A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes za-, pere-, do-, and ot-

(1)

Slavistische Beiträge ∙ Band 192

(eBook - Digi20-Retro)

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,

Laura A. Janda

A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes

za-, pere-, do-, and ot-

(2)

S l a v i s t i c h e B e i t 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

(3)

LAURA A. JANDA

A SEMANTIC ANALYSIS

OF THE RUSSIAN VERBAL PREFIXES

za-, pere-, do-, and ot-

(4)

B e y e r t e t h e 1

S ta a ts b ib lio th e k I

M ü n c h e n ]

l;

ISBN 3-87690-332-7

© Verlag Otto Sagner, München 1986 Abteilung der Firma Kubon & Sagner, München

Druck: D. Gräbner, Altendorf

(5)

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.

(6)

00057072

CO NTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...iv

V I T A ... v

A B S T R A C T OF THE D IS S E R T A T IO N ...v i C h a p te r pag e I. S TATE M E N T OF P R O B L E M ... 1

One q u e s tio n u n a n s w e re d in tr a d itio n a l d e s c rip tio n s . . . 1

W hy th e set th e o r y model is in a d e q u a t e ... 5

I I . V A R IO U S APPROACHES T O THE SEM ANTICS OF RUSSIAN V E R B A L PREFIXES ... 15

T h e T r a d itio n a l A p p r o a c h ... 15

Id e n t it y o f s u b m e a n in g s ... 16

System o f c o m b in a t io n ... 16

P r e d i c t i o n ...17

C o herence o f s u b m e a n in g s ...18

N u m be r o f s u b m e a n in g s ... 18

C la s s ific a tio n ... 19

” Em pty'* p re fix e s ...19

Sum m ary o f q u e s t i o n s ... 26

S t r u c tu r a lis t a p p r o a c h e s ... 26

F lie r 1975 ... 27

v a n S ch oone veld 1978 ... 29

G a lla n t 1979 ... 31

S um m ary o f s t r u c t u r a lis t a p p r o a c h e s ... 32

In v a ria n c e and m e a n in g ... 33

D iv e r s ity vs u n i t y ...33

T h e common d e n o m in a t o r ... 34

T h e p a ra d o x o f th e in v a r ia n t ... 38

O th e r a rg u m e n ts a g a in s t i n v a r i a n c e ... 40

S u m m a r y ... 42

I I I . THE M O D IFIED S T R U C T U R A L IS T APPROACH ...44

E vid e n ce fro m p s y c h o lo g y ... 44

E vid e n ce fro m l i n g u i s t i c s ... 48

F i l l m o r e ... 49

(7)

00057072

Kay and M cDaniel 1978 and Coleman and Kay 1981 . . 49

L a n g a c k e r ... 50

La k o f f ... 52

B ru g m a n , L in d n e r, and R u d z k a - O s t y n ... 54

Sum m ary o f im p a ct o f c o g n itiv e p s y c h o lo g y on l i n g u i s t i c s ...55

S u m m a r y ...59

A n o u tlin e o f th e m o d ifie d s t r u c t u r a lis t a p p ro a ch . . 60

IV . A M O D IFIED S T R U C T U R A L IS T A N A L Y S IS OF RUSSIAN V E R B A L PREFIXES ... 64

P r e l im in a r i e s ... 64

*,C o g n itiv e ” space ...64

T h e s tr u c tu r e o f th e c o n f i g u r a t i o n ...66

T h e s tr u c tu r e o f th e n e t w o r k ... 67

Role o f p r e fix a i sem antics in th e m eaning o f a v e rb . . . 69

V . Z A - ...78

A n o v e rv ie w o f th e n e tw o rk and c o n fig u ra tio n s o f Z A - . 78 C o n fig u ra tio n 1 ... 81

C o n fig u ra tio n 2 ...120

S u m m a r y ... 133

V I . P E R E - ... 134

A n o v e rv ie w o f th e n e tw o rk and c o n fig u ra tio n s o f P E R E - ... 134

V I I . D O - ...174

An o v e rv ie w o f DO- ... 174

(8)

00057072

C o n fig u ra tio n 1 ... 193

C o n fig u ra tio n 2 ... 205

IX . S U M M A R Y ...209

A co m p a riso n o f th e th re e a p p ro a ch e s ... 209

On l i n k a g e ... 217

X . V A R IE T IE S OF EXPRESSIONS OF E X C E S S ... 222

<Excess> and th e c o n fig u r a tio n s and m a p p in g p a tte rn s 222 DO- v e rs u s О Т - ... 228

Z A - v e rs u s P E R E - ...229

Sum m ary o f < e x c e s s > ... 234

X I . A REMARK ON A S P E C T ... 235

D e fin itio n s o f th e te rm p e r f e c t i v e ... 236

T h e le x ic o -g ra m m a tic a l d i c h o t o m y ... 237

A s p e c t and p r e fix e s in th e m o d ifie d s t r u c t u r a lis t model 238 A k t i o n s a r t ... 240

X I I . C O N C L U S IO N ... 242

B IB L IO G R A P H Y ...257

(9)

C h a p te r I

S T A T E M E N T OF PROBLEM

1.1 ONE Q U ES TIO N UNANSWERED IN T R A D IT IO N A L DE SC R IPTIO N S T r a d it io n a l1 d e s c r ip tio n s o f R u ssian v e rb a l p re fix e s c o n s is t o f lis ts o f th e "s u b m e a n in g s *' o r "h o m o n ym s" subsu m e d u n d e r a g iv e n p r e fix a i m orphem e. A lth o u g h th e y do n o t e x p lic it ly use set th e o ry te rm in o lo g y , s in c e su ch d e s c r ip tio n s m ake no m e n tio n o f a n y re la tio n s betw e en th e s u b m e a n in g s o f a p r e f ix , se t th e o r y p ro v id e s an a c c u ra te model o f t h is a p p ro a c h to p r e fix a i s e m a n tic s . F ig u re 1 is a schem atic s e t th e o r y d ia g ra m o f th e s u b m e a n in g s o f a n y g iv e n p r e f ix , as s u g g e s te d b y t r a d it io n a l d e s c r ip tio n s .

1 F o r th e p u rp o s e s o f t h is d is s e r ta tio n , " t r a d it io n a l" re fe rs to th e d e s c rip tio n o f R u ssian v e rb a l p r e fix e s in th e Academ y G ram m ar and to w o rk s b y a u th o rs whose v ie w s on p r e f ix a i sem antics do n o t d if f e r s ig n if ic a n tly fro m th o s e p re s e n te d in th e Academ y G ram m ar.

S p e c ific a lly , I am r e fe r r in g to w o rk s b y B o g u s ła w s k i, IsaEenko,

(10)

F i g u r e 1: Set T h e o ry Model

Each c ir c le d n u m b e r re p re s e n ts th e set o f in s ta n tia tio n s o f a g iv e n s u b m e a n in g and all o f th e s e se ts a re g a th e re d to g e th e r in th e la rg e r s e t w h ic h re p re s e n ts th e p r e f ix as a w h o le . T h is m odel, a lth o u g h e le g a n t in its s im p lic ity , o b s c u re s th e a c tu a l sem antic s t r u c t u r e o f th e p r e f ix , w h ic h is n e ith e r as loose n o r as random as th e se t th e o ry re p re s e n ta tio n im p lie s . T h e in a d e q u a c ie s o f th is a p p ro a c h as w e ll as th e v a rio u s a lte rn a tiv e s w h ic h h a ve been d e v is e d b y lin g u is ts to c o r r e c t th e s e s h o rtc o m in g s w ill be d is c u s s e d in d e ta il th ro u g h o u t th is d is s e r ta tio n .

In a d d itio n to th e V e n n d ia g ra m re p re s e n ta tio n , th e tr a d itio n a l d e s c r ip tio n o f R u ssian p r e fix e s may be p o r tra y e d as a m a trix of p re fix e s a n d s u b m e a n in g s . T h is ty p e o f re p re s e n ta tio n is m o tiv a te d b y th e use o f v ir t u a lly id e n tic a l c h a ra c te riz a tio n s o f subm ea ning s of d if f e r e n t p r e fix e s . F o r exa m p le . G ra m m a tika ru s s k o g o ja iy k a , I960

(11)

(w h ic h w ill h e n c e fo rth be r e fe r r e d to as th e 1960 Academ y G ram m ar) lis ts f o r e v e ry n o n - fo r e ig n , n o n -C h u rc h S la v ic p r e f ix e x c e p t v - , n a d- , and p e re - a su b m e a n in g "d o v e s ti d o r e z u i'ta ta /k o n c a d e ļs tv ie "

( 'b r in g th e a c tio n to a r e s u lt / e n d ') . T h e p r e fix e s d o - , г а- , and o t- each h a ve an id e n tic a lly c h a ra c te riz e d s u b m e a n in g "d o v e s ti d o n e ìe ia te iѳподо s o s to ļa n ija " ( ’ b r in g to an u n d e s ira b le s ta te *) w h ic h is v e r y s im ila r to th a t o f p e r e - , " 5 n e le Ìa te Ì*n o b o f'Š o j d iit e f 'n o s t 'ju / ín te n s iv n o s t'ju s o v e rŠ it1 d e ļs tv ie" ( 'p e r fo r m th e a c tio n w ith

u n d e s ira b le d u ra tio n o r in t e n s it y ') .

