University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Linguistics ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-1-2016 A Cognitive Grammar Analysis of the Semantics of the Russian Verbal Prefix na- Christopher Hart-Moynihan Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds Recommended Citation Hart-Moynihan, Christopher. "A Cognitive Grammar Analysis of the Semantics of the Russian Verbal Prefix na-." (2016). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds/14 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistics ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. i Christopher Hart-Moynihan Candidate Linguistics Department This thesis is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Thesis Committee: Melissa Axelrod, Chairperson Tanya Ivanova, Member William Croft, Member ii A Cognitive Grammar Analysis of the Semantics of the Russian Verbal Prefix na- by CHRISTOPHER HART-MOYNIHAN THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Linguistics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico May 2016 iii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to two families: Robert, Priscilla, and Luke, and Carla, Joel, and all the Jacobsens/Beauchamps. Thank you for your support. By hook or by crook! iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like first to acknowledge my advisor, Dr. Melissa Axelrod, who has always provided support and counsel, even during moments of doubt and indecision. I also would like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. William Croft and Dr. Tanya Ivanova, whose commentary was invaluable throughout the continuous process of revision and improvement. Finally, many thanks are due to all of the friends and colleagues who have walked with me for all or part of this journey. v May 2016 A Cognitive Grammar Analysis of the Semantics of the Russian Verbal Prefix na- by Christopher Hart-Moynihan B.A., Linguistics, College of William & Mary, 2011 M.A., Linguistics, University of New Mexico, 2016 ABSTRACT The Russian verbal prefix na- is one of a set of aspectual prefixes that exhibit characteristics of both derivational and inflectional morphemes. In addition to forming aspectual pairs as a grammatical marker of Perfective aspect, na-, in many cases, also carries lexical meaning; in these cases, na-prefixation changes the lexical/semantic meaning of the verbal stem, resulting in a distinct lexical item. I examine a sample of 40 verbs to compare the frequencies of na- as a lexicalized prefix and as a grammaticalized prefix. I then propose a radial category model to account for the polysemous functions of na-, with several metonymically and metaphorically related functions branching out from a single spatial prototype. vi Table of Contents 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………..1 2. Theoretical orientation and background……………………………………………………...7 2.1. Cognitive and Construction Grammar……………………………………………...7 2.1.1. Notions of construal, frame, base, profile………………………………..8 2.1.2. Construction grammar…………………………………………………..11 2.1.3. Radical construction grammar…………………………………………..11 2.1.4. Application to Russian na-.......................................................................15 2.2. Cognitive Semantics……………………………………………………………….17 2.2.1. Frame Semantics……………………………………………………….. 17 2.2.2. Polysemy………………………………………………………………...18 2.2.3. Metaphor and metonymy………………………………………………..19 2.2.4. Prototype categories and radial categories……………………………...19 2.2.5. Application to Russian na-……………………………………………...21 2.3. Cognitive approaches to aspect………………………………………………..21 2.3.1. Complex events…………………………………………………………23 2.3.2. Croft’s Verbs……………………………………………………………23 2.3.2.1. Situation types – Vendler…………………………………….23 2.3.2.2. Croft’s revision of Vendler’s categories……………………..24 2.3.3. Application to Russian na-……………………………………………..25 2.4. Cognitive and functional approaches to language change…………………….27 2.4.1. Grammaticalization……………………………………………………..28 2.4.2. Lexicalization…………………………………………………………...28 2.4.3. Unidirectionality………………………………………………………..29 2.4.4. Application to Russian na-……………………………………………..30 3. Previous research on verbal aspect in Russian……………………………………………...33 3.1. Formal approaches: Svenonius, Filip, Polinsky…………………………………..33 vii 3.2. Cognitive approaches: Janda, Croft, Baydimirova, Endresen et al……………….36 3.3. Constructional/Diachronic approaches: Peskova…………………………………43 4. The case of na-………………………………………………………………………………..47 4.1. na- as an independent preposition in Russian…………………………………....47 4.2. na- as a verbal aspectual prefix in Russian………………………………………49 4.2.1.Analysis of the Synchronic Lexicalization and Grammaticalization of na-50 4.2.1.1. Typology of Complex and Simplex Predicate Types……………….50 4.2.1.1.1. Complex Predicate Types………………………………...50 4.2.1.1.2. Simplex Predicate Types……………………………...