This issue of Journal of Slavic Linguistics celebrates its Silver Anniversary. Yes, though you may not have noticed (time flies when you are having fun), JSL has now been appearing uninterrupted for 25 years. When it gets down to it, for an academic journal the cliché is truth—survival is success. And for a new journal to have survived for the past 25 years is no small feat. The time of JSL’s existence since volume 1, issue 1, in 1993 has spanned many changes, including that from a fairly pre-digital age to our hyper-digital one (here I would point out that early on one article by a respected Slavist was submitted in handwritten form), as well as the transition from the academic (and Slavistic) structures of the Cold-War era to a new age, and numerous changes in the field of linguistics (such as the ascendance of usage-based and sociological approaches to language and quantitative methods alongside formal approaches). These changes, in one way or another, are reflected in the pages of JSL. JSL was established by George Fowler and Steven Franks at Indiana University in 1992 to fill a gap—there was no journal dedicated to Slavic linguistics as a whole in North America. Since its inception, JSL has assumed a prominent position in the international Slavic linguistics community, and in 2006 became the flagship publication of the Slavic Linguistics Society. Beyond the changes in the world at large mentioned above, the inevitable impermanency of organization also complicates the continuity of any journal, and in this regard JSL has shown the necessary flexibility, responding to the need for personnel changes along the way. The editorial team of George Fowler and Steven Franks was changed in 1994; George Fowler became Editor-in-Chief with a team of three associate editors, and then in 1997 Steven Franks took over and has remained Editor-in-Chief to date. The first three volumes of JSL were published by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, then it was published independently until being adopted by Slavica Publishers starting with volume 5, issue 2. It would take too much space to acknowledge all those who have otherwise assisted and aided in the publication of JSL; however, we should gratefully acknowledge Rosemarie Connolly’s service as Managing Editor over the past ten years. Anyone who has been
{"title":"Introduction: JSL Silver Anniversary Issue","authors":"Stephen M. Dickey","doi":"10.1353/jsl.2017.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This issue of Journal of Slavic Linguistics celebrates its Silver Anniversary. Yes, though you may not have noticed (time flies when you are having fun), JSL has now been appearing uninterrupted for 25 years. When it gets down to it, for an academic journal the cliché is truth—survival is success. And for a new journal to have survived for the past 25 years is no small feat. The time of JSL’s existence since volume 1, issue 1, in 1993 has spanned many changes, including that from a fairly pre-digital age to our hyper-digital one (here I would point out that early on one article by a respected Slavist was submitted in handwritten form), as well as the transition from the academic (and Slavistic) structures of the Cold-War era to a new age, and numerous changes in the field of linguistics (such as the ascendance of usage-based and sociological approaches to language and quantitative methods alongside formal approaches). These changes, in one way or another, are reflected in the pages of JSL. JSL was established by George Fowler and Steven Franks at Indiana University in 1992 to fill a gap—there was no journal dedicated to Slavic linguistics as a whole in North America. Since its inception, JSL has assumed a prominent position in the international Slavic linguistics community, and in 2006 became the flagship publication of the Slavic Linguistics Society. Beyond the changes in the world at large mentioned above, the inevitable impermanency of organization also complicates the continuity of any journal, and in this regard JSL has shown the necessary flexibility, responding to the need for personnel changes along the way. The editorial team of George Fowler and Steven Franks was changed in 1994; George Fowler became Editor-in-Chief with a team of three associate editors, and then in 1997 Steven Franks took over and has remained Editor-in-Chief to date. The first three volumes of JSL were published by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, then it was published independently until being adopted by Slavica Publishers starting with volume 5, issue 2. It would take too much space to acknowledge all those who have otherwise assisted and aided in the publication of JSL; however, we should gratefully acknowledge Rosemarie Connolly’s service as Managing Editor over the past ten years. Anyone who has been","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"169 - 170"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jsl.2017.0007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41778154","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 explores the connection between Slavic languages and the theoretical tenets of construction grammar, a cognitively and functionally oriented approach to linguistic analysis. The strengths of traditional Slavic linguistics consist particularly in its focus on diachronic concerns, lexical semantics, and on issues of morphology. Constructional analysis provides a firm theoretical grounding for these traditional areas and also draws attention to phenomena and issues that have been less prominently pursued by Slavic linguists. This concerns various kinds of syntactic patterning but also the domain of discourse organization and grammatical devices that serve specific discourse functions, be it the nature of pragmatic particles, specific clausal structures, expressions of subjective epistemic stance, etc. Of interest is also the origin and evolution of such devices. This area has been generally left just about untouched in Slavic linguistics, yet it represents an enormous pool of interesting data and relates directly to theoretical questions that are presently in the forefront of general linguistic research. With respect to the evolutionary perspective, the present paper also comments on the role of pragmaticization and constructionalization and their manifestations in particular instances, including suggestions for how they can be conceptualized with the contribution of construction grammar.