In F ig u re 2 th e colum ns r e p re s e n t th e sem antic m a k e -u p o f g iv e n p re fix e s (p 1 , p 2 , . . . p n ) and th e row s re p re s e n t s u b m e a n in g s ( s i , s2, . . . s n ) . T h e p re s e n c e o f a p lu s s ig n s ig n a ls th e a s s o c ia tio n o f th e p r e fix o f th e g iv e n colum n w ith th e su b m e a n in g o f th e g iv e n ro w .

F ig u re 2: M a trix R e p re s e n ta tio n o f S u bm eanings

p i p2 p3 p4 p5 . . . pn

s i

s2 ♦ ♦ ♦

s3

54 + ♦

s5

sn ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

w hereas th e absence o f a s ig n s ig n a ls th e la c k o f such an a s s o c ia tio n .

(12)

S im ila r to th e set th e o r y d ia g ra m , th e m a trix re p re s e n ta tio n s u g g e s ts th a t th e sem antic c o n te n t o f a p r e fix is re la tiv e ly u n s tr u c tu r e d a n d rando m . In th e m a tr ix , h o w e v e r, th e n o tio n t h a t a lim ite d s e t o f subm ea ning s is sh a re d b y th e p re fix e s is m ore s a lie n t.

T h is a s s u m p tio n has had c o n s id e ra b le in flu e n c e on a s p e c to lo g y (as w ill be seen in C h a p te r 11) and le x ic o g ra p h y . D ic tio n a rie s o fte n g iv e s im ila r d e fin itio n s o f d iff e r e n t p re fix e s when th e y a lle g e d ly s ig n a l th e same s u b m e a n in g . B oth p e re- and 20־ have th e <excess> su b m e a n in g , hence th e d e fin itio n s g iv e n b y O fe g o v :

P E R E KO R M IT' (P E R E **fe e d ') ־ ־ n a k o rm it' s liîk o m s y tn o , p r iČ in iv v r e d *feed too f u ll , c a u s in g harm '

Z A K O R M IT ' ( Z A - 'fe e d ') - - n a k o rm it' s v e rx m e ry ili p r ič in it*

v r e d izliS n im korm leniem ,fe e d more th a n norm al o r harm b y e x c e s s iv e fe e d in g '

an d th e Academ y D ic tio n a ry :

PE R E SPA T’ (P E R E -'s le e p ') ־ ־ s p a t' s liîk o m d o lg o , dol'S e, Čem n u în o ,sle ep to o lo n g , lo n g e r th a n necessary*

Z A S P A T 'S J A ( Z A - 's le e p '- r e fle x ) - - spat* s liîk o m d o lg o 'sle e p too lo n g *.

N ot o n ly a re th e d e fin itio n s o f v e rb s o f a g iv e n subm eaning s im ila r, re g a rd le s s o f w h ic h p r e f ix is p re s e n t, b u t o c c a s io n a lly a v e rb w ith one p r e f ix is c ro s s -re fe re n c e d to th e same base v e rb w ith a

(13)

d if f e r e n t p r e f ix . T h e Academ y D ic tio n a ry , f o r e xam ple, lis ts p e r e x v a liv a t9 p e r e - ’p raise* *p ra ise too h ig h ly ' u n d e r th e d e fin itio n o f z a x v a U v a t' z o -’ p ra is e ’ *p ra ise to o h ig h ly ' and p e r e k a rm itv a t״

p e r e - 'fe e d ’ *overfeed* u n d e r th e d e fin itio n o f d o k a rm liv a t״ </o-’fe e d ' 'o v e rfe e d *. A ll o f th is e v id e n c e s u g g e s ts th a t d if f e r e n t p re fix e s may s h a re a su b m e a n in g whose v a lu e is in d e p e n d e n t. In o th e r w o rd s , r e tu r n in g to F ig u re 2,

1) T h e sem antic re a liz a tio n o f a g iv e n sn is e q u iv a le n t f o r all in s ta n tia tio n s o f all p 's w h ic h in c lu d e i t in t h e ir sem antic m a k e -u p .

T h e p r im a r y aim o f th is d is s e rta tio n is to te s t th e v a lid it y o f a ssu m p tio n 1 ). T h is a ssum ptio n is o f c o u rs e o n ly one o f m any w h ic h m ig h t be q u e s tio n e d and lik e w is e th e re se a rch d e s c rib e d in th e fo llo w in g s e c ito n is o n ly one o f m any te s ts th a t m ig h t be a p p lie d to th e t r a d itio n a l m odel. T h is te s t is n o t, th e r e fo re , d e fin it iv e , b u t is r a th e r in te n d e d as a s ta r tin g p o in t f o r d is c u s s io n .

1.2 WHY THE SET THEO RY MODEL IS IN AD EQ U ATE

In s p ite o f th e s im ila ritie s no te d b y d ic tio n a rie s and b y th e Academ y G ram m ar, th e re is reason to q u e s tio n w h e th e r in s ta n tia tio n s o f a g iv e n su bm ea ning w ith d iff e r e n t p re fix e s a re in d e e d s y n o n ym o u s.

I w ill use th e p re fix e s 20־ , p e r e- , d o- , and o t - , all o f w h ic h have a su b m e a n in g e x p re s s in g <excess>* to e x e m p lify th e d is c u s s io n o f t h is

00057072

1 C f. th e Academ y G ram m ar's c h a ra c te riz a tio n o f th is sub m e a n in g f o r a ll o f th e s e p re fix e s c ite d a b o v e . O b - and n a š also p a r tic ip a te in

(14)

q u e s tio n .

I f 1) is a v a lid a s s u m p tio n , we w o u ld e x p e c t base v e rb s to show no p a r t ic u la r it y in th e s e le c tio n o f a p r e fix in <excess>, a n d , c o n v e rs e ly , we w o u ld e x p e c t th e fo u r p re fix e s to com bine w ith th e base v e r b s w ith ro u g h ly equ al fre q u e n c y . T h e d a ta 1 g iv e n b e low , h o w e v e r, show th a t th is is n o t th e case.

T a b le 1: M u ltiv a le n c e o f Base V e rb s N u m b e r o f p re fix e s

base v e rb s can

com bin e w ith N u m b e r o f base v e rb s P e rce n t

a ll 4 4 n

3 23 7%

2 44 14%

T o ta l 71 22%

p re fix e s I have ch o se n , b u t th e y have been e x c lu d e d fro m d is c u s s io n in o r d e r to keep th e d is s e rta tio n to a m anageable size.

P r e* also p re fix e s a b o u t a dozen v e rb s d e n o tin g <excess>, b u t f o r th e p u rp o s e s o f th is w o rk , it w ill be c o n s id e re d a v a r ia n t o f p e r e - .

* T h e se ta b le s p re s e n t data com piled fro m 421 e n trie s in th e Academ y D ic tio n a ry . T he se a re , to my k n o w le d g e , a il o f th e e n trie s o f v e rb s p re fix e d in *а т , p e r e- , d o - and o t- w h ic h d e n o te <excess>.

T h e to ta l n u m b e r o f base v e rb s in v o lv e d , 318, was used to com pute th e p e rc e n t o f v e rb s w h ic h c o u ld com bine w ith tw o , th r e e , o r fo u r o f th e p re fix e s in T a b le 1

(15)

00057072

T a b le 2: E x c lu s iv ity o f Base V e rb s to P re fix e s

г а - p e re - d o - o t -

to ta l # o f

base v e rb s 166 141 100 14

# o f v e rb s e x c lu s iv e to

g iv e n p r e f ix 102 94 49 3

% o f base

v e rb s 61% 67% 49% 21%

As T a b le 1 in d ic a te s , o n ly 22% o f th e base v e rb s w h ic h , when p r e fix e d , can e x p re s s <exce$s> a re capa ble o f co m b in in g w ith m ore th a n one p r e fix in th is su b m e a n in g , and o n ly 1% can com bine w ith all f o u r p r e fix e s . T a b le 2 shows how m any o f th e base v e rb s com bine e x c lu s iv e ly w ith one p r e fix in e x p re s s io n s o f <excess>.

A p p ro x im a te ly 50% o r m ore o f base v e rb s p r e fix e d b y z a -1 p e r e - , and d o- are p r e fix - s p e c ific and ca n n o t se le ct a n y o th e r p r e f ix to e x p re s s

<excess>.