….52 4.2.1.2. Data Selection and Methodology…………………………………...54 4.2.1.3. Classification of Predicates into Types……………………………..56 4.2.1.3.1. Participant Role Assignment……………………………..57 4.2.1.3.2. Derivation of Imperfectives…………………………...…59 4.2.1.4. Distribution of Type Frequencies with na-………………………....59 4.2.1.5. Position of Predicate Types along Grammaticalization and Lexicalization Continua……………………………………………………61 4.2.1.5.1. The Grammaticalization Continuum in Complex Predicates..61 4.2.1.5.2. The Lexicalization Continuum in Complex and Simplex..62 Predicates 4.2.1.6. Path of Development of Aspectual Prefixes………………………..63 4.2.1.7. Mapping na- onto the Path of Development……………………….63 5. A radial category analysis of na-…………………………………………………………...65 5.1. na- used in complex motion events……………………………………………..73 ! Subcat. 1 - Move over an object or surface…………………………………73 ! Subcat. 2 - Move against/make contact with an object or surface………….76 ! Subcat. 3 - Cause to make contact with an object or surface……………….81 5.2. na- used in non-spatial complex events………………………………………...83 ! Subcat. 4 - Metaphorical move over an object or surface………………….85 viii ! Subcat. 5 - Metaphorical move against/make contact with a surface (interfere/infringe)………………………………………………………….88 ! Subcat. 6 - Do something until reaching change of state (Resultative)…..98 ! Subcat. 7 - Do something a lot; to exhaustion (Completive) (Perfective)..99 ! Subcat. 8 – Metaphorical cause to make contact with an object or surface (Causative)………………………………………………………………..103 6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………....104 1 1. Introduction Russian, an East Slavic language spoken by over 180 million people in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia, has a complex system of verbal aspect. Comrie (1976) summarizes the general view of aspect by way of a distinction between two primary ways of construing the temporal consistency of an action or state (a ‘situation’): “perfectivity indicates the view of a situation as a single whole, without distinction of the various separate phases that make up that situation; while the imperfective pays essential attention to the internal structure of the situation” (16). Bybee (1985: 142), states, “the function of aspect is to allow the temporal dimensions of a situation to be described from different points of view depending on how the situation is intended to fit into the discourse.” Many studies, including Janda (2007a) and Croft (2012), discuss the difficulty of categorizing aspect in Slavic languages. Croft (2012), in an analysis of verbal aspect in Russian, writes, “the morphology [of the Russian verbal-aspectual system] does not neatly divide itself into distinct inflectional categories” (110). Broadly, aspectual distinctions of Russian verbs are manifested morphologically both through imperfective infixation (or simply the absence of prefixation in unmarked forms) and perfective prefixation. Of these two morphological processes, imperfective infixation is generally considered a process restricted to the creation of imperfective aspectual partners from perfective verbs: 1. a. dat’ ‘give(Pf.)’ davat’ ‘give(Imp.)’ b. pokazat’ ‘show(Pf.)’ pokazyvat’ ‘show(Imp.)’ c. razgovorit’ ‘discuss(Pf.)’ razgovarivat’ ‘discuss(Imp.)’ Perfective prefixation, on the other hand, is generally believed to be actually two distinct semantic processes. In the first of these, a perfective partner is created from an imperfective verb 2 through prefixation: pisat’-napisat’ ‘write’, videt’-uvidet’ ‘see’, smotret’-posmotret’ ‘look at’. In the second, more specific aspectual or lexical information--information “above and beyond” mere perfectivity as Comrie (1976) defines it above--is added to the verbal root through prefixation, resulting in a new lexical iterm: govorit’-ugovorit’ ‘speak-convince’, est’-doest’ ‘eat-finish eating’, dumat’-razdumat’ ‘think-change one’s mind’. In the latter process, a verbal prefix adds a lexical or aspectual semantic component in addition to perfectivity, such as completion or orientation toward a goal, as can be seen in the examples above. Croft (2012) mentions two types of aspectual distinctions coded by Russian verbal- aspectual morphology: in addition to the broad Perfective/Imperfective distinction, which is found in almost all verbs, he describes a Determinate/Indeterminate distinction for verbs of motion. Croft (2012) states that the Determinate/Indeterminate distinction is for expressing directed vs. undirected activity, while the Perfective/Imperfective distinction is for differentiation