{"title":"Construction Grammar in the Service of Slavic Linguistics, and Vice Versa","authors":"Mirjam Fried","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0010","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This paper explores the connection between Slavic languages and the theoretical tenets of construction grammar, a cognitively and functionally oriented approach to linguistic analysis. The strengths of traditional Slavic linguistics consist particularly in its focus on diachronic concerns, lexical semantics, and on issues of morphology. Constructional analysis provides a firm theoretical grounding for these traditional areas and also draws attention to phenomena and issues that have been less prominently pursued by Slavic linguists. This concerns various kinds of syntactic patterning but also the domain of discourse organization and grammatical devices that serve specific discourse functions, be it the nature of pragmatic particles, specific clausal structures, expressions of subjective epistemic stance, etc. Of interest is also the origin and evolution of such devices. This area has been generally left just about untouched in Slavic linguistics, yet it represents an enormous pool of interesting data and relates directly to theoretical questions that are presently in the forefront of general linguistic research. With respect to the evolutionary perspective, the present paper also comments on the role of pragmaticization and constructionalization and their manifestations in particular instances, including suggestions for how they can be conceptualized with the contribution of construction grammar.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"241 - 276"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47626267","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 state-of-the-field article traces some recent trajectories of morphological theory, illustrated via four classic problems of Slavic morphology: vowel-zero alternation, stem consonant mutations, paradigmatic gaps, and animacy-determined accusative syncretism. Using Russian as the primary illustrating data, one theme that emerges is that theories that leverage the distributional properties of the lexicon have made progress against previously intractable aspects of these phenomena, including idiosyncratic lexical distributions, unexpected (non)productivity, and distributions shared by distinct exponents. In turn, the analyses raise new questions.
{"title":"Slavic Morphology: Recent Approaches to Classic Problems, Illustrated with Russian","authors":"Andrea D. Sims","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This state-of-the-field article traces some recent trajectories of morphological theory, illustrated via four classic problems of Slavic morphology: vowel-zero alternation, stem consonant mutations, paradigmatic gaps, and animacy-determined accusative syncretism. Using Russian as the primary illustrating data, one theme that emerges is that theories that leverage the distributional properties of the lexicon have made progress against previously intractable aspects of these phenomena, including idiosyncratic lexical distributions, unexpected (non)productivity, and distributions shared by distinct exponents. In turn, the analyses raise new questions.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"489 - 524"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0019","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45236032","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:We outline some recent highlights in the application of cognitive linguistic theoretical and methodological approaches to the analysis of Slavic languages. A principal strength of cognitive linguistics is the way it focuses our attention on the continuous nature of linguistic phenomena. Rather than positing rigid categories and strict definitions, cognitive linguistics addresses the messy realities of language, facilitating the extraction of coherent patterns from the noise of human communication. We follow a thematic arrangement motivated by the types of variation we observe in language and the analyses proposed by Slavic linguists. These include variation across meaning and form, across modalities and genres, and across time and speakers.
