All
 
|
 
 


Raising and similar phenomena in Russian (mainly based on the behavior of pronouns)
 
PIIS0373658X0008776-2-1
DOI10.31857/S0373658X0008776-2
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Alexander B. Letuchiy 
Affiliation:
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Vinogradov Russian Language Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Anna V. Viklova
Affiliation: National Research University Higher School of Economics
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameVoprosy Jazykoznanija
EditionIssue 2
Pages31-60
Abstract

The paper discusses the possibility of argument raising in Russian. Although Russian is not a canonical raising language, as English, some phenomena are reminiscent of raising. These are constructions where an element of the main clause can only acquire a plausible interpretation if we suppose that it is generated in the subordinate clause. In the analysis, I use data of previous works focusing on one particular construction. However, in my study I focus on the behavior of pronouns: scope of negative and indefi nite pronouns and possibility of replacement of the subordinate clause with the pronoun èto.

Keywordscomplex sentence, negation, pronominalization, pronouns, raising, Russian, scope, syntax
AcknowledgmentThe publication was prepared within the framework of the Academic Fund Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) in 2018–2019 (grant No. 18-01-0032) and by the Russian Academic Excellence Project “5-100”. The authors are grateful for the two anonymous reviewers for their questions and remarks.
Received26.02.2018
Publication date25.06.2020
Number of characters79000
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1149

