This paper discusses the problem of resumptive pronouns in Polish object relative clauses introduced by the relative marker co. It does so through the use of corpus data, thus contributing to previous literature, which has been largely based on introspection. In the literature, different accounts vary significantly as to the basic question of when the resumptive pronoun is expected. The present study addresses this matter by means of qualitative and quantitative analysis of conversational spoken Polish—the language variety in which co relatives typically occur. As is shown, the relatives are used in two broad configurations—unmarked (with null resumptives and inanimate referents) and marked (with overt resumptives and human referents). Both scenarios are linked to distinct strategies of case recovery. The presence of the pronoun itself is one such strategy. In contrast, the omission of the pronoun is often accompanied by case-matching effects that facilitate the omission. Another typical property of co relatives is their preference for encoding definiteness of referents, whereby który clauses tend to signal indefiniteness. This is evidenced by the frequent cooccurrence of co clauses with head-internal demonstratives. Interestingly, these head-internal demonstratives can also render resumptive pronouns unnecessary, thus constituting another factor relevant in resumption.
{"title":"Resumptive Pronouns in Polish co Relative Clauses","authors":"Wojciech Guz","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0003","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the problem of resumptive pronouns in Polish object relative clauses introduced by the relative marker co. It does so through the use of corpus data, thus contributing to previous literature, which has been largely based on introspection. In the literature, different accounts vary significantly as to the basic question of when the resumptive pronoun is expected. The present study addresses this matter by means of qualitative and quantitative analysis of conversational spoken Polish—the language variety in which co relatives typically occur. As is shown, the relatives are used in two broad configurations—unmarked (with null resumptives and inanimate referents) and marked (with overt resumptives and human referents). Both scenarios are linked to distinct strategies of case recovery. The presence of the pronoun itself is one such strategy. In contrast, the omission of the pronoun is often accompanied by case-matching effects that facilitate the omission. Another typical property of co relatives is their preference for encoding definiteness of referents, whereby który clauses tend to signal indefiniteness. This is evidenced by the frequent cooccurrence of co clauses with head-internal demonstratives. Interestingly, these head-internal demonstratives can also render resumptive pronouns unnecessary, thus constituting another factor relevant in resumption.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44328497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:This paper provides an overview of recent work on the first language acquisition of Slavic languages. The focus is on those areas in which the most work has been done since the year 2000: referring expressions, nominal inflection, the verbal domain, and word order, with a brief mention of other topics, including the acquisition of phonology. Most of the studies reviewed here focus on typical monolingual first language development, but bilingual first language development is discussed where relevant.
{"title":"The State of the Art of First Language Acquisition Research on Slavic Languages","authors":"T. Ionin, Teodora Radeva-Bork","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0013","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This paper provides an overview of recent work on the first language acquisition of Slavic languages. The focus is on those areas in which the most work has been done since the year 2000: referring expressions, nominal inflection, the verbal domain, and word order, with a brief mention of other topics, including the acquisition of phonology. Most of the studies reviewed here focus on typical monolingual first language development, but bilingual first language development is discussed where relevant.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0013","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44512925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This issue of JSL, which completes volume 24, includes four stimulating articles about diverse Slavic-linguistic topics, as well as three very useful reviews of recent books likely to be of interest to our readers. It also contains two In Memoriam pieces, marking the sad passing of our venerated colleagues Dean Worth of UCLA and Charles Gribble of Ohio State. Both of these individuals played major roles in strengthening our discipline in the United States. Their impact as scholars and their personal dedication as editors and publishers have been inestimable. The Slavic Linguistics Society continues to prosper. SLS 11, held in Toronto this past September, was a great success, and we look forward with excitement to next year’s meeting in Ljubljana, to take place 21–24 September 2017. Beyond that, the 2018 meeting is already being planned for Vancouver, and the Executive Board has tentatively approved Potsdam to be the host the following year. Also at this year’s meeting, two new Executive Board members were elected, Motoki Nomachi and Rosemarie Connolly, to replace outgoing members Anton Zimmerling and Bojan Belić. Additionally, the members of the board chose Joseph Schallert to serve as the board’s chair for 2016–17, replacing Anton. Please join me in congratulating Joe, in thanking Anton and Bojan for their service, and in welcoming Motoki and Rosie. Also noteworthy from SLS 11 was the first Charles E. Townsend Memorial Award, which went to Roman Ronko (Institute for Modern Linguistic Research, Sholohov University), for his paper “Pseudoincorporation analysis of objects in Old Russian and modern North Russian Dialects”, presented at the Heidelberg meeting in 2015. Turning to journal news, please welcome Neil Bermel of the School of Languages and Cultures at the University of Sheffield as a new Associate Editor. I also wish to express my personal gratitude to Stephen Dickey for his six years of service in that capacity. Stephen is, however, not severing his connections to JSL; indeed, he has been busy spearheading the silver anniversary volume, slated to appear at the end of next year as issue 25.2. I remain very grateful to Rosemarie Connolly for her continuing diligence as Managing Editor, a position which assumes primary responsibility for almost all stages of the editorial and production process. When I step down as Editor-in-Chief— something I plan to do in the next few years—whoever takes over the position will find the job made much easier by Rosie’s experience.