A close e xam in ation o f th e v e rb s w h ic h a re p r e f ix - s p e c ific re v e a ls a te n d e n c y to p a tte rn b y sem antic g ro u p . O f th e n in e t y - f o u r v e rb s s p e c ific to p e r e - , t h ir ty - s e v e n d e n o te 'fo o d p r e p a ra tio n ' (p e r e v a r it 1 p e r e • 'b o il' ’ b o il to o lo n g ', p e r e p e r iit' p e re -*p e p p e r* *o ve r p e p p e r1) .

(16)

tw e lv e d e n o te ’ c a re f o r c lo th ’ (p e re k ra x m a U t' p e r e - ’ s ta rc h ' ’o v e r s ta r c h ’ , p e re u z it* p e r e • 'n a rro w ' ,ta k e in (a d re s s ) too f a r ’ ) , f iv e ’care f o r anim a ls' (p e r e d o it1 p e r e - ’m ilk ’ ’o v e r m ilk ’ , p e r e p o it' p e r e • 'g iv e to d r in k ' ‘ g iv e to o m uch w a te r to d r in k ') and tw e n ty - tw o ,w o rk o r engage in social a c t iv itie s ' (p e r e u s e rd s tv o v a t' p e r e • 'be zealous’ ' t r y too h a r d ', p e re m o d n iČ a t' p e r e • ' be fa s h io n a b le * ‘ be e x c e s s iv e ly fa s h io n a b le *). T h e se v e rb s may f u r t h e r be c o n s o lid a te d in to a s in g le g r o u p , u n d e r th e h e a d in g 'a c t iv itie s w h ic h have a s p e c ific lim it, d e te rm in e d b y re c ip e , in s tr u c tio n s , s ta n d a rd p ra c tic e o r o th e r n o rm ’ . T h e fo u r g ro u p s o f v e r b s in v o lv e d a c c o u n t f o r 80% o f th e v e rb s w h ich com bine e x c lu s iv e ly w ith p e r e- in e x p re s s io n s o f <excess>. T w e n ty - th re e , o r n e a rly o n e - fo u r th , o f th e v e rb s s p e c ific to zo- den ote

’t o r t u r e o r b e a t’ (z a p y ta t׳ z a - ’ t o r t u r e ’ 'to rm e n t t e r r ib ly m uch’ , z a p o ro t' z o -’ flo g * 'flo g t e r r i b l y m u c h ') and th e m a jo rity o f th e re m a in in g v e rb s d e s c rib e an a c t iv it y w h ic h , th ro u g h e xce ssive in d u lg e n c e , can cause s u f fe r in g (s u c h as z a /a s k a t' z o -'c a re s s ' ’ caress t o r t u r o u s ly m uch*, z a p u te Š e s tv o v a t's ja z o -’t r a v e l'- r e f le x 'g e t w o rn o u t fro m t r a v e lin g ') . T h is sem antic g r o u p in g o f v e rb s s u g g e s ts th a t each p r e fix has its ow n c h a r a c te r is tic sem antic s t r u c t u r e w h ic h r e s tr ic ts its a b ility to com bine w ith v e r b s . T h is in fe re n c e , h o w e v e r, c o n flic ts w ith a ssu m p tio n 1) and has no p la ce in th e t r a d itio n a l fra m e w o rk .

I t is also im p o rta n t to m e n tio n t h a t , s in c e T a b le s 1 and 2 w e re c o n s tru c te d p u r e ly on th e b a sis o f th e m o rp h o lo g ic a l c o o c c u rre n c e of p re fix e s and v e rb a l base s, th e d a ta re p re s e n te d in them a re somewhat m is le a d in g . F o r m any o f th e exam ples w h ic h are g iv e n in T a b le 1,

(17)

th e base v e r b , a lth o u g h m o rp h o lo g ic a lly id e n tic a l in a ll cases, p e rfo rm s d is t in c t ly d if f e r e n t fu n c tio n s in s e n te n c e s , d e p e n d in g on w h ic h p r e f ix it is co m bin ed w ith . F o r e x a m p le , th e re a re s e v e ra l v e rb s w h ic h , w hen p r e fix e d b y p e r e- , can ta k e o n ly in a n im a te d ir e c t o b je c ts , b u t w h ic h ta k e anim a te d ir e c t o b je c ts w h e n p r e fix e d b y га- , as in exam ples 1) and 2 ) .

1) On el x o lo d n u ju , b e z v k u s n u ju t e lja tin u , p ii p e re p a re n n y ļ { p e r e - 'ste a m *), g o r 'k o v a ty j 5 a j.

He a te c o ld , ta s te le s s veal and d r a n k o v e rb re w e d, b it t e r tea.

2) A n fis a deda v bane zaparU a (г а -*ste am ') , a to i e££e god o v p ja t' p r o ž il b y .

I f A n fis a h a d n 't steam ed G ra n d p a in th e b a th h o u s e too m u c h, he m ig h t have liv e d a n o th e r f iv e y e a rs o r $0^.

T h e v e r b e s tr *eat’ u n d e rg o e s li t t le chan ge in th e fo rm a tio n o f p e re e s t* p e re -*ea t’ 'o v e re a t', b u t a c q u ire s a v e r y s p e c ific c o n n o ta tio n in zaesV sja 20- * e a t* -re fle x 'b y o v e r in d u lg in g in d e lic a c ie s , become a fu s s y e a te r '. S im ila rly , p lja s a t' ,dance* goes th r o u g h a s e rie s o f tra n s fo rm a tio n s w ith г а -, d o - , a n d o t ־ : z a p lja s a t' z o - 'd a n ce ' *dance (someone) s illy * , is t r a n s it iv e a n d its d ir e c t o b je c t is a p e rs o n , d o p /ja s a t$s ļa d o - ' d a n c e ’ ־ re fle x ,da n ce one’ s w a y to tr o u b le ' is in tr a n s itiv e , o tp tļa s a t1 o f - ’ d a n c e ' *dance o n e 's ( le g s , a rm s, e t c . ) o f f is t r a n s it iv e and it s d ir e c t o b je c t is a lw a ys a b o d y p a r t .

(18)

Am ong v e rb s w h ic h com bine w ith m ore th a n one p r e fix in <excess>, th o s e w h ic h make a fu n c tio n a l a n d /o r sem antic d is tin c tio n (as d e s c rib e d a b o ve ) c o n s titu te th e m a jo r ity . F o r th is re a so n , th e d e g re e o f p r e f ix - s p e c if ic it y o f v e rb s is c o n s id e ra b ly g r e a te r th a n T a b le s 1 and 2 in d ic a te .

On th e ba sis o f m o rp h o lo g ic a l c o m p a tib ility a lo n e , p r e fix in te r c h a n g e a b ility is d e m o n s tra b ly lim ite d and a b r ie f s u r v e y o f th e fu n c tio n a l and sem antic s h ifts a sso cia te d w ith g iv e n p re fix e s s u g g e s ts even s tr o n g e r p r e f ix - s p e c if ic it y . T h e q u e s tio n a ris e s , g iv e n a f u ll c o n te x t, w h a t is th e a c tu a l in te r c h a n g e a b ility o f p re fix e s in e x p re s s io n s o f <excess>? In an a tte m p t to a n s w e r th is q u e s tio n , I c o n s tru c te d a q u e s tio n n a ire fro m f o r t y - s e v e n te x ts o f v a r y in g le n g th s c o n ta in in g e x p re s s io n s o f <exces$> in th e fo rm o f v e rb s p r e fix e d in z a -, p e r e־ , d o* , a n d o f - (see th e r e p r in te d q u e s tio n n a ire in th e A p p e n d ix ) . H a lf o f th e te x ts w e re s e le cte d fro m books and a rtic le s p u b lis h e d w ith in th e p a s t tw e n ty y e a rs , a n d th e re m a in d e r w e re q u o te d fro m R ussian lit e r a t u r e c ite d b y th e Academ y D ic tio n a ry . In none o f th e te x ts d id th e p r e fix e d v e r b a p p e a r as p a r t o f an id io m a tic o r fro z e n e x p re s s io n . In th e q u e s tio n n a ire it s e lf, th e v e rb in q u e s tio n ( h e n c e fo r th , " th e ta r g e t fo r m " ) was rem oved fro m each te x t and p la ce d below i t a lo n g s id e fo rm s o f th e same v e r b com bined w ith th e re m a in in g th r e e p r e fix e s . R e sp o n d e n ts w e re a ske d to read each t e x t and to s ta te w h ic h o f th e f o u r fo rm s a p p e a rin g below i t was most a p p ro p ria te , and w h e th e r o r n o t a n y v a r ia n ts w e re p o s s ib le .

(19)

T a b le 3 sum m arizes th e m o rp h o lo g ic a l c o m p a tib ility o f v e rb s in th e q u e s tio n n a ire exam ples w ith th e f o u r p re fix e s z a - , p e r e- , d o ', and o f- in e x p re s s io n s o f <excess>.

