1. “The Many Faces of Perfective Aspect in Russian”
Laura A. Janda
University of Tromsø

2. Overview Cluster Model: Three Metaphors Cluster Model Predictions
Solid vs. Substance => Perfective vs. Imperfective
Travel vs. Motion => Construal of Completability
Granular vs. Fluid => Construal of Singularizability
Cluster Model Predictions
Complex Act Perfectives and Biaspectuals
Single Act Perfectives and Allomorphy
Natural Perfectives and “Empty” Prefixes
Semantic Profiles
Constructional Profiles
Grammatical Profiles

3. Slavic Aspect:
Contrasts perfective vs. imperfective (no progressive and no neutral aspect)
Is independent of tense and other verbal categories
Implements imperfective (as unmarked) where other languages would have perfective
Has a complex and seemingly incoherent array of uses
Has a very complex system for aspectual derivation

4. 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

5. 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

6. Four types of Perfectives:
Natural Perfective:
napisat’p ‘write’, svjazat’p ‘tie’, o(b)ščipat’p ‘pinch/pluck’, оkrepnut’p ‘get stronger’
Specialized Perfective:
perepisat’p ‘rewrite’, razvjazat’p ‘untie’, pererabotat’p ‘revise’, vdut’p ‘blow in’, vyščipat’p ‘pluck out’
Complex Act Perfective:
popisat’p ‘write a while’, porabotqt’p ‘work a while’, podut’p ‘blow a while’, poščipatp ‘pinch/pluck a while’, poskripet’p ‘squeak a while’
Single Act Perfective:
dunut’p ‘blow once’, ščipnut’p ‘pinch/pluck once’, skripnut’p ‘squeak once’

7. The three metaphors Solid vs. Substance Travel vs. Motion
Construal of event aspect type
Perfective vs. Imperfective
Travel vs. Motion
Construal of Completability
Natural & Specialized Perfective vs. Complex Act Perfective
Granular vs. Fluid
Construal of Singularizability
Single Act Perfective

8. Solid vs. Substance => Perfective vs. Imperfective
Metaphor 1
Solid vs. Substance => Perfective vs. Imperfective

9. Traditional Feature Analyses
Boundedness, Totality, Definiteness, Change vs. Stability, Sequencing vs. Simultaneity, Exterior vs. Interior, Figure vs. Ground, Punctuality vs. Durativity, Resultative
Lack intricacy needed to account for uses
Are ultimately new synonyms for perfective vs. imperfective

10. The Two Types of Matter
Discrete Solid Object:
Fluid substance:

11. Properties of Matter and Parameters of Aspect
Inherent Properties -- correspond to inherent structure of situations and act as default values
Interactional Properties -- correspond to discourse structure, and can override Inherent Properties
Human Interactional Properties -- correspond to pragmatic structure, and can override Inherent Properties

12. A. - G.: Properties inherent to types of matter
A. Edges
B. Shape
C. Integrity
D. Countability
E. Streamability
F. Penetrability
G. Conversions

13. A. Edges
Perfective:
Has edges 1)
Imperfective
Has no edges 2)

14. B. Shape Perfective Imperfective Can have various shapes 3), 4), 5)
Has no shape but can spread 6), 7), 8), 9)

15. C. Integrity Perfective: Imperfective: A unique occurrence 10)
Continuous processes and repetitions 11), 12)

16. H. – K.: Interactions of types of matter and discourse structure
H. Compatibility
I. Dynamicity
J. Salience
K. Contiguity

17. H. Compatibility Perfective: Sequencing and future 24), 25), 26)
Imperfective:
Simultaneity and present 27), 28), 29), 30)

18. H. Compatibility, cont’d.
Perfective embedded in imperfective:
Interruption of ongoing action 31)

19. I. Dynamicity Perfective: moves story along 32)
Imperfective slows story down 32)

20. J. Salience Perfective: obvious, foregrounded events 32)
Imperfective: backgrounded events 32), 33)

21. Metaphor 2 Travel vs. Motion => Construal of Completability
Natural & Specialized Perfective vs. Complex Act Perfective