{"title":"Cognitive Linguistics: A Neat Theory for Messy Data","authors":"L. Janda, Stephen M. Dickey","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0014","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:We outline some recent highlights in the application of cognitive linguistic theoretical and methodological approaches to the analysis of Slavic languages. A principal strength of cognitive linguistics is the way it focuses our attention on the continuous nature of linguistic phenomena. Rather than positing rigid categories and strict definitions, cognitive linguistics addresses the messy realities of language, facilitating the extraction of coherent patterns from the noise of human communication. We follow a thematic arrangement motivated by the types of variation we observe in language and the analyses proposed by Slavic linguists. These include variation across meaning and form, across modalities and genres, and across time and speakers.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"367 - 385"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45591512","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 Russian verb pobedit’ ‘conquer’ shows what Sims calls canonical defectiveness, “the complete lack of any word-form filling a given paradigm cell [...] in the context of a maximal expectation that there should be some form corresponding to that cell” (250). That cell is the first-person singular nonpast, in which *pobežu is bad and so are *pobedju and *pobeždu. In this wide-ranging study she cites data from two dozen languages and employs a variety of tools like statistical analysis and information theory in order to provide a context for understanding the defectiveness of pobedit’. Introductory chapter 1 poses the question: Are paradigm gaps random anomalies, epiphenomena, or normal morphological objects? They are anomalies when they are generated by the regular rules of inflection but then must be specified [–lexical insertion] to prevent their occurring in a sentence. They are epiphenomenal when they reflect morphological rule competition, such as the competition between the Russian reflex of /dj/ (in *pobežu) and the Church Slavic reflex (in *pobeždu). The epiphenomena explanation could have been pursued further. The same competition between Russian ž and Church Slavic žd is seen in the nonoccurring imperfective *pobeživat’ and the standard imperfective pobeždat’, which shows that the Church Slavic reflex, although acceptable in derivation, is not acceptable in inflection (or no longer acceptable: Pushkin had straždut as the 3pl. of stradat’ ‘suffer’, but it has been replaced by stradajut). Sims rejects these two options and throughout the book repeatedly argues that such gaps are “normal morphological objects” (209) and that inflectional defectiveness is “a systemic variant of normal inflectional structure” (11). In chapter 2 Sims defines inflectional defectiveness and evaluates candidates for it. In the Yimas sentence taŋatpul ‘You didn’t hit me’, the absence of ma ‘you’ is not a gap because the sentence is well formed and interpreted as having a second-person singular subject. (“This is thus an example of zero expression of the nominative, which is not to be confused with lack of expression” [32]) “Inasmuch as [taŋatpul] is a well-formed sentence and the ineffability requirement of the definition is thus not met, this does” [surely the author
俄语动词pobedit“征服”显示了西姆斯所说的规范缺陷，“在最大期望应该有某种形式对应于给定范式单元格的情况下，完全没有任何单词形式填充该单元格[…]”（250）。这个细胞是第一人称单数的无党派，其中*pobežu是坏的，*pobedju和*pobe-du也是坏的。在这项范围广泛的研究中，她引用了20多种语言的数据，并使用了统计分析和信息理论等各种工具，为理解pobedit的缺陷提供了背景。引言第1章提出了一个问题：范式间隙是随机异常、副现象还是正常形态对象？当它们由规则的屈折规则生成时，它们是异常的，但必须指定[-词汇插入]，以防止它们在句子中出现。当它们反映形态规则竞争时，它们是副现象，例如/dj/（在*pobežu中）的俄语反射和Church Slavic反射（在*pobeždu中）之间的竞争。副现象的解释本可以进一步探究。俄语ž和教会斯拉夫语žd之间的竞争同样存在于不完全不完全的“pobeživat”和标准的不完全pobe-dat”中，这表明教会斯拉夫反射虽然在派生上是可以接受的，在屈折上是不可接受的（或者不再可接受：普希金将straždut作为stradat“受苦”的第三人称，但它已被stradajut取代）。西姆斯拒绝接受这两种选择，并在整本书中反复辩称，这种间隙是“正常的形态对象”（209），屈折缺陷是“正常屈折结构的系统变体”（11）。在第二章中，Sims定义了屈折缺陷，并评估了它的候选者。在Yimas句子taŋatpul“You di't hit me”中，没有ma“You”并不是一个缺口，因为这个句子的形式很好，并被解释为有第二人称单数主语。（“因此，这是主格零表达的一个例子，不应与缺乏表达相混淆”[32]）“由于[taŋatpul]是一个格式良好的句子，因此定义的无效性要求没有得到满足，所以确实如此”[当然，作者
{"title":"Inflectional defectiveness by Andrea D. Sims (review)","authors":"F. Gladney","doi":"10.1353/jsl.2017.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0005","url":null,"abstract":"The Russian verb pobedit’ ‘conquer’ shows what Sims calls canonical defectiveness, “the complete lack of any word-form filling a given paradigm cell [...] in the context of a maximal expectation that there should be some form corresponding to that cell” (250). That cell is the first-person singular nonpast, in which *pobežu is bad and so are *pobedju and *pobeždu. In this wide-ranging study she cites data from two dozen languages and employs a variety of tools like statistical analysis and information theory in order to provide a context for understanding the defectiveness of pobedit’. Introductory chapter 1 poses the question: Are paradigm gaps random anomalies, epiphenomena, or normal morphological objects? They are anomalies when they are generated by the regular rules of inflection but then must be specified [–lexical insertion] to prevent their occurring in a sentence. They are epiphenomenal when they reflect morphological rule competition, such as the competition between the Russian reflex of /dj/ (in *pobežu) and the Church Slavic