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Бурукина 2018 — Burukina I. S. On possibility of subject raising in Russian. Tipologiya morfosintaksicheskikh parametrov. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii. No. 4. Lyutikova E. A., Zimmerling A. V. (eds.). Moscow: Pushkin State Russian Language Institute, 2018, 34–44.
2. Волков 2014 — Volkov O. S. Tipologiya inkhoativnykh pokazatelei: grammatikalizatsiya i modeli polisemii [Typology of inchoative markers: Grammaticalization and patterns of polysemy]. Ms., 2014.
3. Герасимова 2015 — Gerasimova A. A. Licensing of negative pronouns across the clause boundary in Russian. Tipologiya morfosintaksicheskikh parametrov. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «TMP-2015». No. 2. Lyutikova E. A., Zimmerling A. V., Konoshenko M. B. (eds.). Moscow: Moscow State Univ. for Education, 2015, 47–61.
4. Летучий 2005 — Letuchiy A. B. Non-prototypic transitivity and lability: The phasal labile verbs. Voprosy Jazykoznanija, 2005, 4: 57–75.
5. Летучий 2014 — Letuchiy A. B. Syntactic proprerties of complement clauses governed by predicatives. Vestnik MGGU im. M. A. Sholokhova, 2014, 1: 62–84.
6. Летучий 2018 — Letuchiy A. B. Predicatives. Materialy k korpusnoi grammatike russkogo yazyka [Material for a corpus-based Russian grammar]. No. 3: Chasti rechi i leksiko-grammaticheskie klassy [Parts of speech and lexical-grammatical classes]. Plungian V. A., Stoynova N. M. (eds.). St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 2018, 136–192.
7. Летучий 2019 — Letuchiy A. B. The pronoun eto as a marker of event-anaphora: Semantics and collocability. Rusistika na poroge XXI veka: problemy i perspektivy. Gerasimov D. V., Dmitrenko S. Yu., Zaika N. M. (eds.). Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul’tury, 2019, 237–279.
8. НКРЯ — Russian National Corpus. URL: http://www.ruscorpora.ru. 
9. ТКПА 1985 — Xrakovskij V. S. (ed.). Tipologiya konstruktsii s predikatnymi aktantami [Typology of constructions with complement clauses]. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1985.
10. Циммерлинг 2003 — Zimmerling A. V. Predicatives and qualitative adverbs: Word classes and directions of derivation. Rusistika na poroge XXI veka: problemy i perspektivy. Onipenko N. K., Moldovan A. M., Belousov V. N. (eds.). Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul’tury, 2003, 54–59.
11. Циммерлинг 2011 — Zimmerling A. V. Non-canonical subjects in Russian. Ot formy k znacheniyu, ot znacheniya k forme. Sbornik statei v chest’ 80-letiya A. V. Bondarko. Voeikova M. D. (ed.). Moscow: Znak, 2011, 568–590.
12. Arylova 2006 — Arylova A. Infi nitival complementation in Russian. Master degree diss. Tromsø: Arctic Univ. of Tromsø, 2006.
13. van der Auwera, Plungian 1998 — van der Auwera J., Plungian V. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology, 1998, 1(2): 79–124.
14. Babby 1999 — Babby L. H. Adjectives in Russian: primary vs. secondary predication. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL-7). The Seattle meeting 1998 (Michigan Slavic Materials 44). Dziverek K., Coates H., Vakareliyska C. (eds.). Ann Arbor (MI): Michigan Slavic Publications, 1999, 1–16.
15. Bailyn 2001 — Bailyn J. The syntax of Slavic predicate case. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 2001, 22: 1–23.
16. Bailyn 2011 — Bailyn J. The syntax of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011.
17. Burukina, in print — Burukina I. Russian verbs of order and permission: Between obligatory control and ECM. Proc. of Formal Description for Slavic Languages 12.5. In print.
18. Culicover, Jackendoff 2005 — Culicover P., Jackendoff R. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2005.
19. Engerer 2013 — Engerer V. Towards a theory of phases and phasal verbs in language typology. 2013, ms. URL: http://pure.iva.dk/ws/fi  les/35044787/typology_v2_UFC_FoL_anonymous.pdf.
20. Feldman 1986 — Feldman F. Doing the best we can. Dortrecht: Reidel, 1986.
21. Frantz 1978 — Frantz D. G. Copying from complements in Blackfoot. Linguistic studies of native Canada. Cook E.-D., Kaye J. (eds.). Vancouver: UBC Press, 1978, 89–110.
22. Geist 2010 — Geist L. The argument structure of predicate adjectives in Russian. Russian Linguistics, 2010, 3(34): 239–260.
23. Giannakidou 2000 — Giannakidou A. Negative …concord? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 2000, 18: 457–523.
24. Giannakidou 2002 — Giannakidou A. N-words and negative concord. The Blackwell companion to syntax. Everaert M., Goedenmans R., Hollerbrandse B., van Riemsdjik H. (eds.). Oxford: Blackwell, 2002, 327–391.
25. Lasnik 1998 — Lasnik H. Exceptional Case Marking: Perspectives old and new. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Connecticut Meeting 1997. Bošković Z., Franks S., Snyder W. (eds.). Ann Arbor (MI): Michigan Slavic Publications, 1998, 187–211.
26. Lasnik, Saito 1991 — Lasnik H., Saito M. On the subject of infi nitives. Papers from the 27th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Dobrin L. M., Nichols L., Rodrigues R. M. (eds.). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1991, 324–343.
27. Lyutikova, Tatevosov 2018 — Lyutikova E. A., Tatevosov S. G. Two facets of causality: On the syntax of causation verbs in Russian. Talk at conference Cause and Causation II. Paris, 2018.
28. Minor 2013 — Minor S. Controlling the hidden restrictor: A puzzle with control in Russian. Proc. of the 42nd Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 42). Keine S., Sloggett S. S. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2013, 29–40.
29. Pereltsvaig 2000 — Pereltsvaig A. Are all small clauses created equal? Evidence from Russian and Italian. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, 15(1). Yoo M., Seele J. (eds.). Montreal: McGill Univ. Press, 2000, 73–104.
30. Pereltsvaig 2004 — Pereltsvaig A. Negative polarity items in Russian and the ‘Bagel Problem’. Negation in Slavic. Przepiórkowski A., Brown S. (eds.). Bloomington: Slavica Publ., 2004, 153–178.
31. Pesetsky 1991 — Pesetsky D. Zero syntax. Vol. 2: Infi nitives. 1991, ms. URL: http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/people/faculty/pesetsky/infi  ns.pdf.
32. Pesetsky 2017 — Pesetsky D. Hyper-rasing. (Handout.) 2017. URL: http://sznfong.scripts.mit.edu/site/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/hyper-raising-24.S90.pdf. 
33. Polinsky 2013 — Polinsky M. Raising and control. The Cambridge handbook of Generative Syntax. Den Dikken M. (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013, 577–606.
34. Polinsky 2015 — Polinsky M. Tsez syntax: A description. 2015, ms. URL: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mpolinsky/fi  les/polinsky_15_tsez-syntax-a.5_2.pdf.
35. Rosenbaum 1965 — Rosenbaum P. S. The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Doctoral diss. Cambridge (MA): MIT, 1965.
36. Say 2013 — Say S. On the nature of dative arguments in Russian constructions with “predicatives”. Current studies in Slavic linguistics. Kor Chahine I. (ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2013, 225–245.
37. Sigurðsson 2002 — Sigurðsson H. A. To be an oblique subject: Russian vs. Icelandic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 2002, 20(4): 691–724.
38. Stepanov 2007a — Stepanov A. The end of CED? Minimalism and extraction domains. Syntax, 2007, 10(1): 80–126.
39. Stepanov 2007b — Stepanov A. On the absence of long-distance A-movement in Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 2007, 15(1): 81–108.
40. Stiebels 2007 — Stiebels B. Toward a typology of complement control. Studies in complement control. Stiebels B. (ed.). Berlin: ZAS, 2007, 1–80.
41. Williams 1987 — Williams E. Implicit arguments, the Binding Theory, and control. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 1987, 5: 151–180.
42. Wurmbrand 2001 — Wurmbrand S. Infi nitives. Restructuring and clause structure. (Studies in Generative Grammar, 55.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001.
43. Xolodilova 2015 — Xolodilova M. A. Inter-clausal negative concord. Poster for a talk at The Pragmatics of Grammar: Negation and Polarity. Caen: Univ. of Caen Normandy, 2015.
44. Zeijlstra 2004 — Zeijlstra H. Sentential negation and negative concord. Ph.D. diss. Amsterdam: Univ. of Amsterdam, 2004.
45. Zimmerling 2009 — Zimmerling A. Dative subjects and semi-expletive pronouns. Studies in Formal Slavic Phonology, Syntax, Semantics and Information Structure. Zybatow G., Junghanns U., Lenertová D., Biskup P. (eds.). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2009.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up