{"title":"From the Editor","authors":"S. Franks","doi":"10.1353/jsl.2016.0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2016.0009","url":null,"abstract":"This issue of JSL, which completes volume 24, includes four stimulating articles about diverse Slavic-linguistic topics, as well as three very useful reviews of recent books likely to be of interest to our readers. It also contains two In Memoriam pieces, marking the sad passing of our venerated colleagues Dean Worth of UCLA and Charles Gribble of Ohio State. Both of these individuals played major roles in strengthening our discipline in the United States. Their impact as scholars and their personal dedication as editors and publishers have been inestimable. The Slavic Linguistics Society continues to prosper. SLS 11, held in Toronto this past September, was a great success, and we look forward with excitement to next year’s meeting in Ljubljana, to take place 21–24 September 2017. Beyond that, the 2018 meeting is already being planned for Vancouver, and the Executive Board has tentatively approved Potsdam to be the host the following year. Also at this year’s meeting, two new Executive Board members were elected, Motoki Nomachi and Rosemarie Connolly, to replace outgoing members Anton Zimmerling and Bojan Belić. Additionally, the members of the board chose Joseph Schallert to serve as the board’s chair for 2016–17, replacing Anton. Please join me in congratulating Joe, in thanking Anton and Bojan for their service, and in welcoming Motoki and Rosie. Also noteworthy from SLS 11 was the first Charles E. Townsend Memorial Award, which went to Roman Ronko (Institute for Modern Linguistic Research, Sholohov University), for his paper “Pseudoincorporation analysis of objects in Old Russian and modern North Russian Dialects”, presented at the Heidelberg meeting in 2015. Turning to journal news, please welcome Neil Bermel of the School of Languages and Cultures at the University of Sheffield as a new Associate Editor. I also wish to express my personal gratitude to Stephen Dickey for his six years of service in that capacity. Stephen is, however, not severing his connections to JSL; indeed, he has been busy spearheading the silver anniversary volume, slated to appear at the end of next year as issue 25.2. I remain very grateful to Rosemarie Connolly for her continuing diligence as Managing Editor, a position which assumes primary responsibility for almost all stages of the editorial and production process. When I step down as Editor-in-Chief— something I plan to do in the next few years—whoever takes over the position will find the job made much easier by Rosie’s experience.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jsl.2016.0009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41396755","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lithuanian root list by Cynthia Vakareliyska is a welcome publication, in that probably for the first time in English, it presents the basic elements of Lithuanian word formation, i.e., roots and affixal morphemes with their variants, in a systematic and fairly comprehensive fashion. The book consists of a short introduction (1–6) outlining the purposes of the root list, describing the most common phonological and morphophonemic rules affecting the shape of morphemes as well as the methodology of presentation of the material. The central part of the book is the root list itself (7–64), containing about 2,000 Lithuanian roots and root variants in alphabetical order. There follows a comprehensive list of the common derivational affixes (65–85) arranged according to the part-of-speech (noun, adjective, verb) they derive, including both suffixes and prefixes with their basic meanings or functions and, importantly, information about the accentuation of the respective derivatives. The book closes with a concise glossary of linguistic terms for nonlinguists (86–90) and a short list of references (91). It is worth noting, as the author herself does on page 1 of the introduction, that the root list provides the synchronic forms and meanings of roots disregarding etymological information. Therefore, it is not surprising that having abstracted away from the more or less automatic morphophonological processes affecting the shapes of roots, such as, e.g., palatalization or “mutation” of the final consonant before certain suffixes (e.g., rýt-as ‘morning’ ~ pùs-ryči-ai ‘breakfast’, lit. ‘half-morning-ers’), Vakareliyska lists (sometimes in the same entry, sometimes in different entries) root variants related by such nonautomatic processes as ablaut (e.g., skand‘sink, drown’ ~ skend‘submerge, drown’), nasal infixation (e.g., gud-, gund‘accustom’), or synchronically opaque final consonant variation (e.g., moj-, mos‘wave’). This is perfectly justified given that such variants, which for some roots are quite numerous (e.g., svar‘weigh, weight’, svarb‘important’, sver-, svėr-, svor‘weigh’ ~ svir-, svyr‘bend, hang’), tend to develop their own meanings, often lexicalized in combination with certain derivational affixes. All in all, the book is certainly useful, both for students of Lithuanian, for whom it facilitates breaking up polymorphemic words of Lithuanian into their constituent parts and recognition of the sometimes fairly complex rela-