reflex (in *pobeždu). The epiphenomena explanation could have been pursued further. The same competition between Russian ž and Church Slavic žd is seen in the nonoccurring imperfective *pobeživat’ and the standard imperfective pobeždat’, which shows that the Church Slavic reflex, although acceptable in derivation, is not acceptable in inflection (or no longer acceptable: Pushkin had straždut as the 3pl. of stradat’ ‘suffer’, but it has been replaced by stradajut). Sims rejects these two options and throughout the book repeatedly argues that such gaps are “normal morphological objects” (209) and that inflectional defectiveness is “a systemic variant of normal inflectional structure” (11). In chapter 2 Sims defines inflectional defectiveness and evaluates candidates for it. In the Yimas sentence taŋatpul ‘You didn’t hit me’, the absence of ma ‘you’ is not a gap because the sentence is well formed and interpreted as having a second-person singular subject. (“This is thus an example of zero expression of the nominative, which is not to be confused with lack of expression” [32]) “Inasmuch as [taŋatpul] is a well-formed sentence and the ineffability requirement of the definition is thus not met, this does” [surely the author","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"141 - 145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jsl.2017.0005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49108390","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 discusses the choice of the past-tense forms in the Rusyn dialect spoken in the village of Novoselycja in Zakarpats'ka oblast' of Ukraine. The past-tense forms for the 1st and 2nd person in Rusyn are formed by a participle accompanied either by an enclitic auxiliary or by a fully stressed subject pronoun (the former construction occurs more often), but not by both. The factors influencing the choice of one over the other have never been clear. I claim that in Novoselycja Rusyn the factor that influences the choice of an auxiliary or a subject pronoun is a discourse factor. The choice between auxiliaries and pronouns generally depends on the position in discourse: the pronoun codes the first mention of the 1st and 2nd person subject and the auxiliary subsequent mentions. The exceptions, auxiliaries in locally initial positions and pronouns in locally subsequent positions, show dependence on the speech genre: speakers prefer pronouns at the beginning of episodes in classical narratives, and auxiliaries in genres closer to interactional conversation.
{"title":"Past Tense in the Rusyn Dialect of Novoselycja: Auxiliary vs. Subject Pronoun as the First-and Second-Person Subject","authors":"Elena Boudovskaia","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0001","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article discusses the choice of the past-tense forms in the Rusyn dialect spoken in the village of Novoselycja in Zakarpats'ka oblast' of Ukraine. The past-tense forms for the 1st and 2nd person in Rusyn are formed by a participle accompanied either by an enclitic auxiliary or by a fully stressed subject pronoun (the former construction occurs more often), but not by both. The factors influencing the choice of one over the other have never been clear. I claim that in Novoselycja Rusyn the factor that influences the choice of an auxiliary or a subject pronoun is a discourse factor. The choice between auxiliaries and pronouns generally depends on the position in discourse: the pronoun codes the first mention of the 1st and 2nd person subject and the auxiliary subsequent mentions. The exceptions, auxiliaries in locally initial positions and pronouns in locally subsequent positions, show dependence on the speech genre: speakers prefer pronouns at the beginning of episodes in classical narratives, and auxiliaries in genres closer to interactional conversation.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"3 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47565728","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 publication of a treatment of Slavic nominal word formation by Ranko Matasović (RM) is an important and welcome event for Slavicists and IndoEuropeanists alike. Among numerous other works spanning Slavic, IndoEuropean, and non-Indo-European linguistics, RM has authored the Poredbenopovijesna gramatika hrvatskoga jezika (Matasović 2008), still the only historical grammar of a Slavic language significantly engaging the Proto-IndoEuropean background and compatible with the current state of knowledge about the latter (the importance of the connection with Indo-European linguistics is also emphasized in the extended title of the work under review). The current synthesis of historical Sl word formation—as we learn from the opening paragraphs (15)—grew out of RM’s work on the new, coauthored etymological dictionary of Croatian, the first volume of which has since appeared (ERHJ 1). The book has already been the subject of three quite extensive reviews: by M. Mihaljević (2014), Ž. Ž. Varbot (2015), and Th. Olander and B. Nielsen Whitehead (2015).1 In order not to duplicate the effort of the aforementioned competent reviewers, every so often I shall refer the interested reader to their conclusions, particularly as regards those areas which they have dealt with at some length;2 in the present review, I concentrate on those aspects of the work regarding which more discussion is in order.