T h ir te e n o f th e exam ples w e re m o rp h o lo g ic a lly p r e f ix - s p e c ific and s e rv e d as c o n tro ls . A ll re s p o n d e n ts c o n s is te n tly s e le cte d o n ly ta r g e t fo rm s f o r th e c o n tro l e x a m p le s , and th e r e fo r e data fro m th e s e exam ples a re n o t in c lu d e d in th e ta b le s and d is c u s s io n t h a t fo llo w . I t is im p o rta n t to keep in m in d t h a t a ll o f th e d a ta d is c u s s e d below w e re g a th e re d e x c lu s iv e ly fro m base v e rb s w h ic h a re m o rp h o lo g ic a lly c o m p a tib le w ith m ore th a n one p r e f ix in < e xcess> / a n d th a t th e s e v e rb s c o m p rise o n ly 22% o f th e to ta l n u m b e r o f base v e rb s w h ic h have p re fix e d fo rm s in <excess> (see T a b le 1 ). T h e e x p e rim e n t was th u s d e s ig n e d to te s t th e in te r c h a n g e a b ility o f p r e fix e s s p e c ific a lly w ith th o se base v e rb s w ith w h ic h i t is th e o r e tic a lly (m o rp h o lo g ic a lly ) p o ssib le f o r m ore th a n one p r e f ix to a p p e a r.

(20)

00057072

T a b le 3: M o rp h o lo g ic a l C o m p a tib ility o f V e rb s a n d P re fix e s in Q u e s tio n n a ire

« o f exam ples c o n ta in in g v e rb s c o m p a tib le w ith X p r e fix e s ,

w h e re X =

1 ( c o n tr o ls ) 13 exam ples

2 7

3 20

4 7

to ta l 47

F iv e a d u lt n a tiv e s p e a k e rs o f R u ssian fro m Moscow and L e n in g ra d p a rtic ip a te d in t h is e x p e rim e n t, th e re s u lts o f w h ic h are sum m arized in T a b le 4. W h e n e ve r a c o n s u lta n t re s p o n d e d t h a t o n ly one p r e fix co u ld be u s e d , I a ske d a g a in w h e th e r o th e r p re fix e s m ig h t be acce p ta b le in th e g iv e n c o n te x t in o r d e r to g a th e r as much data as p o s s ib le on v a r ia tio n .

12

(21)

T a b le U: R e s u lts o f th e Q u e s tio n n a ire

ta r g e t fo rm ta r g e t fo rm o th e r fo rm se le cte d p r e f e r r e d ; p r e fe r r e d ; e x c lu s iv e ly v a r ia tio n v a r ia tio n

c o n tro ls 6 5 /6 5 100%

v e r b s c o m p a tib le w ith :

2 p re fix e s 2 5 /3 5 71% 8 /3 5 23% 2 /3 5 6%

3 p re fix e s 82/100 82% 8 /1 0 0 8% 10/100 10%

4 p re fix e s 2 2 /3 5 76% 12/35 34% 1/3 5 3%

to ta ls 129/170 76% 28/170 16% 13/170 8%

( e x c lu d in g c o n tr o ls )

T h e re spose s to th e q u e s tio n n a ire w e re h ig h ly c o n s is te n t and re v e a le d a d e f in it e t r e n d . As e x p e c te d , no v a ria tio n was allow ed f o r v e rb s w h ic h a re m o rp h o lo g ic a lly s p e c ific to a g iv e n p r e f ix ; th e ta rg e t fo rm was a lw a y s selecte d e x c lu s iv e ly in re sp o n se to th e c o n tro l exa m p le s. V e rb s w h ic h c o u ld com bin e w ith tw o o r m ore p re fix e s d e m o n s tra te d a h ig h d e g re e o f e x c lu s iv ity in c o n te x t, a d m ittin g o n ly

(22)

00057072

As th e re s u lts o f th is e x p e rim e n t s h o w , th e a ctu a l in te r c h a n g e a b ility o f p r e fix e s e x p re s s in g <excess> is v e r y lim ite d even w h e n it is p e rm itte d m o rp h o lo g ic a lly . In th e m a jo r ity o f cases, th e in fo rm a tio n s u p p lie d b y c o n te x t e lim in a te d in te r c h a n g e a b ility and cau se d th e v e r b to be p r e f ix - s p e c if ic . C o n tr a r y to th e tr a d itio n a l v ie w , w h ic h c o n s id e rs th e <excess> s u b m e a n in g s o f za- , p e r e - , d o - a n d ot~ to be r o u g h ly e q u iv a le n t, th e ab o ve re s e a rc h in d ic a te s th a t each p r e fix e x p re s s e s <excess> in its own c h a r a c te r is tic w a y and th a t sem antic o v e rla p among th e s e f o u r p re fix e s is a t b e s t lim ite d . T he se d a ta c o n tr a d ic t a s s u m p tio n 1) and s u g g e s t t h a t a ré é v a lu a tio n o f p r e f ix a i sem antics is in o r d e r .

14

(23)

00057072

C h a p te r II

V A R IO U S APPR O ACHES TO TH E SEM AN TIC S OF R U S S IA N V E R B A L PREFIXES

C h a p te r 1 c o n ta in e d a ro u g h o u tlin e o f th e tr a d itio n a l d e s c rip tio n o f p r e fix a i s e m a n tic s , a lo n g w ith a d is c u s s io n o f a phenom enon ( th e n o n - in te r c h a n g e a b ility o f p r e fix e s w ith <excess> su b m e a n in g s ) w h ic h c a lls t h a t d e s c r ip tio n in to q u e s tio n . T h e p u rp o s e o f th e p re s e n t c h a p te r is to p re s e n t a th o ro u g h in v e n to r y o f t r a d itio n a l and o th e r a p p ro a ch e s to th e se m antics o f R u ssia n v e rb a l p r e fix e s and th e d iff ic u ltie s posed to them b y th e la n g u a g e it s e lf.

2 .1 TH E T R A D IT IO N A L APPROACH

In im p le m e n tin g th e t r a d itio n a l a p p ro a c h , in s ta n tia tio n s o f a g iv e n R u ssian v e rb a l p r e f ix a re a rra n g e d in g ro u p s a c c o rd in g to a p p a re n t sem antic c o n te n t and lis ts o f th e s e v a r y in g c o n te n ts ( ,*su b m e a n in g s"

o r "h o m o n y m s ") a re d ra w n u p . T h is a p p ro a c h is sim p le and r e d u c tio n is tic , its aim b e in g to is o la te a ll id e n tifia b le su b m e a n in g s. It is a p p ro p ria te ly m odeled b y se t th e o r y (as m e ntion ed in C h a p te r 1) because: a) i t im p lie s no re la tio n s b e tw e e n subm ea ning s ( i . e . , i t is a to m is tic ), a n d b ) i t s u g g e s ts t h a t a ll su b m e a n in g s h a ve equal s ta tu s ( i . e . , no s u b m e a n in g is m ore c e n tra l th a n a n y o t h e r ) . In a d d itio n , th e lis ts o f su b m e a n in g s a re g a th e re d to g e th e r in a m a trix (see

(24)

F ig u re 2 ) . A n a s su m p tio n (la b e le d 1) and re s ta te d in 2 .1 .1 below ) in h e r e n t in th is a p p ro a c h , w a s, h o w e v e r, fo u n d to be in v a lid . T he fo llo w in g is a lis t o f q u e s tio n s th a t th e t r a d itio n a l a p p ro a c h e ith e r does n o t a d d re s s o r fa ils to s o lv e .

2 .1 .1 I d e n t it y o f su b m e a n in g s

What d is tin g u is h e s s e e m in g ly id e n tic a l s u b m e a n in g s o f d iff e r e n t p re fix e s ?

T h e tr a d itio n a l a p p ro a c h c a n n o t a n s w e r th is q u e s tio n beca use i t does n o t re c o g n iz e a n y c o n s is te n t d iffe re n c e s in th e in s ta n tia tio n o f w h a t is c o n s id e re d to be one s u b m e a n in g o f d if f e r e n t p r e fix e s . A c tu a l usage o f v e rb a l p re fix e s d e v ia te s fro m w h a t we w o u ld e x p e c t a c c o rd in g to th e tr a d itio n a l model a n d e lic its s e v e ra l a d d itio n a l q u e s tio n s , w h ich w ill be ta k e n u p in t u r n b e lo w . T h e se q u e s tio n s a re re la te d to each o th e r and o v e rla p som ew hat, b u t th e y b r in g to lig h t some o f th e s h o rtc o m in g s o f th e t r a d itio n a l a p p ro a c h .

2 .1 .2 System o f c o m b in a tio n

W hat is th e system f o r c o m b in in g v e rb s w ith p re fix e s ?