Cynthia Vakareliyska的《立陶宛词根表》是一本受欢迎的出版物，因为它可能是英语中的第一次，它以系统和相当全面的方式呈现了立陶宛语构词法的基本要素，即词根和词缀语素及其变体。本书包括一个简短的介绍(1-6)，概述了词根表的目的，描述了影响语素形状的最常见的音位和语素规则，以及材料的呈现方法。书的中心部分是根表本身(7-64)，包含约2000立陶宛根和根变体按字母顺序排列。下面是根据词类(名词、形容词、动词)排列的常见衍生词缀的综合列表(65-85)，包括后缀和前缀及其基本含义或功能，重要的是，关于各自衍生词缀的重音信息。该书以非语言学家简明的语言术语表(86-90)和一个简短的参考书目(91)结束。值得注意的是，正如作者本人在引言的第一页所做的那样，词根表提供了词根的共时形式和意义，而不考虑词源信息。因此，Vakareliyska从影响词根形状的或多或少自动的词形音素过程中抽象化也就不足为奇了，例如，某些后缀前的最后一个辅音的腭形化或“突变”(例如，rýt-as“morning”~ pùs-ryči-ai“breakfast”，lit.“half- morningers”)，Vakareliyska列出了(有时在同一条目中，有时在不同条目中)与非自动过程相关的词根变体，如ablaut(例如，skand“sink”)，淹死' ~ skend ' submerge, Drown ')，鼻音固定(例如，good -， gund '习惯')，或者同步不透明的末辅音变化(例如，moj-， mos ' wave ')。这是完全合理的，因为这些变体对于一些词根来说是相当多的(例如，svar ' weight, weight '， svarb ' important '， sver-， svėr-， svor ' weight ' ~ svir-， svr ' bend, hang ')，往往会发展出自己的意思，通常与某些衍生词缀结合在一起。总而言之，这本书对立陶宛语的学生来说当然是有用的，对他们来说，它有助于将立陶宛语的多态词分解成它们的组成部分，并有助于识别有时相当复杂的rela-
{"title":"Lithuanian root list by Cynthia M. Vakareliyska (review)","authors":"P. Arkadiev","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2016.0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2016.0016","url":null,"abstract":"Lithuanian root list by Cynthia Vakareliyska is a welcome publication, in that probably for the first time in English, it presents the basic elements of Lithuanian word formation, i.e., roots and affixal morphemes with their variants, in a systematic and fairly comprehensive fashion. The book consists of a short introduction (1–6) outlining the purposes of the root list, describing the most common phonological and morphophonemic rules affecting the shape of morphemes as well as the methodology of presentation of the material. The central part of the book is the root list itself (7–64), containing about 2,000 Lithuanian roots and root variants in alphabetical order. There follows a comprehensive list of the common derivational affixes (65–85) arranged according to the part-of-speech (noun, adjective, verb) they derive, including both suffixes and prefixes with their basic meanings or functions and, importantly, information about the accentuation of the respective derivatives. The book closes with a concise glossary of linguistic terms for nonlinguists (86–90) and a short list of references (91). It is worth noting, as the author herself does on page 1 of the introduction, that the root list provides the synchronic forms and meanings of roots disregarding etymological information. Therefore, it is not surprising that having abstracted away from the more or less automatic morphophonological processes affecting the shapes of roots, such as, e.g., palatalization or “mutation” of the final consonant before certain suffixes (e.g., rýt-as ‘morning’ ~ pùs-ryči-ai ‘breakfast’, lit. ‘half-morning-ers’), Vakareliyska lists (sometimes in the same entry, sometimes in different entries) root variants related by such nonautomatic processes as ablaut (e.g., skand‘sink, drown’ ~ skend‘submerge, drown’), nasal infixation (e.g., gud-, gund‘accustom’), or synchronically opaque final consonant variation (e.g., moj-, mos‘wave’). This is perfectly justified given that such variants, which for some roots are quite numerous (e.g., svar‘weigh, weight’, svarb‘important’, sver-, svėr-, svor‘weigh’ ~ svir-, svyr‘bend, hang’), tend to develop their own meanings, often lexicalized in combination with certain derivational affixes. All in all, the book is certainly useful, both for students of Lithuanian, for whom it facilitates breaking up polymorphemic words of Lithuanian into their constituent parts and recognition of the sometimes fairly complex rela-","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2016.0016","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44592012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In his Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories, David Pesetsky addresses core questions of Case Theory and proposes an entirely new program of research into the grammar of case. The program rests on two pivots: first, one should treat case as a signature property of a given grammatical category rather than its descriptive feature, and, second, one should build the theory of case on the basis of grammars that show a lot of morphological case rather than on those where case morphology has undergone substantial attrition (e.g., Russian and Lardil rather than English and French). In the process of forming his novel approach, Pesetsky was able to cover numerous major topics in the grammar of Russian and solved a number of outstanding problems, including the Paucal Genitive and the Genitive of Quantification. Only a fraction of these problem areas can be touched upon in a brief review.1 I insist on using the term “program” with reference to Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories, as I see this publication as a promising beginning of a watertight theory of case. Below, I will try to explore both certain ready-made solutions as well as certain less-welcome consequences of this proposal. Thus I believe that the general idea of this New Program for Case Theory (henceforth NPCT) is a captivating one and set in a truly reductionist spirit, yet its application to many grammatical phenomena in Russian and closely related languages (e.g., Polish) still requires clarification and further development.
