slavic linguists. These include variation across meaning and form, across modalities and genres, and across time and speakers.

show abstract

“…Other scholars disagree with this view due to considerable discrepancies between verbal usage in Old Russian and modern Russian (Ruzicka, 1957). Additionally, some recent work (Bermel, 1997;Dickey, 2007) indicates that aspect as we know it in Russian today was sorted out much later, in the 16th-17th centuries. Not all scholars accept these recent results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergence of Aktionsarten: The First Step Towards Aspect

Gerasymova

2010

The Evolution of Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Slavic aspect has remained a mystery for centuries and continues to fascinate linguists. The genesis of this intricate grammar category is even a greater puzzle. This paper aims at computationally reconstructing the prerequisite for aspect -the emergence of a system of markers for Aktionsarten. We present an experiment where artificial language users develop a conventional system as the consequence of their distributed choices in locally situated communicative acts.

show abstract

A prototype account of the development of delimitative po- in Russian

Cited by 36 publications

References 13 publications

The typology of Slavic aspect: a review of the East-West Theory of Slavic aspect

The typology of Slavic aspect: a review of the East-West Theory of Slavic aspect

Cognitive Linguistics: A Neat Theory for Messy Data

Emergence of Aktionsarten: The First Step Towards Aspect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About