22. Travel vs. Motion One can travel to a destination
or –
One can move without a destination
This distinction is grammaticalized in Russian motion verbs: idtii ‘walk (somewhere)’ vs. xodit’i ‘walk (around, back and forth)’
This can be likened to the Completability of an action

23. Completability:
Pisatel’ pišeti knigu.
‘The writer is writing a book.’
Professor rabotaeti v universitete.
‘The professor is working at the university.’
Note that Completability is a scale involving various kinds of construal.

24. Completability: Many verbs are Ambiguous:
Completable
Pisatel’ pišeti knigu ‘A writer is writing a book’
Non-Completable
Pisatel’ pišeti knigi ‘A writer writes books’
Some verbs are Non-Completable: stonat’i ‘moan’
But some can be Completable if specialized
rabotat’i ‘work’ > pererabotat’p ‘revise’
Few verbs are unambiguously Completable:
krepnut’i > okrepnut’p ‘get stronger’

25. What Completability means for aspectual derivation:
Only verbs that can be construed as Completable have Natural Perfectives
pisat’i ‘write’ > napisat’p ‘write’, krepnut’i ‘get stronger’ > okrepnut’p ‘get stronger’
Only verbs that can be construed as Non-Completable have Complex Act Perfectives
pisat’i ‘write’> popisat’p ‘write a while’, stonat’i ‘moan’> postonat’p ‘moan a while’, rabotat’i ‘work’> porabotat’p ‘work a while’
Verbs that can be Completable if specialized have Specialized Perfectives
pisat’i ‘write’> perepisat’p ‘rewrite’, rabotat’i ‘work’ > pererabotat’p ‘revise’

26. Granular vs. Fluid => Construal of Singularizability
Metaphor 3
Granular vs. Fluid => Construal of Singularizability
Single Act Perfective

27. Granular vs. Fluid: Substances can be:
Particulate, like sand
Continuous, like water
This can be likened to Singularizability of an action

28. Singularizability: Mal’čik duli na oduvančik.
‘The boy was blowing on the dandelion.’
Mal’čik dunulp na oduvančik.
‘The boy blew once on the dandelion.’
Professor rabotali v universitete.
‘The professor was working at the university.’

29. What Singularizability means for aspectual derivation:
Verbs that can be construed as Non-Completable and have a Complex Act Perfective can also have a Single Act Perfective:
ščipat’i ‘pinch/pluck’ + poščipat’p ‘pinch/pluck a while’ > ščipnut’p ‘pinch/pluck once’
dut’i ‘blow’ + podut’p ‘blow a while’ > dunut’p ‘blow once’
skripet’i ‘squeak’ + poskripet’p ‘squeak a while’ > skripnut’p ‘squeak once’
rabotat’i ‘work’ + porabotat’p ‘work a while’ > *rabotnut’p ‘work once’ [NB: Some are formed ad-hoc]

30. Singularizability and motion verbs:
The Non-Completable motion verbs can also be construed as Singularizable
xodit’i ‘walk’ can refer to multiple round-trips, in which case there is a Single Act Perfective sxodit’p ‘make a single round trip’
On sxodilp v magazin
‘He went to the store
(and came back once)’

31. Advantages of the cluster model:
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

32. Cluster Model Predictions
Complex Act Perfectives and Biaspectuals
Single Act Perfectives and Allomorphy

33. Complex Act Perfectives and Biaspectuals

34. Biaspectual verbs
Can express both Imperfective and Natural Perfective with the same morphological form > indicates strong tendency for Completability, which should hinder formation of Complex Act Perfectives
Over 90% are foreign borrowings
All foreign verbs have –ova- suffix, which gives verbal inflection but does not designate aspect
Empirical study tests prediction of Cluster Model