{"title":"Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories by David Pesetsky (review)","authors":"J. Witkoś","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2016.0018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2016.0018","url":null,"abstract":"In his Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories, David Pesetsky addresses core questions of Case Theory and proposes an entirely new program of research into the grammar of case. The program rests on two pivots: first, one should treat case as a signature property of a given grammatical category rather than its descriptive feature, and, second, one should build the theory of case on the basis of grammars that show a lot of morphological case rather than on those where case morphology has undergone substantial attrition (e.g., Russian and Lardil rather than English and French). In the process of forming his novel approach, Pesetsky was able to cover numerous major topics in the grammar of Russian and solved a number of outstanding problems, including the Paucal Genitive and the Genitive of Quantification. Only a fraction of these problem areas can be touched upon in a brief review.1 I insist on using the term “program” with reference to Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories, as I see this publication as a promising beginning of a watertight theory of case. Below, I will try to explore both certain ready-made solutions as well as certain less-welcome consequences of this proposal. Thus I believe that the general idea of this New Program for Case Theory (henceforth NPCT) is a captivating one and set in a truly reductionist spirit, yet its application to many grammatical phenomena in Russian and closely related languages (e.g., Polish) still requires clarification and further development.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2016.0018","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45386651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: Verbs of perception have been typically classified into three semantic groups. Gisborne (2010) calls the three categories agentive (listen class), experiencer (hear class), and percept (sound class). Examples pertaining to the sense of smell in English use the same lexical item (smell), while in Polish, the three senses of smell are expressed with different verbs: wąchać (agentive), czuć zapach (experiencer), and pachnieć (percept). In metaphorical extensions of the verbs of sensory perception these verbs often stand for mental states, as meaning shifts typically involve the transfer from concrete to abstract domains. I show that the metaphorical extensions of pachnieć and percept to smell are quite different. Not only does pachnieć not suggest bad character or dislikeable characteristics, it actually conveys the opposite, as in the expression coś komuś pachnie ‘something is attractive to someone’ or when used without a modifier. These differences stem from the positive meaning of pachnieć and the negative meaning of to smell. Since the percept verbs of smell seem to be intrinsically positively or negatively valued, they do not lend themselves to universal Mind-as-Body extensions. I also consider some of the dramatic frequency contrasts between Polish and English smell constructions and show they can have their root in different cultural scripts underlying modes of speaking (pachnieć jak vs. smell like), framing of experiences (czuć zapach vs. experiencer to smell), polysemy, and different constructional capabilities (wąchać vs. to sniff).