In th e tr a d itio n a l model th e c h o ic e o f a p r e f ix f o r a g iv e n v e rb a p p e a rs to be no m ore th a n an a r b it r a r y s e le c tio n o f an item fro m a set o f e q u ip o lle n t e le m e n ts. T h e re s e a rc h d is c u s s e d in C h a p te r 1 in d ic a te s , h o w e v e r, th a t t h is p ro c e s s is a ll b u t random and th a t

(25)

s p e a k e rs a g re e in t h e ir ch o ice o f p r e fix e s . N o r is th is agreem ent m e re ly a m a tte r o f c o n v e n tio n , s in c e th e in tr o d u c tio n o f new v e rb s in to th e le x ic o n does n o t e v o k e v a rio u s id io s y n c ra tic p r e fix e d c o llo c a tio n s ; r a th e r s p e a k e rs u n a n im o u s ly a sso cia te th e same p re fix e s w ith g iv e n v e rb s . K łe jm it1 'b r a n d ' a n d k a l'k u lir o v a t' 'c a lc u la te ' fo rm t h e ir p e rfe c tiv e s w ith za- a n d 5 ־ , r e s p e c tiv e ly . T h e ease and c o n s is te n c y w ith w h ic h new v e rb s a re in te g ra te d in to th e p r e fix a i system te s tifie s to th e d y n a m ic c h a r a c te r o f it s sem antic s tr u c tu r e . T h is phe nom enon, as w e ll as th e s t r u c t u r e i t b e tr a y s , is u n fo r tu n a te ly ig n o re d in t r a d itio n a l d e s c r ip tio n s .

2 .1 .3 P re d ic tio n

G iv e n a base v e r b and a p r e f ix , w h ic h s u b m e a n in g (s ) w ill be in s ta n tia te d ?

N ot o n ly does th e tr a d itio n a l model fa il to p r e d ic t w h ich p r e fix w ill be a ssociated w ith a g iv e n v e r b , b u t , c o n v e rs e ly , it c a n n o t d e te rm in e w h a t s u b m e a n in g o r su b m e a n in g s o f a p r e f ix w ill be in s ta n tia te d when i t is com bined w ith a g iv e n v e r b . H o w e v e r, even when p re s e n te d w ith v e rb s th a t th e y d id n o t k n o w , th e n a tiv e sp e a ke rs I c o n s u lte d w e re able to id e n t if y and d e s c rib e th e su b m e a n in g o f th e p r e fix e d v e r b once I d e fin e d th e base v e r b f o r th e m . I t is a p p a re n t th a t R ussian has a t le a s t a p a r tia l syste m f o r d e te rm in in g w h a t subm ea ning s o f a p r e f ix w ill be p r e s e n t, based on th e m eaning o f th e base v e r b , b u t a n y m e n tio n o f t h is is a b s e n t fro m tra d itio n a l

(26)

2 .1 .4 C o h e re n ce o f s u b m e a n in g s

ts th e re a n y re la tio n s h ip b etw e en th e subm ea ning s o f a g iv e n p re fix ?

T h e tr a d itio n a l model p re s e n ts a lis t o f d is jo in t subm ea ning s ( c f . th e d is u n io n o f s u b s e ts in F ig u re 1) d e v o id o f a n y o rg a n iz a tio n . To em phasize th is su p p o s e d d is c o n t in u it y / some S lā v is ts (A xm a n o va (1957) and IsaČenko (1 9 6 2 )) spea k o f p r e fix a i hom onym s. My c o n s u lta n ts , h o w e v e r, in s is te d th a t a ll exam ples o f a g iv e n p r e fix a i m orphem e in s ta n tia te d one and th e same p r e f ix , s u g g e s tin g th a t p s y c h o lo g ic a l u n ity u n d e rlie s th e m o rp h o lo g ic a l id e n tity o f a g iv e n p r e f ix . I f th is is so, th e s u b m e a n in g s o f a p r e f ix m u st be re la te d to each o th e r , in s p ite o f th e fa c t th a t th e t r a d itio n a l model does n o t p r o v id e a means f o r e x p re s s in g in te r-s u b m e a n in g re la tio n s .

2 .1 .5 N u m be r o f s u b m e a n in g s

How m any s u b m e a n in g s does a g iv e n p r e f ix have?

T h e n u m b e r o f s u b m e a n in g s p o s tu la te d f o r a g iv e n p r e f ix v a rie s w id e ly and seems to be d e te rm in e d o n ly b y how d o g g e d ly a g iv e n s c h o la r choses to c a r r y o u t th e a to m is tic te n d e n c ie s o f tr a d itio n a l d e s c r ip tio n . B o g u s ła w s k i (1 9 6 3 ), f o r e x a m p le , lis ts a b o u t th re e tim es as m any su b m e a n in g s as th e Academ y D ic tio n a ry a n d , as G a lla n t (1979) has p o in te d o u t, th e id e n tific a tio n o f e v e r more n a r r o w ly - d e fin e d subm e a n in g s c o u ld be p u rs u e d in d e f in ite ly , p ro d u c in g a

(27)

p o te n tia lly in f in it e lis t . I f su b m e a n in g s do e x is t, it s h o u ld be p o s s ib le f o r s c h o la rs to a g re e on t h e ir q u a n tity and id e n t it y .

2 . 1 . 6 C la s s ific a tio n

Can e v e ry in s ta n tia tio n o f a p r e f ix be id e n tifie d w ith a s in g le subm ea ning ?

I f one makes a s e rio u s a tte m p t to c la s s ify p r e fix e d v e rb s in d ic tio n a r y e n tr ie s a n d in exam ples fro m lit e r a t u r e a c c o rd in g to su b m e a n in g , th is t u r n s o u t to be a m uch m ore d i f f ic u l t a n d less c le a r - c u t ta s k th a n th e t r a d itio n a l d e s c r ip tio n s u g g e s ts . M any v e rb s a re am biguous and a s s ig n in g them to one su b m e a n in g may be done o n ly a r b it r a r i ly . Is z a b o le t1 z o -’ h u r t ’ ,f a ll i l l ' an exam ple o f <change o f state> o r

< in c h o a tiv e > ? Is z a p ie s n e v e t' z o - 'g r o w m o ld y ’ *grow m o ld y ' an exam ple o f < c o v e rin g > o r < change o f state>? In a d d itio n , a fe w p r e fix e d v e rb s a re in is o la tio n , h a v in g no a s s o c ia tio n w ith a n y su b m e a n in g . Z a b y t* zo- Ъ е ' 'fo r g e t* seems to b e a r no re la tio n to th e subm ea ning s o f za~ and to c o n s titu te an is o la te d e xam ple. T h e re is no place f o r m u ltip ly - c la s s ifia b le and u n c la s s ifia b le p r e fix e d v e rb s in th e tr a d itio n a l m odel.

2 . 1 .7 *’E m p ty " p r e fix e s

A re th e r e e m p ty p re fix e s ?

00057072

(28)

F o r e v e ry p r e f ix ( e x c e p t fo r e ig n and C h u rc h S la v ic p r e fix e s and v~, n a d - , p e r e - , ) th e Academ y G ram m ar lis ts a su b m e a n in g " d o v e s ti do r e z u l'ta ta /k o n c a d e js t v ie . " In th e s e cases i t is c u s to m a ry to ta lk a b o u t e m p ty p r e fix e s w h ic h c a r r y no m eaning e x c e p t " p e r f e c t iv e . "

A rg u m e n ts d e fe n d in g th e e x is te n c e o f e m p ty p r e fix e s a re f r a u g h t w ith p ro b le m s . A c c o rd in g to T ix o n o v (1 9 6 2 ), w ho is p e rh a p s th e m ost o u ts p o k e n p ro p o n e n t o f e m p ty p r e fix e s , th e y d i f f e r in p r in c ip le fro m p r e fix e s h a v in g re a l m e a n in g ; th e y s ig n a l o n ly an in te r n a l lim it to th e p ro c e s s ־־ th e n a tu r a l outcom e o f th e p ro c e s s . T h e te rm " n a tu r a l o u tco m e " is n e v e r d e fin e d and th e v a g u e n e ss o f th is n o tio n has re s u lte d in s ig n ific a n t d is a g re e m e n t among le x ic o g ra p h e rs in th e id e n tific a tio n o f v e rb s h a v in g e m p ty p r e fix e s , as Is a č e n k o (1962) and F o rs y th (1970) h a v e p o in te d o u t. F u r t h e r s c r u t in y o f th e e m p ty p r e f ix p ro b le m y ie ld s m ore q u e s tio n s .

1. W hat causes p r e fix e s to become em pty? T ix o n o v sta te s th a t p re fix e s t h a t h a ve lo s t t h e ir s p a tia l m e aning o r a re r a r e ly used and u n p r o d u c tiv e in t h e ir s p a tia l m e aning a re c a n d id a te s f o r e m p ty p r e fix e s . T h is s ta te m e n t may be r e le v a n t to p o - and i z - , b u t w h a t a b o u t th e o th e r th ir te e n p r e fix e s w h ic h have e m p ty s u b m e a n in g s , b u t w hose s p a tia l s u b m e a n in g s are v ig o ro u s a n d p r o d u c tiv e : n a - ,

0

( b ) - , o t - , v z ~, v y - , d o ׳ , z a -, p o d - , p r i ׳ , p r o - , r a z - , s - , и - l E v id e n tly th e v it a l it y o f th e s p a tia l su b m e a n in g c a n n n o t be c o r re la te d w ith th e p re se n ce o r abse nce o f an e m p ty su b m e a n in g .