35. Empirical study Hypothesis:
Bi-aspectual borrowed verbs are strongly Completable (telic), so they will be unlikely to form Complex Act Perfectives with po-
Imperfective borrowed verbs will be more likely to form Complex Act Perfectives with po-

36. Empirical study of Biaspectuals
Methodology:
Cull all foreign verbs from a single source
Sort Biaspectual vs. Imperfective
Collect data on frequency of unprefixed and po- prefixed (Complex Act Perfective) forms

37. Results of empirical study
555 foreign verbs in Wheeler 1972/1992
349 (63%) Bi-aspectual
206 (37%) Imperfective
Bi-aspectual
borrowed verbs
Imperfective
unpref
po- pref
Avg # hits
1,903 51
1,973
265
Max # hits
77,799
2,444
25,784
1,697
Min # hits 19 20
Is this significant?
Yes! Logistic regression model using Pearson’s
statistic yields and the associated
p-value is <.0001

38. Single Act Perfectives and Allomorphy

39. A little problem...
The Cluster Model claims that Single Act Perfectives are formed both with the suffix -nu (as in čixnut’ ‘sneeze once’) and with the prefix s- (primarily for motion verbs like sxodit’ ‘go someplace and come back once’).
Чихнет

40. But...
this is a strange combination of -nu and s- and there is very little in the scholarly literature to support grouping these two morphemes together

41. Allomorphy hypothesis
Suffix -nu and prefix s- are allomorphs if
They are in complementary distribution
They have the same function
Databases of Single Act Perfectives with -nu and s-
Statistical Analysis of distribution

42. -nu database
295 Imperfective verbs form Single Act Perfectives with -nu
collected by Anastasia Makarova
data from Švedova et al. 1980, Zaliznjak 1980 and “Exploring Emptiness” database at UiT
Плеснуть
или плескануть?
includes both -nu and -аnu verbs like pleskat’ ‘splash’ which forms plesnut’ and pleskanut’ ‘splash once’
includes both reflexive and non-reflexive verbs like kačat’/kačnut’, kačat’sja/kačnut’sja ‘swing/swing once’

43. Схитрил?
s- database
105 Imperfective verbs form Single Act Perfectives with s-
collected by Laura Janda with help from Anastasia Makarova
data from 17 V Dictionary, Zaliznjak 1980 and Isačenko 1960
includes 11 motion verbs like xodit’/sxodit’ ‘go/go someplace and come back once’
includes both reflexive and non-reflexive verbs like lovčit’/slovčit’, lovčit’sja/slovčit’sja ‘be sneaky/do one sneaky thing’

44. Are -nu and s- in complementary distribution?

45. chi-squared = 259.3
(p<0.0001, df=5)
Cramer’s V = 0.8
(enormous effect)

46. Do -nu and s- have the same function?
Yes, they can both mean ‘do something once’
There is one verb that uses both -nu and s- to form synonyms: xvastat’: xvastnut’/xvastanut’, sxvastat’ ‘brag once’
There are several verbs that use -nu and s- simultaneously: sgrustnut’, sgrustnut’sja, ‘feel sad once’ smetnut’, smetnut’sja ‘leap sideways (once; of animals)’, struxnut’ ‘do one cowardly thing’
Хвастнул
или схвастал?

47. The function of -nu and s- is not entirely identical...
With -nu we usually extract a single cycle from a series of repeated events: čixat’/čixnut’ ‘sneeze/sneeze once’, lizat’/liznut’ ‘lick/lick once’
With s- we often have something that actually only happened once: malodušestvovat’/smalodušestvovat’ ‘act cowardly/do once cowardly thing’
Real series
of events
Potential series
of events
-nu s-

48. Evaluation of the Allomorphy hypothesis
Are -nu and s- in complementary distribution?
Do -nu and s- have the same function?
Is the Allomorphy hypothesis confirmed?
Is the Cluster Model confirmed?
Statistically speaking, almost.
As far as we can tell, almost.
Mostly.
Yes.

