Slavistische Beiträge ∙ Band 192 (eBook - Digi20-Retro) Laura A. Janda A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes za-, pere-, do-, and ot- Verlag Otto Sagner München ∙ Berlin ∙ Washington D.C. Digitalisiert im Rahmen der Kooperation mit dem DFG-Projekt „Digi20“ der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, München. OCR-Bearbeitung und Erstellung des eBooks durch den Verlag Otto Sagner: http://verlag.kubon-sagner.de © bei Verlag Otto Sagner. Eine Verwertung oder Weitergabe der Texte und Abbildungen, insbesondere durch Vervielfältigung, ist ohne vorherige schriftliche Genehmigung des Verlages unzulässig. «Verlag Otto Sagner» ist ein Imprint der Kubon & Sagner GmbH. S B l a v i s t i c h e e it r ä g e BEGRÜNDET VON ALOIS SCHMAUS HERAUSGEGEBEN VON JOHANNES HOLTHUSEN t ■ HEINRICH KUNSTMANN PETER REHDER • JOSEF SCHRENK REDAKTION PETER REHDER Band 192 VERLAG OTTO SAGNER MÜNCHEN LAURA A. JANDA A SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF THE RUSSIAN VERBAL PREFIXES za-, pere-, do-, and ot- VERLAG OTTO SAGNER • MÜNCHEN 1986 l; Beyertethe 1 Staatsbibliothek I München ] ISBN 3-87690-332-7 © Verlag Otto Sagner, München 1986 Abteilung der Firma Kubon & Sagner, München Druck: D. Gräbner, Altendorf ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS What I have comitted to paper here is indeed the product of the labors of many people. Most of all, I must thank Professors Flier, Timberlake, Lakoff and Du Bois for their comments, criticism, suggestions, and advice. My consultants also made significant contributions to this work: Victor Dmitriev, Ayalla Dollinger, Ninel Dubrovich, Liudmilla Gelb, Olga Kagan and Sergei Zamascikov. Encouragement and moral support were provided by Judy McKee, Charles E. Townsend, all the faculty and students in our department and by my husband Jaroslav. I am grateful to AATSEEL, Annual Reviews and Physsardt Publications for permission to use quotations from materials on which they hold copyright and to Kubon and Sagner and Professor Dr. Peter Rehder for the publication of this book. 00057072 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..........................................................................................iv V IT A ................................................................................................................................v ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION ............................................................vi Chapter page I. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM....................................................................1 One question unanswered in traditional descriptions . . . 1 Why the set theory model is inadequate..................................5 II. VARIOUS APPROACHES TO THE SEMANTICS OF RUSSIAN VERBAL PREFIXES ....................................................................15 The Traditional Approach................................................................15 Identity of subm eanings............................................................16 System of com bination................................................................16 P rediction..........................................................................................17 Coherence of submeanings........................................................18 Number of subm eanings............................................................18 Classification .................................................................................19 ”Empty'* prefixes .........................................................................19 Summary of questions................................................................26 Structuralist approaches................................................................26 Flier 1975 .......................................................................................... 27 van Schooneveld 1978 ................................................................ 29 Gallant 1979 ...................................................................................... 31 Summary of structuralist approaches..................................32 Invariance and meaning....................................................................33 Diversity vs u n ity .........................................................................33 The common denominator............................................................34 The paradox of the invariant ...............................................38 Other arguments against in va ria n ce ..................................40 Sum m ary..................................................................................................42 III. THE MODIFIED STRUCTURALIST APPROACH ..........................44 Evidence from psychology ............................................................44 Evidence from lin g u istics................................................................48 F illm ore..............................................................................................49 00057072 Kay and McDaniel 1978 and Coleman and Kay 1981 . . 49 Langacker.........................................................................................50 La k o ff..................................................................................................52 Brugman, Lindner, and Rudzka-Ostyn..............................54 Summary of impact of cognitive psychology on linguistics.............................................................................55 Sum m ary..................................................................................................59 An outline of the modified structuralist approach . . 60 IV. A MODIFIED STRUCTURALIST ANALYSIS OF RUSSIAN VERBAL PREFIXES ....................................................................64 Prelim inaries.........................................................................................64 *,Cognitive” space .............................................................................64 The structure of the configuration...........................................66 The structure of the netw ork.......................................................67 Role of prefixai semantics in the meaning of a verb . . . 69 V. Z A - ...................................................................................................................78 An overview of the network and configurations of ZA- . 78 Configuration 1 .....................................................................................81 Configuration 2 .................................................................................120 Configuration 3 .................................................................................121 Configuration 4 .................................................................................129 Configuration 5 .................................................................................131 Sum m ary.............................................................................................133 VI. PERE-..........................................................................................................134 An overview of the network and configurations of P E R E -.....................................................................................134 Configuration 1 .................................................................................138 Configuration 2 .................................................................................156 Configuration 3 .................................................................................158 Configuration 4 .................................................................................160 Configuration 5 .................................................................................162 Configuration 6 .................................................................................165 Configuration 7 .................................................................................168 Configuration 8 .................................................................................170 Configuration 9 .................................................................................172 V II. D O -...............................................................................................................174 An overview of DO- ....................................................................174 Configuration 1 .................................................................................175 Configuration 2 .................................................................................189 V III. О Т -...............................................................................................................192 An overview of ОТ- 192 00057072 Configuration 1 ..................................................................................193 Configuration 2 ..................................................................................205 IX. SUMMARY....................................................................................................209 A comparison of the three approaches ..............................209 On lin ka g e ...........................................................................................217 X. VARIETIES OF EXPRESSIONS OF EXCESS..............................222 <Excess> and the configurations and mapping patterns 222 DO- versus О Т - ..............................................................................228 ZA- versus P E R E -..........................................................................229 Summary of <excess>.....................................................................234 XI. A REMARK ON A S P E C T.....................................................................235 Definitions of the term perfective...........................................236 The lexico-grammatical dichotom y...........................................237 Aspect and prefixes in the modified structuralist model 238 A k tio n s a rt...........................................................................................240 XII. CONCLUSION...........................................................................................242 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................257 Chapter I STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 1.1 ONE QUESTION UNANSWERED IN TRADITIONAL DESCRIPTIONS Traditional1 descriptions of Russian verbal prefixes consist of lists of the "submeanings*' or "homonyms" subsumed under a given prefixai morpheme. Although they do not explicitly use set theory terminology, since such descriptions make no mention of any relations between the submeanings of a prefix, set theory provides an accurate model of this approach to prefixai semantics. Figure 1 is a schematic set theory diagram of the submeanings of any given prefix, as suggested by traditional descriptions. 1 For the purposes of this dissertation, "traditional" refers to the description of Russian verbal prefixes in the Academy Grammar and to works by authors whose views on prefixai semantics do not differ significantly from those presented in the Academy Grammar. Specifically, I am referring to works by Bogusławski, IsaEenko, Tixonov, Bondarko and the like. 1 Figure 1: Set Theory Model Each circled number represents the set of instantiations of a given submeaning and all of these sets are gathered together in the larger set which represents the prefix as a whole. This model, although elegant in its simplicity, obscures the actual semantic structure of the prefix, which is neither as loose nor as random as the set theory representation implies. The inadequacies of this approach as well as the various alternatives which have been devised by linguists to correct these shortcomings will be discussed in detail throughout this dissertation. In addition to the Venn diagram representation, the traditional description of Russian prefixes may be portrayed as a matrix of prefixes and submeanings. This type of representation is motivated by the use of virtually identical characterizations of submeanings of different prefixes. For example. Grammatika russkogo jaiyka, I960