00057072

20

(29)

2. Is th e r e a n y w a y to c h a ra c te riz e th e base v e r b s w h ic h a t tr a c t e m p ty p re fix e s ? O r , c o n v e rs e ly , w h y does a g iv e n v e r b use one e m p ty p r e f ix and n o t a n o th e r? T ix o n o v (1961, 1962) re p e a te d ly in s is ts th a t th e base v e rb s c o n s titu te sem antic g r o u p s , b u t fa ils to c h a ra c te riz e them a n d is fo rc e d to lis t e x c e p tio n s w h ic h a re u n s y s te m a tic .

3. Is th e sim p le x v e r b in d e e d le x ic a lly id e n tic a l to its e m p ty * p r e fix e d p e rfe c tiv e ? T y p ic a lly th e d ic tio n a r y e n trie s o f th e tw o fo rm s a re com pared in an a tte m p t to illu s t r a t e t h is p o in t.

M aslov (1 9 5 8 ), A v ilo v a (1959) and T ix o n o v (1962) im plem ent th is te c h n iq u e , p r o d u c in g s im ila r r e s u lts , a lth o u g h th e y in t e r p r e t them d if f e r e n t ly . In e v e r y case ( th e n u m b e r o f exam ples is f a r fro m s ig n if ic a n t, each a u th o r p re s e n ts o n ly one o r tw o p a irs o f v e rb s w h ic h a re c la s s ic cases o f em p ty p r e f ix a t io n , e . g . , n a /p is a t' n a / - 'w r it e ' * w rite * , s /d e la V s / - 'd o ' 'd o ', p o / s t r o it* p o /- 'b u ild * 'b u il d ') , th e e m p ty -p r e fix e d p e r fe c tiv e is fo u n d to be m ore lim ite d in s e m a n tic scope th a n th e sim p le x v e r b . M a slo v, f o r exa m p le , g iv e s th re e m eanings o f p is a t' *w rite * (1 ) 'b e good f o r w r i t i n g ', 2) *p ro d u ce lite r a tu r e * , 3 ) ,w o rk f o r th e p r in te d m e d ia ') w h ic h a re e x c lu d e d b y th e p r e fix e d p e r fe c tiv e n a p is a t* n a - 'w r it e ' 'w r it e ' and c o n c lu d e s th a t th e s o -c a lle d e m p ty p r e fix e s c a r r y m ore th a n p u r e ly g ra m m a tic a l m e a n in g . T ix o n o v and A v ilo v a , h o w e v e r, p e r s is t in c la im in g th a t d e s p ite its lim ita tio n s , th e e m p ty - p r e fix e d v e r b is s e m a n tic a lly e q u a l to its s im p le x base.

00057072

(30)

th e r e b y im p ly in g t h a t e q u a lity and *,e m p tin e s s ” a re r e la tiv e , r a th e r th a n a b s o lu te , te rm s . A v ilo v a (1959) sta te s t h a t w ith some v e rb s a s u p p le m e n ta ry m e aning in tro d u c e d b y th e p r e fix is ,,c le a re r ” th a n w ith o th e r s . T ix o n o v a s s e rts th a t th e re is n o t a c le a r b o u n d a ry b e tw e e n " p u r e ly a s p e c tu a l" ( i. e . e m p ty ) and ,,le x ic a l” m a n ife s ta tio n s o f p r e fix e s . He also speaks a b o u t th e g ra d u a l w e a k e n in g o f th e m eaning o f p re fix e s t h a t a re e m p ty . T h u s a d h e re n ts o f th e e m p ty p r e f ix h y p o th e s is have c o n c lu d e d th a t a b s o lu te se m a n tic id e n t it y o f th e p re fix e d p e r fe c tiv e w ith th e base is n o t r e q u is ite f o r e m p ty p re fix e s and th a t in some in s ta n tia tio n s a p r e f ix can be m ore e m p ty th a n in o th e r s . G iv e n th e s e g u id e lin e s i t is d i f f ic u l t to u n d e rs ta n d how we a re to id e n t if y e m p ty p r e fix e s : how are we to know when th e p r e f ix is e m p ty e n o u g h and th e p r e fix e d v e r b s e m a n tic a lly e q u a l e n o u g h to th e base so th a t th e p r e fix may be d e s ig n a te d as e m pty? T ix o n o v a n d A v ilo v a do n o t d ra w a n y d e f in it iv e tin e s .

4 . W hat is th e s ta tu s o f im p e rfe c ti v e d e r iv a tio n fro m e m p ty - p re fix e d p e rfe c tiv e s ? F o rs y th (1 9 7 0 :4 1 ) uses th e e x is te n c e o f a d e riv e d im p e rfe c tiv e as a c r it e r io n f o r s o r tin g o u t n o n -e m p ty and em p ty p r e fix e s . A c c o rd in g to h im , e m p ty -p r e fix e d v e rb s do n o t fo rm d e riv e d im p e rfe c tiv e s : " I f a n y *new* m eaning w e re p e rc e p tib le in su ch p e rfe c tiv e s as s d e f a t n a p i s a t * and r a z b u d it1, im p e rfe c tiv e s su ch as * s d e ly v a V, * n a p is y v a t ',

*r a z b u ld a V f r a z b u llv a t״ w o u ld h a ve come in to g e n e ra l u s e ."

00057072

22

(31)

T ix o n o v (1958) does n o t a g re e , n o r c o u ld h e , as a t r u e p ro p o n e n t o f e m p ty p r e fix e s , s in ce th is d e fin itio n w o u ld d r a s tic a lly re d u c e th e in c id e n c e o f e m p ty p r e f ix a t io n , w h ich w o u ld be a m a rg in a l phenom enon o f m uch less in te r e s t. B u t if a s e c o n d a ry im p e rfe c tiv e ca n be d e riv e d fro m an em p ty p r e fix e d v e r b , is i t s e m a n tic a lly id e n tic a l to th e sim p le x base?

From Is a č e n k o 's (1962) p o in t o f v ie w , th e a n s w e r to th is q u e s tio n was a d e f in it e "N o " a n d i t c lin c h e d h is a rg u m e n t a g a in s t th e e x is te n c e o f e m p ty p r e fix e s . F o llo w in g th e re a s o n in g o f e m p ty p r e f ix p ro p o n e n ts , he a rg u e d th a t if th e p r e f ix w e re in d e e d e m p ty , th e n th e sim p le x and th e d e riv e d im p e rfe c tiv e w o u ld be s y n o n y m s . is a fe n k o re je c te d th e p o s s ib ility th a t th e m em bers o f p a irs su ch as Č ita t' *re a d ' and p r o l i t y v a t' p r o - 'r e a d ’ ‘ be re a d in g t h r o u g h ' c o u ld be c o n s id e re d sy n o n y m o u s . T ix o n o v (1958) in s is ts , h o w e v e r, th a t s e c o n d a ry im p e rfe c tiv e s o f e m p ty - p r e fix e d v e rb s a re syn o n y m s o f th e c o rre s p o n d in g b a se s, a lth o u g h t h e ir usage is m ore lim ite d . H e re T ix o n o v and Is a č e n k o s ta n d a t lo g g e rh e a d s , w ith no w ay to re c o n c ile t h e ir d iffe r e n c e s , s in c e th e r e is no a b s o lu te scale f o r ju d g in g w hen th e base and d e riv e d im p e rfe c tiv e a re "e q u a l e n o u g h " to be c o n s id e re d s y n o n y m s . ls a £ e n k o , h o w e v e r, does seem to have an e d g e - - w h y w o u ld R u ssian d e riv e s e c o n d a ry im p e rfe c tiv e s if t h e ir s e m a n tic n ic h e w e re a lre a d y fille d to s a tis fa c tio n b y th e sim p le x v e rb ? I t is im p o ssib le to a r b itr a te an u n e q u iv o c a l s o lu tio n to t h is d is a g re e m e n t d u e to th e

00057072

(32)

