Biblioteca Di Studi Slavistici – 39 – Direttore Responsabile Laura Salmon (Università Di Genova)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BIBLIOTECA DI STUDI SLAVISTICI – 39 – DIRETTORE RESPONSABILE Laura Salmon (Università di Genova) SEGRETERIA DI REDAZIONE Maria Bidovec (Università di Udine) REDAZIONE Rosanna Benacchio (Università di Padova) Maria Cristina Bragone (Università di Pavia) Andrea Ceccherelli (Università di Bologna) Giuseppe Dell’Agata (Università di Pisa) Francesca Romoli (Università di Pisa) Laura Rossi (Università di Milano) COMITATO SCIENTIFICO INTERNAZIONALE Maria Di Salvo (Università di Milano) Alexander Etkind (European University Institute) Lazar Fleishman (Stanford University) Marcello Garzaniti (Università di Firenze) Lucyna Gebert (Università di Roma “La Sapienza”) Harvey Goldblatt (Yale University) Mark Lipoveckij (University of Colorado-Boulder) Jordan Ljuckanov (Bălgarska Akademija na Naukite) Roland Marti (Universität des Saarlandes) Michael Moser (Universität Wien) Ivo Pospíšil (Masarykova univerzita) Krassimir Stantchev (Università Roma Tre) The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality Issues of grammaticalization edited by Rosanna Benacchio Alessio Muro Svetlana Slavkova Firenze University Press 2017 The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality : issues of grammaticalization / edited by Rosanna Benacchio, Alessio Muro, Svetlana Slavkova. – Firenze : Firenze University Press, 2017. (Biblioteca di Studi slavistici ; 39) http://digital.casalini.it/9788864536989 ISBN 978-88-6453-697-2 (print) ISBN 978-88-6453-698-9 (online) La collana Biblioteca di Studi Slavistici, (<http://www.fupress.com/COLLANE/biblioteca-di- studi-slavistici/47), fondata per iniziativa dell’Associazione Italiana degli Slavisti, opera in sinergia con la rivista Studi Slavistici (<http://fupress.com/riviste/studi-slavistici/17>). Questo volume è stato pubblicato grazie al contributo del Dipartimento di Studi Linguistici e Letterari (DiSLL) dell’Università di Padova. In copertina: Immagine creata da Silvano Longo. Peer Review Process All publications are submitted to an external refereeing process under the responsibility of the FUP Editorial Board and the Scientific Committees of the individual series. The works published in the FUP catalogue are evaluated and approved by the Editorial Board of the publishing house. For a more detailed description of the refereeing process we refer to the official documents published on the website and in the online catalogue of the FUP (www.fupress.com). Firenze University Press Editorial Board A. Dolfi (Editor-in-Chief), M. Boddi, A. Bucelli, R. Casalbuoni, M. Garzaniti, M.C. Grisolia, P. Guarnieri, R. Lanfredini, A. Lenzi, P. Lo Nostro, G. Mari, A. Mariani, P.M. Mariano, S. Marinai, R. Minuti, P. Nanni, G. Nigro, A. Perulli, M.C. Torricelli. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). This book is printed on acid-free paper CC 2018 Firenze University Press Università degli Studi di Firenze Firenze University Press via Cittadella, 7, 50144 Firenze, Italy www.fupress.com Printed in Italy INDICE From the editors VII От редакторов XI P. Arkadiev Borrowed preverbs and the limits of contact-induced change in aspectual systems 1 R. Benacchio, Грамматикализация глагольного H. Steenwijk вида в резьянском диалекте: исконно славянская и романская лексика 23 D. Bertocci “Intensive” verbal prefixes in Archaic Latin 41 W. Breu, Видовые приставки в языковом контакте M. Pila, (на материале молизско-славянского, L. Scholze резьянского и верхнелужицкого микроязыков) 59 S.M. Dickey Prefixation in the rise of Slavic aspect 85 F. Esvan On the dynamism of aspectual pair formation in Czech 103 J. Kamphuis The role of prefixation in Old Church Slavonic 115 A. Muro Cross-linguistic considerations on preverb stacking (with special reference to Bulgarian) 137 E.V. Petruchina Аспектуальные антиномии в русском языке (на славянском фоне) 153 V. Plu ng jan К списку двувидовых глаголов в русском языке: история пасть 167 Rosanna Benacchio, Alessio Muro, Svetlana Slavkova (edited by), The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality: issues of grammaticalization, ISBN 978-88-6453-697-2 (print) ISBN 978-88-6453-698-9 (online), CC BY 4.0, 2017 Firenze University Press VI The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality L. Ruvoletto Префиксация глаголов неопределенного движения в русском языке 183 S. Slavkova Супралексический префикс по- в русском и болгарском языках 197 B. Wiemer О роли приставок и суффиксов на ранних и поздних этапах истории славянского вида 219 Contributors 255 From the editors One of the currently most studied topics in the field of verbal aspect and its grammaticalization is aspectual prefixation (a.k.a. preverbation). It is an estab- lished fact that in the Slavic