摘要知觉动词通常分为三类语义组。Gisborne(2010)将这三个类别称为代理(听类)、体验(听类)和感知(听类)。英语中与嗅觉有关的例子使用相同的词汇项(嗅觉)，而在波兰语中，三种嗅觉用不同的动词表达:wąchać(代理)，czuzki zapach(体验者)和pachnieki(感知者)。在感官知觉动词的隐喻延伸中，这些动词通常代表心理状态，因为意义转移通常涉及从具体领域到抽象领域的转移。我证明了帕奇尼奇的隐喻延伸和嗅觉感知是完全不同的。pachnieki不仅没有暗示坏的性格或不讨人喜欢的特征，它实际上传达的是相反的意思，如在表达“某物对某人有吸引力”或不带修饰语时。这些差异源于pachnieki的积极意义和to smell的消极意义。由于嗅觉的感知动词似乎在本质上具有积极或消极的价值，它们并不适合于普遍的心灵即身体的延伸。我还考虑了波兰语和英语嗅觉结构之间的一些戏剧性的频率差异，并表明它们可以根植于不同的文化脚本，潜在的说话模式(pachnieki jak vs. smell like)，经验框架(czzuki zapach vs. experiencer to smell)，多义词和不同的结构能力(wąchać vs. to sniff)。
{"title":"Smell in Polish: Lexical Semantics and Cultural Values","authors":"Katarzyna Dziwirek","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2016.0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2016.0012","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Verbs of perception have been typically classified into three semantic groups. Gisborne (2010) calls the three categories agentive (listen class), experiencer (hear class), and percept (sound class). Examples pertaining to the sense of smell in English use the same lexical item (smell), while in Polish, the three senses of smell are expressed with different verbs: wąchać (agentive), czuć zapach (experiencer), and pachnieć (percept). In metaphorical extensions of the verbs of sensory perception these verbs often stand for mental states, as meaning shifts typically involve the transfer from concrete to abstract domains. I show that the metaphorical extensions of pachnieć and percept to smell are quite different. Not only does pachnieć not suggest bad character or dislikeable characteristics, it actually conveys the opposite, as in the expression coś komuś pachnie ‘something is attractive to someone’ or when used without a modifier. These differences stem from the positive meaning of pachnieć and the negative meaning of to smell. Since the percept verbs of smell seem to be intrinsically positively or negatively valued, they do not lend themselves to universal Mind-as-Body extensions. I also consider some of the dramatic frequency contrasts between Polish and English smell constructions and show they can have their root in different cultural scripts underlying modes of speaking (pachnieć jak vs. smell like), framing of experiences (czuć zapach vs. experiencer to smell), polysemy, and different constructional capabilities (wąchać vs. to sniff).","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2016.0012","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43007505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Bibliography of Slavic linguistics: 2000–2014 is a comprehensive guide to finding anything and everything ever published on a particular topic pertaining to Slavic linguistics within this fifteen-year period. Editors Sijmen Tol, coordinator of the Linguistic Bibliography project at Brill, and René Genis, Ekaterina Bobyleva, and Eline van der Veken, all members of the Linguistic Bibliography team, have ample experience in compiling bibliographies—experience that is displayed on every page of this work. With close to 68,000 entries, the Bibliography covers the Slavic languages from Common Slavic and Old Church Slavic to each of the standard modern languages, as well as less-commonly studied languages such as Kashubian, Pomeranian, Polabian, Sorbian, and Rusyn. Many of the standard languages are divided into works on old, middle, and modern varieties. The table of contents is initially sorted by language family, then individual language, and finally subdivided into individual fields of study, from general topics through the history of the language and historical linguistics, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, semiotics, applied linguistics, stylistics, psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics, sociolinguistics, computational linguistics, corpus linguistics, translation studies, typology, and many more. This three-volume set of over 3,600 pages includes research conducted in over thirty publication languages, such as (but not limited to) Albanian, Dutch, English, Finnish, German, Modern Greek, Hungarian, and Japanese in addition to the Slavic languages. The introduction by Marc L. Greenberg reviews the origins of the field of Slavic linguistics, through the multitude of changes that have occurred over the past couple of decades with increased accessibility to research and information. In the current post-Soviet context in which student enrollments and funding have dwindled, Greenberg paints a promising picture of future trajectories for research with the growth of Internet-based corpora, including a list of all Slavic national corpora, and searchable historical databases, including access to Birchbark letters, the Freising Folia, the Obščeslavjanskij lingvističeskij atlas, the Ètimologičeskij slovar’ slavjanskix jazykov, and Vasmer’s Ètimologičeskij slovar’ russkogo jazyka. This increased access to information is complemented by a number of conferences promoting international coopera-
《斯拉夫语言学书目：2000-2004》是一本全面的指南，可以在这十五年的时间里找到与斯拉夫语言学有关的特定主题上发表的任何东西。Brill语言书目项目协调员Sijmen Tol和语言书目团队的所有成员RenéGenis、Ekaterina Bobyleva和Eline van der Veken在编纂书目方面都有丰富的经验，这些经验在这部作品的每一页上都有体现。该目录收录了近68000个条目，涵盖了从普通斯拉夫语和古教会斯拉夫语到每种标准现代语言的斯拉夫语，以及卡舒比语、波美拉尼亚语、波拉比亚语、索布语和鲁辛语等不太常见的语言。许多标准语言被分为旧的、中间的和现代的变体。目录最初按语系排序，然后按个别语言排序，最后细分为个别研究领域，从一般主题到语言史和历史语言学、语音学、音韵学、形态学、句法、语义学、符号学、应用语言学、文体学、心理语言学、神经语言学、社会语言学，计算语言学、语料库语言学、翻译研究、类型学等等。这套3600多页的三卷本包括用30多种出版语言进行的研究，这些语言包括（但不限于）阿尔巴尼亚语、荷兰语、英语、芬兰语、德语、现代希腊语、匈牙利语和日语以及斯拉夫语。马克·L·格林伯格（Marc L.Greenberg）的引言回顾了斯拉夫语言学领域的起源，通过过去几十年来随着研究和信息可及性的增加而发生的众多变化。在当前学生入学人数和资金减少的后苏联背景下，格林伯格描绘了一幅充满希望的未来研究轨迹图，随着基于互联网的语料库的增长，包括所有斯拉夫国家语料库的列表，以及可搜索的历史数据库，包括访问Birchpark信件、Freising Folia、Obščeslavjanskij lingvističeskij图集，埃蒂莫洛奇·埃斯基·斯洛瓦尔的斯拉夫扬斯基·贾日科夫和瓦斯默的埃蒂莫洛奇·埃斯基·斯洛瓦尔的鲁斯科戈·贾日卡。这一信息获取渠道的增加得到了一些促进国际合作的会议的补充-