5. Can a p r e fix ( o r a n y m orphem e) t u r n its m eaning on a n d o ff?

I f we com pare th e tw o v e rb s s fe te t' 5 ־ 'f l y ' ,f l y d o w n , o f f ’ and s d e ła t״ s - ’d o ’ ,do*, we fin d th a t, a c c o rd in g to tr a d itio n a l d e s c r ip tio n s , th e p r e f ix s - in th e f i r s t exam ple c a rrie s th e sem antic f r e ig h t o f ,d o w n , o ff* , w h ereas in th e second e xam ple it is e m p ty . Is th e r e a n y lin g u is tic p re c e d e n t f o r th is s o r t o f phenomenon? T h is q u e s tio n , w h ic h m u s t be a n s w e re d a ffim a tiv e ly if th e e m p ty p r e fix h y p o th e s is is to be a c c e p te d , is not d is c u s s e d in th e lite r a tu r e . I do n o t know o f a n y u n d is p u te d * exam ple o f a m orphem e in a n y la n g u a g e w h ic h em bodies m eaning in some cases and w h ic h is c a p a b le o f a lto g e th e r s u p p re s s in g its m eaning in o th e r cases. A c o r o lla r y o f th is q u e s tio n is s u g g e s te d b y A v ilo v a 's o b s e rv a tio n th a t p re fix e s c o n ta in in g m e aning engage in fo rm -fo rm a tio n , s in c e th e p e r fe c tiv e p a r t n e r o f a v e r b is b u t a n o th e r fo rm o f th a t v e r b : can a p r e f ix ( o r a n y m orphem e) be a t tim es d e r iv a tio n a l and a t o th e r tim es in fle c tio n a l? Perhaps th e re a re some m orphem es in e x ta n t la n g u a g e s w h ic h can t u r n t h e ir m eanings on and o f f and w h ic h ca n a lte rn a te betw een d e r iv a tio n a l and in fle c tio n a l fu n c tio n s . I f th e re a re m orphem es w ith such

4 T h e re a re lin g u is ts ( e . g . , C u rm e (1914) and F ra s e r (1 9 7 6 )) w ho claim th a t some v e r b - p a r tic le c o n s tru c tio n s in E n g lis h c o n ta in e m p ty p a rtic le s w h ic h s ig n a l o n ly *,p e r f e c t iv it y . " Exam ples a re o u t in f ig u r e o u t, e ke o u t u p in make u p . T h e fu n c tio n o f p a r tic le s in th e se c o n s tru c tio n s c lo s e ly p a ra lle ls th a t o f p re fix e s in R u ssia n v e r b s . T he sem antic e m p tin e ss o f th e se p a rtic le s is , h o w e v e r, a n y th in g b u t an e s ta b lis h e d fa c t. L in d n e r 1982 c o n ta in s a d is c u s s io n o f E n g lis h e m p ty p a rtic le s and a s tro n g a rg u m e n t a g a in s t t h e ir e x is te n c e .

(33)

p r o p e r tie s , th e y d e s e rv e special in v e s tig a tio n . In th e m e antim e, we m u st be v e r y c a u tio u s a b o u t a t t r ib u t in g such p r o p e r tie s to m orphem es s in ce th e e x is te n c e o f such p ro p e rtie s is u n c e rta in a n d , i f th e y do e x is t, th e ro le o f morphem es in la n g u a g e in g e n e ra l w ill h a ve to be re e x a m in e d .

In a d d itio n to in c o n s is te n c ie s in th e a rg u m e n ts s u p p o r tin g e m p ty p r e fix e s (s u c h as T ix o n o v 's cla im th a t em pty p re fix e s a re g e n e r a lly th o s e w hose s p a tia l m eaning is weak and u n p r o d u c tiv e , see a b o v e ), th e e m p ty p r e f ix h y p o th e s is r e q u ire s us to a c c e p t s e v e ra l q u e s tio n a b le a s s u m p tio n s : a) t h a t th e e v a lu a tio n o f th e te rm s " e m p ty " and "e q u a l" is r e la tiv e and s u b je c tiv e ( r a t h e r th a n a b s o lu te , as is g e n e ra lly a c c e p te d ) b ) th a t th e sim p le x v e r b is s e m a n tic a lly e q u iv a le n t to th e im p e rfe c tiv e d e riv e d fro m its e m p ty -p r e fix e d p e rfe c tiv e c ) t h a t p r e f ix a i m orphem es t u r n t h e ir m eanings on and o f f, a lte r n a tin g b etw e en d e riv a tio n a l and in fle c tio n a l fu n c tio n s . I f a n y one o f th e s e p r e r e q u is ite s c a n n o t be to le ra te d th e o r e tic a lly , th e n th e em p ty p r e f ix h y p o th e s is m u s t be r e je c te d . T h e p re s e n c e o f th re e su ch s tro n g o b sta cle s to th e a cce p ta n ce o f e m p ty p re fix e s is c e r ta in ly e n o u g h to make us q u e s tio n t h e ir e x is te n c e . Van S ch o o n e ve ld (1958) a tta c k e d th e n o tio n o f e m p ty p r e fix e s n o t on th e b a sis o f th e above o b je c tio n s , b u t because he p e rc e iv e d s e m a n tic re d u n d a n c y on th e p a r t o f th e v e r b and p r e fix o f s o -c a lle d e m p ty -p r e fix e d v e r b s . S in ce th e m eanings o f th e p r e f ix a n d v e rb o v e rla p ,

00057072

(34)

th a t o f th e p r e fix is less s a lie n t and it a p p e a rs to be e m p ty . V a n S ch oone veld c o n s id e rs em p ty p r e fix a tio n an illu s o r y phenom enon and p re s e n ts a s tro n g , a lb e it b r ie f a rg u m e n t to th is e ffe c t. G ive n th e m u ltitu d e o f p roblem s a ssociated w ith e m p ty p r e fix a tio n , it is re a so n a b le to accep t van S ch o o n e ve ld 's h y p o th e s is th a t em p ty p re fix e s a re an a r tifa c t o f th e lin g u is t's p e rc e p tio n , m o tiv a te d b y sem antic o v e rla p on th e p a r t o f th e v e r b and p r e f ix .

2 .1 .8 Sum m ary o f q u e s tio n s

T h e p re c e d in g se ction s o f th is c h a p te r have p re s e n te d q u e s tio n s and problem s w h ic h th e tr a d itio n a l a p p ro a c h to p r e fix a i sem antics does not a d d re ss and w h ic h c a n n o t be re s o lv e d g iv e n th e tra d itio n a l fra m e w o rk . A ll o f th e se q u e s tio n s c o n c e rn th e o rg a n iz a tio n of m eaning in p r e fix e s , an issu e th a t has t r a d itio n a lly been s id e s te p p e d .

In o r d e r to cope w ith th e s e p ro b le m s one a t le a st has to make a b e g in n in g at re e x a m in in g th e sem antic s tr u c t u r e o f v e rb a l p r e fix e s .

2 .2 S T R U C T U R A L IS T APPROACHES

S e vera l o f th e p roblem s lis te d above have n o t gone u n n o tic e d b y s t r u c t u r a lis ts * who have tu r n e d t h e ir a tte n tio n to R ussian v e rb a l

* H e re I am u s in g th e te rm " s t r u c t u r a lis t " r a th e r lo o s e ly . F o r th e p u rp o s e s o f th is d is s e rta tio n " s t r u c t u r a lis t s " in c lu d e s all c o n te m p o ra ry S lā v is ts w ho have p re s e n te d in te r p r e ta tio n s o f ( p r e fix a i) sem antics w h ic h do n o t d e v ia te s ig n ific a n tly fro m th e s t r u c t u r a lis t a p p ro a ch to m eaning and do n o t, th e r e fo r e , re p re s e n t a lto g e th e r d iff e r e n t a p p ro a c h e s .

(35)

p r e fix e s . As a re a c tio n to th e fr a c tu r e d v ie w o f th e p r e fix p re s e n te d b y t r a d itio n a l s c h o la rs , th e te n d e n c y among s t r u c t u r a lis ts has been to se a rc h f o r a sem antic in v a r ia n t w h ic h w o u ld u n ify th e subm ea ning s o f a g iv e n p r e f ix , a lth o u g h th is se a rch has y ie ld e d v a rio u s re s u lts . In d e e d , because o f th e ba sic p ro b le m o f in v a ria n c e , i t has p ro v e d v e r y d i f f ic u l t to overcom e th e se d if f ic u lt ie s , w h ic h th e s tr u c tu r a lis ts a d d re s s e d . lsa £ e n ko (1962) was also m oved to e n g age in t h is s e a rc h . He e x p lo re d th e subm e a n in g s o f th e p r e fix 5 - , se e k in g sem antic u n it y , b u t c o n c lu d e d th a t th e re was none s in ce he c o u ld n o t iso la te an in v a r ia n t. T h is lin e o f re a s o n in g lead ls a £ e n k o b a c k to th e tr a d itio n a l d e s c rip tio n o f p r e fix a i sem antics in s p ite o f his own m is g iv in g s and h is re je c tio n o f th e n o tio n o f e m p ty p r e fix e s .