languages (the most well-studied in terms of aspect, being traditionally considered prototypical as far as this grammatical category is concerned) the aspect system is based on perfective forms arising from the merger of verbal bases with prefixes acting asbounders (ограничители), which originally performed the function of markers of adverbial meanings. These pre- fixal morphemes (called simplyprefixes or preverbs by different authors) added meanings related to the spatial location or dynamics of the predicate, but sub- sequently, in the diachronic process of grammaticalization, they acquired more abstract meanings, first among them that ofevent culmination, i.e. the attainment of the inherent final bound (предел) of the event, which is at the basis of perfec- tivity (as manifested in Slavic). Similar developments have also characterized other languages (non-Slavic, some belonging to the Indo-European stock, but by no means exclusively); these languages are also characterized by the presence of preverbs in their verbal system. The studies collected in the present volume pursue this line of research, an- alyzing and comparing not only different Slavic languages, but also other lan- guages (both Indo-European and non-Indo-European), which at some level also display the category of verbal aspect as well as the phenomenon of preverbation (whether still productive or not any longer). More precisely, the studies in this collection attempt to shed light on the variation to be found in verbal systems that use preverbs as perfectivizers by identifying the ways such morphemes are used and the limitations on their use. Another line of research pursued in this volume attempts to outline various possible paths of grammaticalization (and lexicaliza- tion) which the morphemes involved in various aspect system may undergo. All this is done in order to arrive at a deeper knowledge of the category of verbal aspect, with special focus on the Slavic phenomenology. Attention is also paid to the grammaticalization pathways leading to the formation of aspect systems in situations of language contact, a theme to which three works are dedicated. Arkad’ev focuses on the peculiarities of the aspect systems developed by non-Slavic languages in situations of contact with Slavic languages (Yiddish, Romani, Livonian and Istroromanian). Two papers (Bena- Rosanna Benacchio, Alessio Muro, Svetlana Slavkova (edited by), The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality: issues of grammaticalization, ISBN 978-88-6453-697-2 (print) ISBN 978-88-6453-698-9 (online), CC BY 4.0, 2017 Firenze University Press VIII The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality cchio and Steenwijk; Breu, Pila and Scholze), on the other hand, focus on the grammaticalization of aspect in minority Slavic varieties that have developed in situations of contact with Romance or Germanic languages. Other studies focus on ancient languages: Bertocci analyses the aspectual properties of some Latin preverbs, and Kamphuis aims to define more precisely the contribution of preverbation to the development of Slavic verbal aspect in the historical phase represented by Old Church Slavonic, which displays a situ- ation still far from that of modern Slavic varieties. The diachronic pathways leading to the emergence of Slavic verbal aspect are dealt with in Dickey’s study, which focuses on the analysis of the preverb u-, which is argued to have played a key role in the development of the perfec- tivizing function of Slavic preverbs. Wiemer’s contribution is dedicated to the interplay of the morphological mechanisms of prefixation and suffixation in the various stages of grammaticalization of various Slavic aspect systems. Focusing on modern Slavic languages, Esvan explores the mechanisms of perfectivization and imperfectivization of verbal loans in contemporary Czech, while Slavkova compares the behaviour of the superlexical prefixpo- in Bulgar- ian and Russian. Modern Russian is dealt with by Ruvoletto, who explores the functions that preverbation can assume with the class of verbs of indeterminate motion. The same language is the topic of Plungjan’s paper: starting from a dia- chronic analysis of the (bi)aspectual value of the Russian verb past’, the author describes a particular case in the formation of aspectual pairs in this language, i.e. the so-called “two-stem perfectivization”. Also focusing on Russian (though on the background of a comparative Slavic perspective), Petruchina’s study deals with some important theoretical and terminological issues concerning the gram- maticalization of aspect and the formation of the aspectual pairs. Finally, Muro’s paper is dedicated to the phenomenon of preverb stacking, especially productive in some Slavic languages such as Bulgarian; his contri- bution also contains