{"title":"Bibliography of Slavic linguistics: 2000–2014 ed. by Sijmen Tol and René Genis (review)","authors":"Rosemarie Connolly","doi":"10.1353/jsl.2016.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2016.0017","url":null,"abstract":"The Bibliography of Slavic linguistics: 2000–2014 is a comprehensive guide to finding anything and everything ever published on a particular topic pertaining to Slavic linguistics within this fifteen-year period. Editors Sijmen Tol, coordinator of the Linguistic Bibliography project at Brill, and René Genis, Ekaterina Bobyleva, and Eline van der Veken, all members of the Linguistic Bibliography team, have ample experience in compiling bibliographies—experience that is displayed on every page of this work. With close to 68,000 entries, the Bibliography covers the Slavic languages from Common Slavic and Old Church Slavic to each of the standard modern languages, as well as less-commonly studied languages such as Kashubian, Pomeranian, Polabian, Sorbian, and Rusyn. Many of the standard languages are divided into works on old, middle, and modern varieties. The table of contents is initially sorted by language family, then individual language, and finally subdivided into individual fields of study, from general topics through the history of the language and historical linguistics, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, semiotics, applied linguistics, stylistics, psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics, sociolinguistics, computational linguistics, corpus linguistics, translation studies, typology, and many more. This three-volume set of over 3,600 pages includes research conducted in over thirty publication languages, such as (but not limited to) Albanian, Dutch, English, Finnish, German, Modern Greek, Hungarian, and Japanese in addition to the Slavic languages. The introduction by Marc L. Greenberg reviews the origins of the field of Slavic linguistics, through the multitude of changes that have occurred over the past couple of decades with increased accessibility to research and information. In the current post-Soviet context in which student enrollments and funding have dwindled, Greenberg paints a promising picture of future trajectories for research with the growth of Internet-based corpora, including a list of all Slavic national corpora, and searchable historical databases, including access to Birchbark letters, the Freising Folia, the Obščeslavjanskij lingvističeskij atlas, the Ètimologičeskij slovar’ slavjanskix jazykov, and Vasmer’s Ètimologičeskij slovar’ russkogo jazyka. This increased access to information is complemented by a number of conferences promoting international coopera-","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jsl.2016.0017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46968350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Slavic linguistics community lost one of its great leaders in 2016. Dean Stoddard Worth, who lived in retirement in Lititz, Pennsylvania, passed away after a long illness on 29 February at the age of 88 years. Worth, who was born in Brooklyn, NY in 1927, earned his BA at Dartmouth College, studied Slavic languages in Paris at the École nationale des langues vivantes and at the Sorbonne (Diploma and Certificat 1952) and went on to Harvard, where he completed the PhD in 1956 with a dissertation on a problem in Russian syntax, written under the supervision of Roman Jakobson. In 1957 he hired on at UCLA, where he rose through the ranks, retiring in 1994. During his career Worth made significant contributions in Russian linguistics, descriptive as well as historical, with early publications on syntactic problems and numerous papers on morphophonemics and morphology, especially word formation. In many other studies he applied linguistic analysis to Russian texts from all periods, chronicles as well as literary, from the Igor’ Tale to Kantemir. He produced more than a dozen papers on rime and metrics, both in classical and in oral literature, where he showed a special interest in the Russian lament. His many studies of the language of these many text types from different periods formed the background for contributions to our understanding of the historical development of the Russian literary language. Besides publications in Russian linguistics, Worth wrote several studies of the southern Kamchatka language Kamchadal (Russian Itel’men). He also edited and coedited several conference volumes and was editor of the International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics from its first issue (1959) to its last (2006). In between he wrote some fifty reviews, about a quarter of the items in his list of publications. Two collections of Worth’s research articles were published (1977, 2006). The latter lists his publications through 2004. Among Worth’s book-length publications are a volume of edited Kamchadal texts, a Kamchadal dictionary, a Russian derivational dictionary (1970), a bibliography of Russian word formation (1977), a two-volume bibliography of Slavic linguistics (1966, 1970), and a monograph on the development of Russian grammar writing (1983). At UCLA Worth played a decisive role in his department’s development into a preeminent center of Slavic studies, the result of judicious hiring and a
