BEYOND PHILOLOGY AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, LITERARY STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING 11 WYDAWNICTWO UNIWERSYTETU GDAŃSKIEGO GDAŃSK 2014 EDITOR Danuta Stanulewicz SECTION EDITORS Linguistics: Olga Sokołowska Literary Studies, Culture: Ludmiła Gruszewska-Blaim Translation: Wojciech Kubiński Language Acquisition, Academic Teaching: Tadeusz Danilewicz Reviews, Reports, Interviews: Jadwiga Węgrodzka EDITORIAL ASSISTANTS Małgorzata Smentek Magdalena Wawrzyniak-Śliwska PROOFREADERS Martin Blaszk Jean Ward Tadeusz Z. Wolański The Editors and Proofreaders are all affiliated with the Institute of English and American Studies, University of Gdańsk, Poland. ABSTRACT TRANSLATOR Barbara Brzezicka (Institute of Romance Philology, University of Gdańsk) COVER DESIGN Andrzej Taranek COMPUTER-AIDED COMPOSITION Danuta Stanulewicz Izabela Żochowska ISSN 1732-1220 © Copyright by Uniwersytet Gdański Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego Contact address Institute of English and American Studies University of Gdańsk ul. Wita Stwosza 55 80-952 Gdańsk Poland Phone: (+48) 58 523 25 50 Fax: (+48) 58 523 25 13 Email: [email protected] ASSOCIATE EDITORIAL BOARD Janusz Arabski (University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland) Marta Bogdanowicz (University of Gdańsk, Poland) Joanna Burzyńska-Sylwestrzak (Wyższa Szkoła Języków Obcych, Świecie, Poland) Ewa Dąbrowska (Northumbria University, Newcastle, U.K.) Desmond Graham (University of Newcastle, U.K.) Zoltán Kövecses (Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary) Ronald W. Langacker (University of California at San Diego, U.S.A.) Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (University of Łódź, Poland) Jerzy Limon (University of Gdańsk, Poland) Irene Gilsenan Nordin (Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden) David Malcolm (University of Gdańsk, Poland) Elżbieta H. Oleksy (University of Łódź, Poland) Adam Pasicki (Pedagogical University of Kraków, Poland) Piotr Ruszkiewicz (Pedagogical University of Kraków, Poland) Bogdan Szymanek (Catholic University of Lublin, Poland) Ryszard Wenzel (Akademia Polonijna, Częstochowa, Poland) Marta Wiszniowska (Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland) BOARD OF REVIEWERS Frank Cioffi (Baruch College, City University of New York, U.S.A.) Roman Kalisz (Wyższa Szkoła Języków Obcych, Świecie, Poland) Aleksandra Kędzierska (Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, Lublin, Poland) Marzenna Mioduszewska (Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain) Grzegorz Moroz (University of Białystok, Poland) Kazimierz Sroka (Polonia University in Częstochowa, Poland) Krystyna Stamirowska (Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland) Yuri Stulov (Minsk State Linguistic University, Belarus) Kamila Turewicz (University of Humanities and Economics in Lodz, Poland) Tomasz Warchoł (Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, U.S.A.) Beyond Philology is published in print and online (<http://www.fil.ug.gda.pl/ pl/instytuty--anglistyki_i_amerykanistyki--beyond_philology/>). The online version is primary. Beyond Philology is indexed by The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (CEJSH) (<http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl>) Index Copernicus (<http://www.indexcopernicus.com>) MLA International Bibliography BEYOND PHILOLOGY 11 CONTENTS LINGUISTICS The category of reflexivity in Russian MARCIN GRYGIEL 9 Beats-and-binding phonology explorations into /s/ voicing in English MAŁGORZATA HAŁADEWICZ-GRZELAK 25 Figurative language in Business English: Metaphors of transport and war ANNA ŁUCZAK 67 The International and Slavonic Phonetic Alphabets LUCYNA RYNDAK 83 COMMUNICATION STUDIES How successful virtual teams communicate: The role of emotional intelligence VAIBHAV P. BIRWATKAR 101 LITERARY STUDIES References to Antiquity in Henry James’ novella “The Beast in the Jungle” AGATA MARCINKOWSKA-WAJNER 141 Mythological references in The Chronicles of Narnia and The Space Trilogy by C. S. Lewis MAGDALENA ZEGARLIŃSKA 165 REVIEWS Review of Słownik metafor i konotacji nazw własnych [Dictionary of Proper Names and their Metaphors and Connotations] by Mariusz Rutkowski MARTYNA GIBKA 187 REPORTS The 48th Linguistics Colloquium “Linguistic Insights: Studies on Languages / Linguistische Einsichten: Studien über Sprachen”, Alcalá de Henares 2013 DANUTA STANULEWICZ 197 INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS 205 LINGUISTICS Beyond Philology No. 11, 2014 ISSN 1732-1220 The category of reflexivity in Russian MARCIN GRYGIEL Abstract The present paper is centered around the semantics of the Russian reflexive marker seen from the perspective of a larger and often ne- glected category of reflexivity.1 Russian, among other Slavic lan- guages, employs a system of two etymologically related markers to