Coordinated tautologies in Russian

The paper discusses a particular pattern of tautological constructions in Russian called coordinated tautologies. The notion was introduced in 2008 by J. Meibauer who used it to describe constructions like Work is work and holidays are holidays. Opposed to other tautologies, these constructions include not one, but two pairs of repeated elements with the meaning that two objects or events are distinct in a relevant way. In Russian there are a few models of «simple» tautologies (X est’ X, X eto X, etc. ‘X is X’), and it is discussed whether their semantic properties are inherited by «complex» coordinated tautologies. It is argued that constructions like Druzhba druzhboi, a sluzhba sluzhboi also belong to the class of coordinated tautologies despite their structural difference.

Keywords

Internet, Russian, semantics, tautologies

Received

11.04.2016

Publication date

11.04.2016

Number of characters

895

Cite Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in

GOST	Vilinbakhova E. Coordinated tautologies in Russian // Voprosy Jazykoznanija – 2016. – Issue 2 C. 61-74 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/vopjaz/s207987840000014-4-2-en (circulation date: 25.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S0373658X0000981-8
MLA	Vilinbakhova, Elena L "Coordinated tautologies in Russian." Voprosy Jazykoznanija 2 (2016):61-74. DOI: 10.31857/S0373658X0000981-8
APA	Vilinbakhova E. (2016). Coordinated tautologies in Russian. Voprosy Jazykoznanija (2), pp.61-74 DOI: 10.31857/S0373658X0000981-8


1	\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Price publication: 0

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1297

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Apresjan Ju. D. Connotations as a part of the pragmatic meaning of a word. Apresjan Ju. D. Izbrannye trudy: V 2 t. T. II: Integral’noe opisanie yazyka i sistemnaya leksikografiya [Selected works: In 2 vol. Vol. II: Integrated description of language and systematic lexicograpgy]. Moscow: Shkola «Yazyki Russkoi Kul’tury», 1995. Pp. 156—178.

2. Apresjan V. Ju. Mehanismy obrazovaniya i vzaimodeistviya slozhnykh znachenii v yazyke. Dokt. diss. [Mechanisms of creation and interaction of complex language meanings. Doct. diss.]. Moscow: Vinogradov Institute of the Russian Language, 2014.

3. Bulygina T. V., Shmelev A. D. Yazykovaya kontseptualizatsiya mira (na materiale russkoi grammatiki) [Linguistic conceptualization of the world (based on the material of the Russian grammar)]. Мosсow: Shkola «Yazyki Russkoi Kul’tury», 1997.

4. Vilinbakhova E. L. On a construction «husband such a husband» (lit.) in Russian (based on on-line sources). Tezisy konferentsii «Russkij jazyk: konstruktsionnyje i leksiko-semanticheskie podkhody», Sankt-Peterburg, 24—26 marta 2011 g.] Available at: http://iling.spb.ru/confs/rusconstr2011/pdf/Vilinbaxova.pdf.

5. Vilinbakhova E. L. Article means article: On one pattern of tautologies in Russian. Komp’yuternaya lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii: Po materialam ezhegodnoi Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «Dialog». No. 14 (21): In 2 vol. Vol. 1. Moscow: Russian State Univ. for the Humanities, 2015. Pp. 638—649.

6. Gilyarova K. A. Paper such a paper. On a reduplication pattern in modern Russian. Komp’juternaja lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii: Trudy mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii «Dialog». No. 12 (19): In 2 vol. Vol. 1. Moscow: Russian State Univ. for the Humanities, 2013. Pp. 268—280.

7. Iomdil L. L. Chitat’ ne chital, no…: On a Russian construction with repeated lexical elements. Komp’juternaja lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii: Trudy mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii «Dialog». No. 12 (19): In 2 vol. Vol. 1. Moscow: Russian State Univ. for the Humanities, 2013. Pp. 309—322.