{"title":"Dean S. Worth In Memoriam","authors":"H. Andersen","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2016.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2016.0011","url":null,"abstract":"The Slavic linguistics community lost one of its great leaders in 2016. Dean Stoddard Worth, who lived in retirement in Lititz, Pennsylvania, passed away after a long illness on 29 February at the age of 88 years. Worth, who was born in Brooklyn, NY in 1927, earned his BA at Dartmouth College, studied Slavic languages in Paris at the École nationale des langues vivantes and at the Sorbonne (Diploma and Certificat 1952) and went on to Harvard, where he completed the PhD in 1956 with a dissertation on a problem in Russian syntax, written under the supervision of Roman Jakobson. In 1957 he hired on at UCLA, where he rose through the ranks, retiring in 1994. During his career Worth made significant contributions in Russian linguistics, descriptive as well as historical, with early publications on syntactic problems and numerous papers on morphophonemics and morphology, especially word formation. In many other studies he applied linguistic analysis to Russian texts from all periods, chronicles as well as literary, from the Igor’ Tale to Kantemir. He produced more than a dozen papers on rime and metrics, both in classical and in oral literature, where he showed a special interest in the Russian lament. His many studies of the language of these many text types from different periods formed the background for contributions to our understanding of the historical development of the Russian literary language. Besides publications in Russian linguistics, Worth wrote several studies of the southern Kamchatka language Kamchadal (Russian Itel’men). He also edited and coedited several conference volumes and was editor of the International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics from its first issue (1959) to its last (2006). In between he wrote some fifty reviews, about a quarter of the items in his list of publications. Two collections of Worth’s research articles were published (1977, 2006). The latter lists his publications through 2004. Among Worth’s book-length publications are a volume of edited Kamchadal texts, a Kamchadal dictionary, a Russian derivational dictionary (1970), a bibliography of Russian word formation (1977), a two-volume bibliography of Slavic linguistics (1966, 1970), and a monograph on the development of Russian grammar writing (1983). At UCLA Worth played a decisive role in his department’s development into a preeminent center of Slavic studies, the result of judicious hiring and a","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2016.0011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47590004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is with deep sadness that we announce the passing of our colleague and friend Charles Edward Gribble, Professor Emeritus of Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures, on June 3, 2016 after a long illness. Chuck (as he was known to his friends and colleagues) had a distinguished career of teaching, research, and service in the field, which spanned nearly 60 years, 35 of which he spent at the Ohio State University. He is survived by his wife, Lyubomira Parpulova Gribble, and his daughter, Elizabeth Rayna Gribble. Chuck was born on November 10, 1936 and grew up in Lansing, Michigan, where his father was an executive with the General Motors Corporation. He entered the University of Michigan with the intention of specializing in physics, but soon he became captivated by the sound, structure, and history of foreign languages—a passion that would endure to the end of his life. Under the guidance of the distinguished Slavist and Byzantinist Ihor Ševčenko, he received his B.A. with High Distinction in Slavic Languages in 1957. Subsequently, he served as a graduate teaching assistant in the Department of Slavic Languages at the University of Michigan. In 1958, Chuck entered the graduate program in Slavic Languages and Literatures at Harvard University, where he studied under the eminent Slavic linguist and structuralist Roman Jakobson. After receiving his A.M. degree, he served as a guide and translator at the first American National Exposition in the USSR held in Sokol’niki Park in Moscow in the summer of 1959. At the exhibition, he met President Eisenhower and witnessed the historic Kitchen Debate between then-Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. Returning to the United States, Chuck continued his graduate studies in Slavic linguistics at Harvard with a focus on historical Slavic linguistics and philology. He developed significant expertise not only in Russian but also in Old Church Slavonic, Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian, Czech, Polish, and Lithuanian. He returned to the USSR as an exchange student at Moscow State University in 1960–61, where he had the opportunity to work with the prominent linguist V. A. Zvegincev. Back at Harvard, he wrote his doctoral dissertation under the supervision of Horace G. Lunt on an early 12th-century East Slavic manuscript, Linguistic Problems of the Vygoleksinskij Sbornik, and defended it in 1967).
