ИСТИНА |
Войти в систему Регистрация |
|
ИСТИНА ИНХС РАН |
||
I discuss the notion of Animacy as a relevant semantic (s-selective) feature in Modern Russian (and partly, in the history of Russian). I argue that two related but different notions must be kept apart which is often not done in the Russian studies. ANIM I is a classifying category expressed by Russian nominals (nouns, NPs, QPs). ANIM II is a relevant feature of grammatical constructions which can be associated with their arguments (both overt and covert ones). The classifier ANIM I favours a scalar approach. The majority of Russian nominals are specified either as + ANIM I (people, most animals) or --ANIM I, but there is an intermediate zone (some animals) that can be treated either as animate or non-animate (увидел двух рыб ~ увидел две рыбы 'X saw two fishes' ) in some diagnostic contexts. There are no marked and unmarked values with ANIM I, since it is not modeled as a privative feature. Contrariwise, ANIM II is a discrete binary feature that does not need to be cast as a scalar feature. Depending on which entities (different constructions, different groups of predicate lexemes oriented toward different constructions, different semantic roles) are treated as opposed on the basis of ANIM II values, ANIM II is realised as the opposition of the marked + ANIM II value vs the unmarked setting (+/- ANIM II) or as the opposition of the + ANIM II value vs - ANIM II. The former scenario is diagnosed in the opposition of the Agent-like ( - ANIM II) vs Patient (+/- ANIM II) arguments in the transitive impersonal construction (cf. Лодку унесло в морю, Васю унесло в море), in the contrast of verbs like видеть 'see', слышать 'hear', кушать, есть 'eat' (+ANIM II)vs тащить, убить ( +/- ANIM II), and two dative constructions - Dative-Predicative-Structures (+ANIM II, cf. Васе было приятно съездить на дачу) vs Dative-Infinitive-Structures (+/-ANIM II, cf. Двум смертям не бывать, Васе / грузовику здесь не проехать). The second scenario is realized in the opposition of two Russian verbal impersonal constructions -- 3Sg & covert ELEMENTS; - ANIM II, cf. Улицу засыпал-о песком vs 3PL & covert PEOPLE; + ANIM II, cf. Улицу засыпал-и песком. I also criticize the hypothesis that Modern Russian has a semantic contrast between animate and inanimate accusative forms of nominals and cardinals and argue that this claim is entirely misleading, despite the great names behind the 'animate accusative hypothesis' in the Russian studies. I (not as native speaker but as a linguist) have serious doubts that Modern Russian has something which deserves the tag 'animate paucal construction'. While I accept there is something 'paucal' (i.e. referring to the dedicated uses of the cardinals двух '2' , трех '3', четырех '4' in увидел трех девушек 'X saw three girls), I am concerned by the interpretation of the terms 'animate ' and 'construction in this complex tag. My own guess it that this tag is either due to historical considerations or to the mix of ANIM I and ANIM II.