1. “Semantic Motivations for Aspectual Clusters of Russian verbs” Laura A. Janda University of Tromsø laura.janda@hum.uit.no hum.uit.no/lajanda

2. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Main Ideas Meaning of verb motivates aspectual behavior Conceptualization of different types of events and relationship to time Components of verb meaning correlate with selection of Perfectives

3. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Theoretical Framework Cluster model, four types of Perfectives Metaphors motivate Perfectives Cluster structure: 0-4 types of Perfectives Cluster structure largely predictable from the meanings of verbs Motion verbs are prototypical

4. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Overview Cluster model Types of Perfectives Implicational hierarchy Metaphorical motivation of Perfectives Travel vs. motion and Completability Granular vs. fluid and Singularizability Conclusions What is the structure of the aspect system? Why does it have this structure? Lexical meaning motivates aspectual behavior

5. Part 1 What is the structure of the aspect system?

6. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Problem: Model of aspectual “pairs” has a long tradition: –Vinogradov 1938, Šaxmatov 1941, Bondarko 1983, Čertkova 1996, Zaliznjak & Šmelev 2000, Timberlake 2004 Suspicions that aspectual relationships involve more complex clusters have arisen: –Isačenko 1960, Bertinetto & Delfitto 2000, Tatevosov 2002, Janda forthcoming

7. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 What is an aspectual cluster? An aspectual cluster is a group of verbs joined via transitive relationships on the basis of aspectual derivational morphology –All verbs in a cluster are aspectually related to a single lexical item In addition to Imperfective Activity verbs, an aspectual cluster can include four types of Perfective verbs: –Natural Perfective, Specialized Perfective, Complex Act, Single Act

8. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Four types of Perfectives: Natural Perfective: –написать p ‘write’, связать p ‘tie’, о(б)щипать p ‘pinch/pluck’, окрепнуть p ‘get stronger’ Specialized Perfective: –переписать p ‘rewrite’, развязать p ‘untie’, переработать p ‘revise’, вдуть p ‘blow in’, выщипать p ‘pluck out’ Complex Act Perfective: –пописать p ‘write a while’, поработать p ‘work a while’, подуть p ‘blow a while’, пощипать p ‘pinch/pluck a while’, поскрипеть p ‘squeak a while’ Single Act Perfective: –дунуть p ‘blow once’, щипнуть p ‘pinch/pluck once’, скрипнуть p ‘squeak once’

9. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Cluster components: Five items (Imperfective Activity + four types of Perfectives) can compose 31 different combinations, but only 12 cluster types are attested The three metaphors motivate an Implicational Hierarchy that constrains the structure of aspectual clusters

10. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 The Implicational Hierarchy: There is a single Implicational Hierarchy that predicts all and only the aspectual clusters that exist in Russian. –This result is based on empirical study of two multiply stratified samples of over 350 verb clusters (several thousand verbs).

11. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 The Implicational Hierarchy: Activity щипать i ‘pinch/pluck’ > (Natural/Specialized Perfective) о(б)щипать p ‘pinch/pluck’/выщипать p ‘pluck out’ > Complex Act Perfective пощипать p ‘pinch/pluck a while’ > Single Act Perfective щипнуть p ‘pinch/pluck once’

12. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Cluster Structures Activity Activity + Natural Perfective Activity + Specialized Perfective Activity + Natural Perfective + Specialized Perfective To any of the above one can add either: …+ Complex Act Perfective …+ Complex Act Perfective + Single Act Perfective Total: 12 extant cluster types

13. Part 2 Why does the aspect system have this structure?

14. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Metaphors and types of perfectives: Three metaphors govern the Russian aspectual system These metaphors motivate the derivation of four different types of Perfective verbs

15. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 The three metaphors Solid vs. Substance => Perfective vs. Imperfective Travel vs. Motion => Construal of Completability Granular vs. Fluid => Construal of Singularizability

16. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Travel vs. Motion One can travel to a destination –or – One can move without a destination This distinction is grammaticalized in Russian motion verbs: идти i ‘walk (somewhere)’ vs. ходить i ‘walk (around, back and forth)’ This can be likened to the Completability of an action

17. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Completability: Писатель пишет i книгу. ‘The writer is writing a book.’ Профессор работает i в университете. ‘The professor is working at the university.’ Note that Completability is a scale involving various kinds of construal.

18. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Completability: Many verbs are Ambiguous: –Completable Писатель пишет i книгу ‘A writer is writing a book’ –Non-Completable Писатель пишет i книги ‘A writer writes books’ Some verbs are Non-Completable: стонать i ‘moan’ –But some can be Completable if specialized работать i ‘work’ > переработать p ‘revise’ Few verbs are unambiguously Completable: крепнуть i > окрепнуть p ‘get stronger’

19. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 What Completability means for aspectual derivation: Only verbs that can be construed as Completable have Natural Perfectives –писать i ‘write’ > написать p ‘write’, крепнуть i ‘get stronger’ > окрепнуть p ‘get stronger’ Only verbs that can be construed as Non-Completable have Complex Act Perfectives –писать i ‘write’> пописать p ‘write a while’, стонать i ‘moan’> постонать p ‘moan a while’, работать i ‘work’> поработать p ‘work a while’ Verbs that can be Completable if specialized have Specialized Perfectives –писать i ‘write’> переписать p ‘rewrite’, работать i ‘work’ > переработать p ‘revise’

20. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Granular vs. Fluid: Substances can be: Particulate, like sand Continuous, like water This can be likened to Singularizability of an action

21. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Singularizability: Мальчик дул i на одуванчик. ‘The boy was blowing on the dandelion.’ Мальчик дунул p на одуванчик. ‘The boy blew once on the dandelion.’ Профессор работал i в университете. ‘The professor was working at the university.’

22. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 What Singularizability means for aspectual derivation: Only verbs that can be construed as Non- Completable and have a Complex Act Perfective can also have a Single Act Perfective: щипать i ‘pinch/pluck’ + пощипать p ‘pinch/pluck a while’ > щипнуть p ‘pinch/pluck once’ дуть i ‘blow’ + подуть p ‘blow a while’ > дунуть p ‘blow once’ скрипеть i ‘squeak’ + поскрипеть p ‘squeak a while’ > скрипнуть p ‘squeak once’ работать i ‘work’ + поработать p ‘work a while’ > *работнуть p ‘work once’ [NB: Some are formed ad-hoc]

23. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Singularizability and motion verbs: The Non-Completable motion verbs can also be construed as Singularizable –ходить i ‘walk’ can refer to multiple round-trips, in which case there is a Single Act Perfective сходить p ‘make a single round trip’

24. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Conclusions: The cluster model is more accurate than the “pair” model Cluster structures are highly constrained and transparently motivated by meanings of verbs: –Verbs with Completable construals form Natural Perfectives –Verbs with Non-Completable construals form Complex Act Perfectives –Verbs with Granular construals form Single Act Perfectives Motion verbs play a prototypical role in the system

25. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Bibliography Avilova, N. S. 1968. Dvuvidovye glagoly s zaimstvovannoi osnovoi v russkom literaturnom jazyke novogo vremeni, Voprosy iazykoznaniia: 66–78. Bertinetto, Pier Marco, and Denis Delfitto. 2000. Aspect vs. Actionality: Why They Should Be Kept Apart, Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, ed. Östen Dahl, 189–225, Berlin. Bondarko, Aleksandr V. 1983. Principy funkcional’noi grammatiki i voprosy aspektologii. Leningrad. Chertkova, Marina Iu. 1996. Grammaticheskaia kategoriia vida v sovremennom russkom iazyke. Moscow. Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford. Galton, Herbert. 1976. The Main Functions of the Slavic Verbal Aspect. Skopje. Gladney, Frank Y. 1982. Biaspectual Verbs and the Syntax of Aspect in Russian, Slavic and East European Journal 26: 202–215. Haspelmath, Martin. 1997. From Space to Time: Temporal Adverbials in the World’s Languages. Munich. Isachenko, A. V. 1960. Grammaticheskii stroi russkogo iazyka v sopostavlenii s slovatskim – Chast’ vtoraia: morfologiia. Bratislava. Janda, Laura A. 1995. Unpacking Markedness, Linguistics in the Redwoods: The Expansion of a New Paradigm in Linguistics, ed. Eugene Casad, 207–233. Berlin. —. 2000a. Cognitive Linguistics, http://www.indiana.edu/~slavconf/SLING2K.http://www.indiana.edu/~slavconf/SLING2K —. 2000b. A Cognitive Model of the Russian Accusative Case, Trudy mezhdunarodnoi konferencii Kognitivnoe modelirovanie 4, ed. R. K. Potapova, V. D. Solov’ev and V. N. Poliakov, 20–43. Moscow. —. 2002a. Sémantika pádů v češtině, Setkání s češtinou, ed. Alena Krausov á, Markéta Slezáková, and Zdeňka Svobodov á, 29–35. Prague. —. 2002b. The Case for Competing Conceptual Systems, Cognitive Linguistics Today. Studies in Language 6, ed. Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk and Kamila Turewicz, 355–374. Frankfurt. —. 2002c. Concepts of Case and Time in Slavic, Glossos 3 http://www.seelrc.org/glossos/.http://www.seelrc.org/glossos/

26. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Bibliography —. 2002d. Cognitive Hot Spots in the Russian Case System, Peircean Semiotics: The State of the Art. The Peirce Seminar Papers 5, ed. Michael Shapiro, 165-188. New York. —. 2002e. The Conceptualization of Events and Their Relationship to Time in Russian, Glossos 2 http://www.seelrc.org/glossos/. http://www.seelrc.org/glossos/ —. 2002f. Cases in Collision, Cases in Collusion: The Semantic Space of Case in Czech and Russian, Where One’s Tongue Rules Well: A Festschrift for Charles E. Townsend, ed. Laura A. Janda, Steven Franks, and Ronald Feldstein, 43–61. Columbus, Ohio. —. 2003. A User-friendly Conceptualization of Aspect, Slavic and East European Journal 47: 251–281. —. 2004a. Border Zones in the Russian Case System, Sokrovennye smysly, ed. Iu. D. Apresian, 378–398. Moscow. —. 2004b. A Metaphor in Search of a Source Domain: The Categories of Slavic Aspect, Cognitive Linguistics 15: 471–527. —. 2006. A Metaphor for Aspect in Slavic, Henrik Birnbaum in Memoriam. International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics 44–45: 249–60. —. Forthcoming a. Aspectual Clusters of Russian Verbs, Studies in Language. —. Forthcoming b. Totally Normal Chaos: The Aspectual Behavior of Russian Motion Verbs, Harvard Ukrainian Studies. —. Forthcoming c. What Makes Russian Bi-aspectual Verbs Special, Slavic Contributions to Cognitive Linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics Research, ed. Dagmar Divjak and Agata Kochanska. Berlin/New York. Janda, Laura A., and Steven J. Clancy. 2002. The Case Book for Russian. Bloomington, IN. —. 2006. The Case Book for Czech. Bloomington, IN.

27. Laura A. Janda Ohrid 2008 Bibliography Janda, Laura A., and John Korba. In print. Beyond the Pair: Aspectual Derivation for Learners of Russian. Jászay, Lázl. 1999. Vidovye korreliaty pri dvuvidovykh glagolakh, Studia Russica 17: 169–177. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago. —. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York. Muchnik, I. P. 1966. Razvitie sistemy dvuvidovyx glagolov v sovremennom russkom jazyke, Voprosy iazykoznaniia: 61–75. Smith, Carlota S. 1991. The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht. Shakhmatov, A. A. 1941. Sintaksis russkogo jayzka. Leningrad. Tatevosov, Sergej. 2002. The Parameter of Actionality, Linguistic Typology 6: 317–401. Timberlake, Alan. 2004. A Reference Grammar of Russian. Cambridge. Vendler, Zeno. 1957. Verbs and times, The Philosophical Review 66: 143–160. Vinogradov, V. V. 1938. Sovremennyi russkii iazyk. Grammaticheskoe uchenie o slove. Moscow. Wheeler, Marcus. 1972/1992. The Oxford Russian-English Dictionary, 2nd edition. Oxford. Zalizniak, Anna A. and Aleksei D. Shmelev. 2000. Vvedenie v russkuiu aspektologiiu. Moscow.