49. Natural Perfectives and “Empty” Prefixes
Semantic Profiles
Constructional Profiles
Grammatical Profiles

50. Reasonable answer: ONE prefix
Thought experiment
That’s weird!
Imagine a language with aspect
Two values: Imperfective and Perfective
Perfective = prefix + Imperfective
Prefixation contributes only “Perfective”
How many prefixes does this language need?
Reasonable answer: ONE prefix
… but Russian has 19!
(Krongauz 1998:64 ,99)

51. “Exploring Emptiness” research group at the University of Tromsø
Investigating verbal morphology
traditionally claimed to be semantically “empty”
Olga
Lyashevskaya
Tore
Nesset
Svetlana
Sokolova
yours
truly
Julia Kuznetsova & Anastasia Makarova
(not pictured)

52. Natural Perfectives and Linguistic Profiles
~2000 imperfective verbs in Russian form a Natural Perfective with an “empty prefix”
19 prefixes supposedly have the same “empty” meaning
How can we prove that the “empty” prefixes are not empty?
Linguistic Profiles
Semantic Profiles
Constructional Profiles
Grammatical Profiles
Databases and statistical analyses

53. Natural Perfectives and Empty Prefixes
Semantic Profiles
with Olga Lyashevskaya
Semantic Classes assigned by the Russian National Corpus

54. ●
RNC
Russian grammar
Morphosyntactic annotation
Lexical taxonomy
Examples
WSD
Future directions

55. chi-squared =
df = 10
p-value < 2.2e-16
Cramers V = 0.3
(moderate effect)

56. Natural Perfectives and Empty Prefixes
Constructional Profiles
Forthcoming PhD dissertation by Svetlana Sokolova

57. Constructional Profiles of Verbs
Relative frequency distributions of constructions
Constructional profiles show that near synonyms can behave very differently
Constructional profiles can show that the “empty” prefixes are not so empty

58. Gruzit’ ‘load’: one verb with three “empty” prefixes?
It is traditionally claimed that in aspectual pairs such as pisat’/napisat’ ‘write’, morozit’/zamorozit’ ‘freeze’, obedat’/poobedat’ ‘eat lunch’ the prefixes na-, zа-, pо- are “empty” (have zero meaning)
A few verbs have more than one “empty” prefix: gruzit’ ‘load’ has three Natural Perfectives nagruzit’, zagruzit’, pogruzit’
The constructional profiles of these three verbs are very different, indicating that the prefixes cannot be empty (How could there be three different zeroes?)

59. Relevant Constructions
Accusative marks load (locatum)
Acc + na/v + Acc (nagruzit’ jaščiki na teležku ‘load boxes onto the wagon’)
Acc (zagruzit’ ugol’ budet problematično ‘loading the coal will be problematic’)
Accusative marks container (location)
Acc + Inst (on nagruzil sanki proviziej ‘he loaded the sleighs with provisions’)
Acc (nagruzili telegi i uexali v gorod ‘they loaded the wagons and rode to town’)
Data: 935 sentences from the Russian National Corpus

60. chi-squared =
(p<0.0001, df=6)
Cramer’s V = 0.507
(large effect)

61. Natural Perfectives and Empty Prefixes
Grammatical Profiles

62. Distribution of Paradigm Forms for Natural Perfectives
formed with prefixes
za-, na-, pro-, s-
198,132 datapoints
representing 467 verbs in RNC

63. chi-squared =
(p<0.0001, df=9)
Cramer’s V = 0.1
(small effect)

64. Conclusions Cluster Model provides a better analysis of
Perfective vs. Imperfective than feature analysis
Aspectual relations than traditional “pair” model
Cluster Model makes predictions borne out by the data
Biaspectual verbs are strongly Completable and avoid formation of Complex Act Perfectives
Suffix -nu and prefix s- collaborate in a state of near-allomorphy to form Single Act Perfectives
Cluster Model helps debunk “empty” prefix myth by showing relationship between prefixes and
Semantic profiles
Constructional profiles
Grammatical profiles