encode the function of reflexivity. In the case of Russian, the reflexive pronoun себя ‘-self’ constitutes the heavy marker, syntactically inde- pendent, while the light reflexive marker has two allomorphs. The variation depends on the inflectional form of the verb. The allomorph -сь appears after vowels and the -ся after consonants. In contrast, the participle forms always appear with the -ся form. Additionally, the light marker is attached to the stem after other morphological markers, such as person, number and gender. Diachronically, the light form appeared as a clitic and used to take two cases: the accu- sative and the dative. Through diachronic changes, the case distinc- tion was lost forming a single marker. Typologically, in a language employing a two-marker system, the light marker tends to be poly- semous, covering a range of different functions in addition to the reflexive one, as is the case in Russian. In the following analysis we will try to show that the two most common linguistic encodings of reflexivity – synthetic and analytic – are related to each other and, in fact, represent the same category. 1 Studies on reflexivity in English appear to focus on two issues: one is an account of the relationship between the reflexive pronouns and their ante- cedents (i.e. the possible distance between a reflexive and the antecedent), and the other is the distribution of personal and reflexive pronouns (Drogosz 2012). 10 Beyond Philology 11 Key words reflexivity, reflexive verbs, reflexive pronouns, transitivity, passive voice, middle voice, impersonal constructions La catégorie de réflexivité dans le russe Résumé Le présent article est centré sur la sémantique du marqueur réflexif en russe, vu de la perspective d’une catégorie plus large et souvent négligée qu’est la catégorie de réflexivité.2 Le russe, entre autres langues slaves, utilise un système avec deux marqueurs liés étymologiquement pour traduire la fonction de réflexivité. Dans le cas du russe, le pronom réflexif себя (soi, soi-même) est un marqueur lourd, indépendant syntaxiquement, tandis que le marqueur réflexif léger a deux allomorphes. La variation dépend de la forme flexionnelle du verbe. L’allomorphe -сь apparaît après les voyelles et le -ся après les consonnes. Par contre, les formes participes ont toujours la forme -ся. En outre, le marqueur léger est attaché à la racine après d’autres marqueurs morphologiques, comme la personne, le nombre ou le genre avec les formes participes. Du point de vue diachronique, la forme légère apparut comme un clitique et avait deux cas : l’accusatif et le datif. Avec les changements diachroniques, la distinction des cas fut perdue et un seul marquer fut créé. Du point de vue typologique, dans une langue qui utilise un système de deux marqueurs, le marqueur léger a tendance à être polysémique et à remplir plusieurs fonctions différentes en plus de la fonction réflexive, comme dans le cas du russe. Dans l’analyse suivante, nous allons essayer de montrer que les deux expressions de réflexivité les plus populaires – la synthétique et l’analytique – sont liées l’une à l’autre et qu’en réalité, elles représentent la même catégorie. 2 Les études sur la réflexivité dans l’anglais semblent se concentrer sur deux questions: l’une est un compte-rendu de la relation entre les pronoms réflexifs et leurs antécédents (par exemple, la distance possible entre le pronom et l’antécédent), l’autre c’est la distribution des pronoms réflexifs et personnels (Drogosz, 2012). Marcin Grygiel: The category of reflexivity in Russian 11 Mots clés réflexivité, verbes pronominaux, pronoms réflexifs, transitivité, voix passive, voix moyenne, constructions impersonnelles 1. Synthetic markers of reflexivity Reflexivity is a kind of relation where a given element is related to itself. Thus, reflexivity refers to a circular relationship in which one element is a reflection or repetition of a previously used element. In linguistics, the category of reflexivity is typi- cally associated with reflexive verbs and reflexive pronouns. Its function resides in establishing a co-reference between the semantic object and the semantic subject (patient/theme and agent). One way of marking reflexivity in Russian is the post- verbal reflexive affix ся/сь. Reflexive verbs are usually divided into several unrelated groups according to the presumed meanings of the affix. They may, for example, express the con- cept of ‘self’ as in oдеваться ‘to dress oneself’, reciprocal rela- tions поцеловаться ‘to kiss each other’, feelings and attitudes гордиться ‘to be proud’. They are also used in specific con- structions, such as the middle voice and impersonal speech. The only property Russian reflexive verbs are said to have in common is their intransitivity. Unlike most other Slavic languages, where reflexive verbs are used with the reflexive pronoun functioning as a clitic, i.e. a free morpheme