Ranko matasoviki (RM)对斯拉夫语名义构词法的论述的出版对于斯拉夫主义者和印欧主义者来说都是一个重要而受欢迎的事件。在众多其他跨越斯拉夫语、印欧语和非印欧语语言学的著作中，RM撰写了Poredbenopovijesna gramatika hrvatskoga jezika (matasoviki 2008)，这仍然是唯一一部与原始印欧语背景密切相关的斯拉夫语历史语法，并与后者的当前知识状态相兼容(与印欧语言学联系的重要性也在审查中的工作的扩展标题中得到强调)。我们从开篇段落(15)中了解到，目前对历史上Sl构词法的综合源于RM对新的、合著的克罗地亚语源学词典的工作，该词典的第一卷已经出现(ERHJ 1)。这本书已经成为三次相当广泛的评论的主题:M. mihaljeviki (2014)， Ž。Ž。Varbot (2015);奥兰德和B.尼尔森怀特黑德(2015)为了不重复上述有能力的审稿人的工作，我将经常向感兴趣的读者介绍他们的结论，特别是那些他们已经相当详细地处理过的领域;2在目前的评论中，我将集中讨论那些有待进一步讨论的方面。
{"title":"Slavic nominal word-formation: Proto-Indo-European origins and historical development by Ranko Matasović (review)","authors":"Marek Majer","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0006","url":null,"abstract":"The publication of a treatment of Slavic nominal word formation by Ranko Matasović (RM) is an important and welcome event for Slavicists and IndoEuropeanists alike. Among numerous other works spanning Slavic, IndoEuropean, and non-Indo-European linguistics, RM has authored the Poredbenopovijesna gramatika hrvatskoga jezika (Matasović 2008), still the only historical grammar of a Slavic language significantly engaging the Proto-IndoEuropean background and compatible with the current state of knowledge about the latter (the importance of the connection with Indo-European linguistics is also emphasized in the extended title of the work under review). The current synthesis of historical Sl word formation—as we learn from the opening paragraphs (15)—grew out of RM’s work on the new, coauthored etymological dictionary of Croatian, the first volume of which has since appeared (ERHJ 1). The book has already been the subject of three quite extensive reviews: by M. Mihaljević (2014), Ž. Ž. Varbot (2015), and Th. Olander and B. Nielsen Whitehead (2015).1 In order not to duplicate the effort of the aforementioned competent reviewers, every so often I shall refer the interested reader to their conclusions, particularly as regards those areas which they have dealt with at some length;2 in the present review, I concentrate on those aspects of the work regarding which more discussion is in order.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"147 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41685915","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}
A long-standing topic in the discussion of Slavic languages is the proper analysis of verbal prefixes. Verbal prefixes play a special role in the expression of grammatical aspect as well as in word formation. One of the more complex issues associated with verbal prefixes in the Slavic languages is that they seem to resist a systematic and uniform analysis. In her monograph, Olga Kagan proposes a unified analysis of Russian verbal prefixes. The overall goal of her book is, as she states (p. 21), “to provide a unified formal semantic analysis for individual prefixes as well as for the more general system that underlies verbal prefixation in Russian.” The analysis Kagan proposes is couched in degree semantics. A scalar approach to verbal prefixes in Slavic languages is not novel and goes back to Filip’s work on this topic (e.g., Filip 2000). Nevertheless, the extent to which Russian verbal prefixes are covered within this analysis is unique to Kagan’s work. Degree semantics originated in the analysis of gradable adjectives like English tall or expensive. The notion of a scale is at the heart of this approach. A scale, following Kennedy and McNally (2005), among others, is a linearly ordered set of values (or degrees) of a measurement dimension such as height, price, or width. A gradable adjective, for example, tall, maps its argument onto a scale (in this case a height scale) and states the argument’s degree on that scale, i.e., its height. Each gradable adjective requires a comparison degree, which is often left implicit. Saying John is tall can be interpreted as meaning ‘John is tall for a boy of his age’ or ‘John is tall for an average American’. The exact interpretation is often determined by the context. Thus, saying that John is tall is a comparison of his degree of tallness to an (implicit) comparison degree. Kagan takes the essential ingredients of degree semantics—scales and their components as well as standards of comparison—and applies them to the analysis of verbal prefixes in Russian. The central hypothesis put forward by Kagan is called the “scale hypothesis.” It states that all verbal prefixes are instantiations of the same template. Without going into the formal details, the basic idea is that verbal prefixes specify a relation between degrees. The degree of a gradable property associated with the verbal predicate can either be less than (<), more than (>) or equal to (=) a comparison degree. The template