2 .2 .1 F lie r 1975

F lie r re je c te d tr a d itio n a l a to m is tic ap p ro a ch e s to p r e fix a i sem antics because th e y ig n o re th e p o s s ib ility o f re la tio n s h ip s e x is tin g between s u b m e a n in g s . T h e goal o f his a p p ro a ch is to re p re s e n t th e sem antic u n it y o f a g iv e n p r e f ix b y means o f in v a r ia n t sem antic fe a tu re s . In k e e p in g w ith s t r u c t u r a lis t d is tin c tiv e fe a tu re th e o r y , each p r e fix is sa id to be e ith e r m a rke d o r u n m a rk e d f o r each o f a small and f in it e se t o f sem antic fe a tu re s . He a n a lyzes f o u r v e rb a l p re fix e s (p0^ā, p e r e- , p r o - , o b - ) in te rm s o f th re e sem antic fe a tu re s ; o b - , f o r exa m p le , is "* s p a n n e d , * la te r a l, - d o m a in ia l." T h u s F lie r claim ed th a t

"each p r e fix a i m orphem e is s e m io tic a lly lin k e d w ith an in v a r ia n t m eaning m a n ife ste d as v a ria n ts d e p e n d in g on s y n ta c tic and le x ic a l

00057072

(36)

e n v ir o n m e n t / ’ e ch o in g J a k o b s o n 's G esam t- and G ru n d b e d e u tu n g . F lie r 's a r tic le c o n s titu te s a s ig n ific a n t s te p to w a rd o v e rc o m in g th e atom ism o f tr a d itio n a l d e s c r ip tio n s , an a tte m p t to expo se th e u n ity b e h in d th e s u b m e a n in g s. F lie r also d is c u s s e d th e fu n c tio n o f p r e fix a i m e a n in g in th e p re fix e d v e r b (a m a tte r p re v io u s ly ig n o re d - - it had been h e re to fo re assumed th a t th e m eaning o f th e p r e f ix is somehow a d d e d to th a t o f th e base v e r b ) , w h ic h he e n v is io n e d as an in te r a c tio n betw een th e p r e f ix and th e v e r b , lik e n in g p re fix e s to

"p ris m s o r camera a n g le s , w h ic h a lte r th e p e rs p e c tiv e o f a g iv e n o b je c t . . . th e y fle s h o u t p e rs p e c tiv e s in h e re n t in th e o b je c t it s e lf . "

B o th F lie r ’ s u n ifie d v ie w o f th e p r e f ix and h is comments on th e in te r a c tiv e d yn a m ics o f p r e fix a i and v e rb a l sem antics a re im p o rta n t c o n tr ib u tio n s . In h is e f f o r t to u n ify th e subm e a n in g s o f th e p r e f ix , h o w e v e r, he may have o v e rs im p lifie d its in te r n a l sem antic s t r u c tu r e . A s a r e s u lt . F lie r 's sem antic fe a tu re s a re q u ite a b s tr a c t, la c k in g th e f in e t u n in g needed to a c c o u n t f o r th e a c tu a l v a r ie ty o f subm eanings (h o w , f o r e xam ple, can th e fe a tu re s p e c ific a tio n s " * s p a n n e d , - la te r a l, -d o m a in ia l" a c co u n t f o r th e d iv e r s it y o f subm ea ning s p re s e n t in p e re־ a n d a t th e same tim e d is tin g u is h them fro m th e subm ea ning s p re s e n t in o th e r p r e fix e s ? ) . In p o s itin g in v a r ia n t fe a tu re s , he has been fo rc e d to s a c rific e in te r n a l d iv e r s ific a tio n to sem antic u n it y . T h is p ro b le m is som ewhat a lle v ia te d b y th e c o n n o ta tio n s w h ic h F lie r a ssociates w ith g iv e n fe a tu re s ( i . e . , - la te r a l can s ig n a l " d ire c tn e s s "

o r " e r r o r ” ) w h ic h a re in s ig h tf u l and w o u ld be m ore v a lu a b le if th e y

(37)

00057072

w e re s y s te m a tiz e d and in te g ra te d w ith th e re s t o f h is m o d e l.*

2 .2 .2 va n S ch oone veld 1978

V a n S ch o o n e ve ld 's a p p ro a c h to th e sem antics o f R ussian v e rb a l p r e fix e s (a n d p re p o s itio n s ) is v e r y s im ila r to t h a t fo u n d in F lie r 1975, a lth o u g h he c a r rie d i t o u t on a m uch m ore g ra n d io s e sca le . In h is a m b itio u s Sem antic T ra n s m u ta tio n s, van S ch o o n e ve ld ta c k le s th e e n tir e set o f Russian p re fix e s and p re p o s itio n s (w h ic h he re g a rd s as an in te g ra te d s e t, n o t m a k in g a n y m a jo r d is tin c tio n s betw een its tw o k in d s o f m em bers) and e n d e a v o rs to u n c o v e r th e s y s te m a tic ity o f t h e ir m e a n in g s. He has d e v is e d a d is tin c tiv e fe a tu re h ie r a r c h y , in o r d e r o f in c re a s in g **alienation o f th e m o d ifie r fro m th e m o d ifie d and fro m th e p re p o s itio n a l m o d ific a tio n situ a tio n **: *,d im e n s io n a lity ,"

" d u p lic a tio n ,* * " e x te n s io n ," " r e s tr ic t e d n e s s , " and "o b je c tiv e n e s s .** His volu m e does c o n ta in m any in s ig h tf u l o b s e rv a tio n s o f th e m eanings o f in d iv id u a l p r e fix e s , such as:

As a p r e v e r b 20- s h o u ld mean th a t a t th e end o f th e v e rb a l p ro c e s s a s itu a tio n w ill fo llo w w h ic h is b o th (a ) a s c e rta in a b le o n ly d u r in g th e pro ce ss - ־ th a t is to say , th is s itu a tio n is n o t a n a tu ra l consequence o f t h a t p ro c e s s ; and ( b ) d e p e n d e n t on th e v o litio n o f th e s u b je c t o f th e v e r b - - th a t is to s a y , an agens a s c e rta in a b le o n ly in th e n a rra te d s itu a tio n . . . . 7 0 - says t h a t a t th e end o f th e v e rb a l process th e m o d ifie d w ill be in a re la tio n s h ip to an u n p re d ic ta b le e lem e nt. T h e u n p r e d ic ta b ility c o n s is ts in th e fa c t th a t th is elem ent is d ir e c t ly id e n tifia b le w ith n e ith e r th e s u b je c t o r th e o b je c t . . . n o r w ith an elem ent d ir e c t ly in h e r e n t in th e le x ic a l m eaning o f th e v e r b .

* In d e e d , F lie r s u g g e s ts in t h is a r tic le th a t th e sem antic c o n n o ta tio n s

(38)

b u t i t also in c lu d e s d u b io u s s ta te m e n ts th a t seem to have been in v e n te d in o r d e r to in c o rp o r a te r e c a lc itr a n t exam ples in to h is system :

Z a k r ič a t* *to b e g in to s h o u t' means th a t in o r d e r to reach th e f in a l s itu a tio n , s h o u tin g ', th e p re c e d in g sta g e is

* s h o u tin g ’ . Z a k riČ o t1 m eans, th e n , 'to s h o u t b e yo n d s h o u tin g ', o r r a th e r , 4 0 s h o u t in such a w ay t h a t th e s h o u tin g w ill pass th e in it ia l f a c tu a lity o f s h o u tin g '.

S e m an tic T ra n s m u ta tio n s s u ffe r s fro m th e same r e s tr ic tio n s as F lie r 1975: beca use em phasis is p la c e d on th e sem antic u n ity o f th e p r e fix alm ost to th e e x c lu s io n o f v a r ia tio n , th e d e fin itio n s o f th e p re fix e s in te rm s o f in v a r ia n t se m a n tic fe a tu re s a re too va g u e and a b s tra c t to c a p tu r e th e v a r ia tio n s in m e a n in g o f in d iv id u a l in s ta n tia tio n s . He c h a ra c te riz e s n o - , f o r e x a m p le , as u n m a rk e d : *'the m eaning o f th e p r e v e r b re d u c e s to 'm a n ife s ta tio n ״, *evid ence'.** H ow , th e n , w o u ld one e x p la in th e v a r ie t y a n d d is tin c tiv e n e s s o f th e su b m e a n in g s w h ic h n o ־ , a lle g e d ly d e v o id o f s e m a n tic fe a tu re s , c o m p re h e n d s , such as its q u a n tita tiv e m eaning (n a p o d a t1 n o - 'f a ll' 'f a ll in g re a t q u a n t it y ') o r its s u b m e a n in g " t r a i n " (n a e z d it* n o - ’ r id e ' 'b re a k a h o rs e ')? T h e gap b etw e en va n S c h o o n e v e ld 's th e o r e tic a l system o f m eaning and th e m e aning o f a c tu a l exam ples o f p r e fix e d v e rb s can be b r id g e d o n ly b y a s tr a in in g leap o f b o th th e in te lle c t and th e im a g in a tio n . B o th van S c h o o n e ve ld and F lie r h a v e re a c te d a g a in s t th e o v e r ly a to m istic t r a d it io n a l d e s c rip tio n s b y s e e k in g sem antic in v a ria n ts and fo c u s in g on se m a n tic u n it y , y e t t h e ir a p p ro a c h d o w n p la y s th e t r u e d iv e r s ity m a n ife s t in c o n c re te e xa m p le s.