{"title":"Charles E. Gribble In Memoriam","authors":"D. Collins","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2016.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2016.0010","url":null,"abstract":"It is with deep sadness that we announce the passing of our colleague and friend Charles Edward Gribble, Professor Emeritus of Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures, on June 3, 2016 after a long illness. Chuck (as he was known to his friends and colleagues) had a distinguished career of teaching, research, and service in the field, which spanned nearly 60 years, 35 of which he spent at the Ohio State University. He is survived by his wife, Lyubomira Parpulova Gribble, and his daughter, Elizabeth Rayna Gribble. Chuck was born on November 10, 1936 and grew up in Lansing, Michigan, where his father was an executive with the General Motors Corporation. He entered the University of Michigan with the intention of specializing in physics, but soon he became captivated by the sound, structure, and history of foreign languages—a passion that would endure to the end of his life. Under the guidance of the distinguished Slavist and Byzantinist Ihor Ševčenko, he received his B.A. with High Distinction in Slavic Languages in 1957. Subsequently, he served as a graduate teaching assistant in the Department of Slavic Languages at the University of Michigan. In 1958, Chuck entered the graduate program in Slavic Languages and Literatures at Harvard University, where he studied under the eminent Slavic linguist and structuralist Roman Jakobson. After receiving his A.M. degree, he served as a guide and translator at the first American National Exposition in the USSR held in Sokol’niki Park in Moscow in the summer of 1959. At the exhibition, he met President Eisenhower and witnessed the historic Kitchen Debate between then-Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. Returning to the United States, Chuck continued his graduate studies in Slavic linguistics at Harvard with a focus on historical Slavic linguistics and philology. He developed significant expertise not only in Russian but also in Old Church Slavonic, Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian, Czech, Polish, and Lithuanian. He returned to the USSR as an exchange student at Moscow State University in 1960–61, where he had the opportunity to work with the prominent linguist V. A. Zvegincev. Back at Harvard, he wrote his doctoral dissertation under the supervision of Horace G. Lunt on an early 12th-century East Slavic manuscript, Linguistic Problems of the Vygoleksinskij Sbornik, and defended it in 1967).","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2016.0010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45648752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: This article explores the fall and vocalization of the jers, making five claims. First, it is shown how the jer shift can be analyzed in terms of a trochaic pattern, whereby a jer fell unless it headed a foot. Second, the foot-based approach is argued to be superior to the traditional counting mechanism postulated for the jer shift in that the foot-based approach avoids ad hoc stipulations and facilitates crosslinguistic comparison. Third, the present study relates the fall of the jers to a trochee-iamb shift in Russian prosody; a few generations after the jer shift was completed, an iambic pattern was introduced through the emergence of akan’e. Fourth, it is proposed that Contemporary Standard Russian may be a “switch language,” i.e., a language in which productive processes are sensitive to both trochees and iambs. Last but not least, the present study analyzes prosodic change from the point of view of cognitive linguistics (the Usage-Based Model) and shows that this framework offers a straightforward account of the jer shift.
{"title":"A FOOTnote to the Jers: The Russian Trochee-Iamb Shift and Cognitive Linguistics","authors":"T. Nesset","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2016.0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2016.0015","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This article explores the fall and vocalization of the jers, making five claims. First, it is shown how the jer shift can be analyzed in terms of a trochaic pattern, whereby a jer fell unless it headed a foot. Second, the foot-based approach is argued to be superior to the traditional counting mechanism postulated for the jer shift in that the foot-based approach avoids ad hoc stipulations and facilitates crosslinguistic comparison. Third, the present study relates the fall of the jers to a trochee-iamb shift in Russian prosody; a few generations after the jer shift was completed, an iambic pattern was introduced through the emergence of akan’e. Fourth, it is proposed that Contemporary Standard Russian may be a “switch language,” i.e., a language in which productive processes are sensitive to both trochees and iambs. Last but not least, the present study analyzes prosodic change from the point of view of cognitive linguistics (the Usage-Based Model) and shows that this framework offers a straightforward account of the jer shift.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2016.0015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46679473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：