{"title":"Scalarity in the verbal domain by Olga Kagan (review)","authors":"Jens Fleischhauer","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0004","url":null,"abstract":"A long-standing topic in the discussion of Slavic languages is the proper analysis of verbal prefixes. Verbal prefixes play a special role in the expression of grammatical aspect as well as in word formation. One of the more complex issues associated with verbal prefixes in the Slavic languages is that they seem to resist a systematic and uniform analysis. In her monograph, Olga Kagan proposes a unified analysis of Russian verbal prefixes. The overall goal of her book is, as she states (p. 21), “to provide a unified formal semantic analysis for individual prefixes as well as for the more general system that underlies verbal prefixation in Russian.” The analysis Kagan proposes is couched in degree semantics. A scalar approach to verbal prefixes in Slavic languages is not novel and goes back to Filip’s work on this topic (e.g., Filip 2000). Nevertheless, the extent to which Russian verbal prefixes are covered within this analysis is unique to Kagan’s work. Degree semantics originated in the analysis of gradable adjectives like English tall or expensive. The notion of a scale is at the heart of this approach. A scale, following Kennedy and McNally (2005), among others, is a linearly ordered set of values (or degrees) of a measurement dimension such as height, price, or width. A gradable adjective, for example, tall, maps its argument onto a scale (in this case a height scale) and states the argument’s degree on that scale, i.e., its height. Each gradable adjective requires a comparison degree, which is often left implicit. Saying John is tall can be interpreted as meaning ‘John is tall for a boy of his age’ or ‘John is tall for an average American’. The exact interpretation is often determined by the context. Thus, saying that John is tall is a comparison of his degree of tallness to an (implicit) comparison degree. Kagan takes the essential ingredients of degree semantics—scales and their components as well as standards of comparison—and applies them to the analysis of verbal prefixes in Russian. The central hypothesis put forward by Kagan is called the “scale hypothesis.” It states that all verbal prefixes are instantiations of the same template. Without going into the formal details, the basic idea is that verbal prefixes specify a relation between degrees. The degree of a gradable property associated with the verbal predicate can either be less than (<), more than (>) or equal to (=) a comparison degree. The template","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"131 - 140"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44094173","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}
As you may have heard if you have been following the Society’s calls for applications to take over the Journal of Slavic Linguistics, I plan to step down as Editor-in-Chief at the end of this year. Since JSL 25(2) is a special guest-edited issue, this will in all likelihood be my last From the Editor column. While I won’t be completely disappearing—I plan on continuing other types of involvement with the Slavic Linguistics Society and am likely to keep a hand in the journal as well for a while—I do look forward to a break. I have enjoyed 25 years giving birth to, weaning, and helping JSL to walk on its own. I now have put it up for adoption by SLS, under the stewardship of which it has matured and eventually become self-sufficient. It is, I feel, high time for new leadership and new directions. As noted, the Society is in the midst of conducting a search for some individual(s) to replace me, and our expectation is that this will be resolved over the next few months. So I hope that when we reconvene in Ljubljana in September you will be able to meet the new editor(s) and discuss your ideas for the journal. I will of course also be at that meeting and fully expect to take part in the 2018 meeting in beautiful Victoria, BC,1 as well as the 2019 meeting, which will most likely be in historic Potsdam. It may even be in the cards for SLS 15 to take place here once again in the fair city of Bloomington, Indiana! In many previous columns, I have tried to thank all the various individuals, from Associate Editors and Board Members to authors and reviewers to Managing Editors and the many production assistants, who have contributed to making this journal the premier publication in the field. To list these folks again here would fill several pages, so let me simply extend my appreciation to all of you who have, over the years, given your time, energy, and expertise to JSL. You know who you are, and I thank each and every one of you from the bottom of my heart. While there has been much turn-over in all these roles, there are two individuals who do deserve to be singled out. First and foremost, of course, is George Fowler, with whom I created the journal in the first place and who served as Editor himself in the early years. Not only has his support, guidance, and advice been indispensible, but the ongoing cooperation with Slavica Publishers, which George facilitates (to put it mildly), has been paramount.