8. Kobozeva I. M. Lingvisticheskaya semantika. [Linguistic semantics]. Moscow: Knizhnyi Dom «LIBROKOM», 2009.

9. Kreidlin G. E., Paducheva E. V. Meaning and syntactic properties of the conjunction a. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Series 2. 1974. No. 9. Pp. 31—37.

10. Natsional’nyi korpus russkogo yazyka [Russian National Corpus]. Available at: http://www.ruscorpora.ru.

11. Nikolina N. A. Structural-semantic features of sentences of the type «Life is life». Predlozhenie kak mnogoaspektnaya edinitsa yazyka. Moscow: Moscow State Pedagogical Institute Publ., 1984. Pp. 38—46.

12. Paducheva E. V. Dinamicheskie modeli v semantike leksiki [Dynamic models in lexical semantics]. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul’tury, 2004.

13. Sannikov V. Z. Russkii sintaksis v semantiko-pragmaticheskom prostranstve [Russian syntax in the semantic-pragmatic space]. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskikh Kul’tur, 2008.

14. Shakhmatov A. A. Sintaksis russkogo yazyka [Syntax of the Russian language]. Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2001.

15. Shvedova N. Yu. Ocherki po sintaksisu russkoi razgovornoi rechi [Essays on the syntax of the Russian colloquial language]. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1960.

16. Shmelev D. N. On «connected» syntactic constructions in Russian. Voprosy jazykoznanija. 1960. No. 5. Pp. 47—60.

17. Autenrieth T. Tautologien sind Tautologien. Pragmatik. Implikaturen und Sprechakte [= Linguistische Berichte. Sonderheft 8]. Rolf E. (Hrsg.). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1997. Ss. 12—32.

18. Bulhof J., Gimbel S. Deep tautologies. Pragmatics and cognition. 2001. Vol. 9 (2). Pp. 279—291.

19. Bulhof J., Gimbel S. A tautology is a tautology (or is it?). Journal of pragmatics. 2004. Vol. 36 (3). Pp. 1003—1005.

20. Escandell-Vidal M. V. Nominal tautologies in Spanish. Talk given at the International conference of pragmatics (Barcelona, Spain, July, 9, 1990).

21. Fraser B. Motor oil is motor oil: An account of English nominal tautologies. Journal of pragmatics. 1988. Vol. 12. Pp. 215—220.

22. Gibbs R. W., McCarrell N. S. Why boys will be boys and girls will be girls: Understanding colloquial tautologies. Journal of psycholinguistic research. 1990. Vol. 19. Pp. 125—145.

23. Grice H. P. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts. Cole P., Morgan J. L. (eds). New York: Academic Press, 1975. Pp. 41—58.

24. Kwon I. Categorization and its embodiment: Korean tautological constructions in mental spaces theory. Language Sciences. 2014. Vol. 45. Pp. 44—55.

25. Levinson S. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1983.

26. Meibauer J. Tautology as presumptive meaning. Pragmatics and cognition. 2008. Vol. 16. Pp. 439—470.

27. Miki E. Evocation and tautologies. Journal of pragmatics. 1996. Vol. 25. Pp. 635—648.

28. Okamoto S. Nominal repetitive constructions in Japanese: The tautology controversy revisited. Journal of pragmatics. 1993. Vol. 20. Pp. 433—466.

29. Rhodes R. A Cross-linguistic comparison of tautological constructions with special focus on English. Available at: www.linguistics.berkeley.edu/~russellrhodes/pdfs/taut_qp.pdf

30. Ward G. L., Hirschberg J. A pragmatic analysis of tautological utterances. Journal of pragmatics. 1991. Vol. 15. Pp. 507—520.

31. Wierzbicka A. Boys will be boys: ‘Radical semantics’ vs. ‘Radical pragmatics’. Language. 1987. Vol. 63. Pp. 95—114.

32. Wierzbicka A. Boys will be boys: A rejoinder to Bruce Fraser. Journal of pragmatics. Vol. 12. Pp. 221—224.

33. Wierzbicka A. Cross-cultural pragmatics: the semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1991.