{"title":"From the Editor","authors":"S. Franks","doi":"10.1353/jsl.2017.0000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0000","url":null,"abstract":"As you may have heard if you have been following the Society’s calls for applications to take over the Journal of Slavic Linguistics, I plan to step down as Editor-in-Chief at the end of this year. Since JSL 25(2) is a special guest-edited issue, this will in all likelihood be my last From the Editor column. While I won’t be completely disappearing—I plan on continuing other types of involvement with the Slavic Linguistics Society and am likely to keep a hand in the journal as well for a while—I do look forward to a break. I have enjoyed 25 years giving birth to, weaning, and helping JSL to walk on its own. I now have put it up for adoption by SLS, under the stewardship of which it has matured and eventually become self-sufficient. It is, I feel, high time for new leadership and new directions. As noted, the Society is in the midst of conducting a search for some individual(s) to replace me, and our expectation is that this will be resolved over the next few months. So I hope that when we reconvene in Ljubljana in September you will be able to meet the new editor(s) and discuss your ideas for the journal. I will of course also be at that meeting and fully expect to take part in the 2018 meeting in beautiful Victoria, BC,1 as well as the 2019 meeting, which will most likely be in historic Potsdam. It may even be in the cards for SLS 15 to take place here once again in the fair city of Bloomington, Indiana! In many previous columns, I have tried to thank all the various individuals, from Associate Editors and Board Members to authors and reviewers to Managing Editors and the many production assistants, who have contributed to making this journal the premier publication in the field. To list these folks again here would fill several pages, so let me simply extend my appreciation to all of you who have, over the years, given your time, energy, and expertise to JSL. You know who you are, and I thank each and every one of you from the bottom of my heart. While there has been much turn-over in all these roles, there are two individuals who do deserve to be singled out. First and foremost, of course, is George Fowler, with whom I created the journal in the first place and who served as Editor himself in the early years. Not only has his support, guidance, and advice been indispensible, but the ongoing cooperation with Slavica Publishers, which George facilitates (to put it mildly), has been paramount.","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"1 - 2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jsl.2017.0000","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45050334","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 preservation of length in the West Slavic and South-West Slavic genitive-locative dual in *-ū is unexpected and to date unexplained. BCS rùkū 'handsGEN.PL' is likely to continue a trisyllabic preform. At the same time, Indo-Iranian and Greek offer strong evidence for PIE o-stem and ā-stem archetypes that should have yielded late Proto-Slavic and OCS *-oju (thus, OCS *rǫkoju), rather than *-u. The actually attested OCS form is rǫku. The present study seeks to provide a unified account of these two problems. The development of some of the PIE dual endings in other daughter traditions, including Greek and its dialects, is also addressed.
{"title":"The Proto-Slavic Genitive-Locative Dual: A Reappraisal of (South-)West Slavic and Indo-European Evidence","authors":"Yaroslav Gorbachov","doi":"10.1353/JSL.2017.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/JSL.2017.0002","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Abstract:</p><p>The preservation of length in the West Slavic and South-West Slavic genitive-locative dual in *-<i>ū</i> is unexpected and to date unexplained. BCS <i>rùkū</i> 'hands<i>GEN.PL</i>' is likely to continue a trisyllabic preform. At the same time, Indo-Iranian and Greek offer strong evidence for PIE <i>o</i>-stem and <i>ā</i>-stem archetypes that should have yielded late Proto-Slavic and OCS *-<i>oju</i> (thus, OCS *<i>rǫkoju</i>), rather than *-<i>u</i>. The actually attested OCS form is <i>rǫku</i>. The present study seeks to provide a unified account of these two problems. The development of some of the PIE dual endings in other daughter traditions, including Greek and its dialects, is also addressed.</p>","PeriodicalId":52037,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Linguistics","volume":"25 1","pages":"63 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2017-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/JSL.2017.0002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47457572","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：