1 / 14
文档名称:

Ambivalent Adpositions and “P-Stranding” in Russian 2020 Tatiana Philippova.pdf

格式:pdf   大小:211KB   页数:14页
下载后只包含 1 个 PDF 格式的文档,没有任何的图纸或源代码,查看文件列表

如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点这里二次下载

Ambivalent Adpositions and “P-Stranding” in Russian 2020 Tatiana Philippova.pdf

上传人:四婆子 2023/3/26 文件大小:211 KB

下载得到文件列表

Ambivalent Adpositions and “P-Stranding” in Russian 2020 Tatiana Philippova.pdf

相关文档

文档介绍

文档介绍:该【Ambivalent Adpositions and “P-Stranding” in Russian 2020 Tatiana Philippova 】是由【四婆子】上传分享,文档一共【14】页,该文档可以免费在线阅读,需要了解更多关于【Ambivalent Adpositions and “P-Stranding” in Russian 2020 Tatiana Philippova 】的内容,可以使用淘豆网的站内搜索功能,选择自己适合的文档,以下文字是截取该文章内的部分文字,如需要获得完整电子版,请下载此文档到您的设备,方便您编辑和打印。
:.
Squibs
and
Discussion
AMBIVALENTADPOSITIONSANDAbstract:P(reposition)-,
“P-STRANDING”INRUSSIANmanylanguagesexhibitphenomenathatlooklikeP-stranding
TatianaPhilippova(Campos1991,Poplack,Zentz,andDion2012)orinvolveP-stranding
undercommontheorizing(seePhilippova2014andreferences
therein).ThesestudiesarguethatthesearenotinstancesofP-comple-

Russianprepositionsthatcanbepostposedtoandapparentlystranded
-heads,

analysiscapturesallidiosyncrasiesoftheirnominaldependentsand
alleviatestheneedtopositexceptionalP-strandinginRussian.
Keywords:adpositions,prepositionstranding,dativecase,Russian
1Introduction
Russianisahead-initiallanguageanditsadpositionsaretypically
preposedwithrespecttotheircomplements,asshownin(1)foran
,thereisasetof
adpositionsthatcaneitherprecedeorfollowtheirnominaldependent,
illustratedin(2).FollowingPodobryaev(2009),Iwillcallthemambiv-
alentadpositions.
(1)po;soglasnoraspisaniju*po;*soglasno

‘accordingtothetimetable’
IthankNomiErteschik-Shir,KyleJohnson,IdanLandau,DavidPesetsky,
AlexanderPodobryaev,NataliaSlioussar,theSquibsandDiscussioneditors,
andanonymousreviewersforvaluablecommentsanddiscussionofthetopic
ofthissquib.
ThissquibwaspreparedwithintheframeworkoftheHSEUniversity
BasicResearchProgramandfundedbytheRussianAcademicExcellence
Project‘5–100’andashort-termpostdoctoralgrantforMay–August2018
fromtheKreitmanSchoolofBen-GurionUniversityoftheNegev.
LinguisticInquiry,Volume53,Number2,Spring2022
399–411
2020bytheMassachusettsInstituteofTechnology
/ling_a_00403399:.
400SQUIBSANDDISCUSSION
(2)voprekizdravomusmysluvopreki

‘contrarytocommonsense’
(adaptedfromPodobryaev2009:199,(14);200,(17))
Podobryaev(2009)observesaP-strandingeffectinRussianandmakes
thegeneralizationthatitisseenonlyiftheadpositionisambivalent.
Thiscontrastisillustratedin(3)–(4);(5)showsthatpied-pipingis
attestedwithbothclassesofadpositions.
(3)a.*KomutybeÅalak?

‘Whowereyourunningto?’
b.*KogotybeÅalaot?

‘Whowereyourunningfrom?’
(4)KomutybeÅalanavstre?u?

‘Whowereyourunningtoward?’
(5)K;Navstre?ukomutybeÅala?

‘?To/Towardwhomwereyourunning?’
Buildingontheirmorphologicalproperties,Podobryaevproposes
thatambivalentadpositionshaveacomplexstructure,[PPP[NDP]]
inmostcases,andthatthepostpositionalvariantisderivedfromthe
base-generatedprepositionalconfigurationviamovementoftheDP-
complementtoSpec,[PPPDP]phrases,this
movementisallowedsinceitdoesnotviolatetheuniversalAntilocality
Constraint(Abels2003).MovementtoSpec,PPputstheDPatthe
edgeofaphase(followingAbels(2003),PPsareproposedtobephases
exceptinP-strandinglanguages),makingitavailabletothehigher
,theDPcanproceedtoaleft-peripheral
positionhostingwh-phrases(.,Spec,CP).Thus,Russiandoesnot
haveP-strandinginthesenseofAbels2003,sincetheentireP-comple-
mentnevermovesoutofaPP.
Inthissquib,Ishowthatthenaturalclassofambivalentadposi-
tionsinstantiatescombinationsofanunderivedprepositionandanoun
(sometimesfossil).TheseadpositionsareessentiallyPPsratherthan
P-headsandtheirdativedependentisaKP,adjoiningeithertotheleft
ortotherightofthePP,-
tionsandtheirdativedependentsarethustreatedsimilarlytothe“pos-
sessivePPcomplexes”discussedandanalyzedbyMatushansky(to
appear)andMatushanskyetal.(toappear).Asignificantadvantage
ofthisanalysisisthatitcaptureswhycomplexP-Nmorphologyis
notasufficientconditionforambivalence;italsodoesnotcrucially
buildonthephasehoodofthePP,whichiscontestedintheliterature
(.,Bruening2014).:.
SQUIBSANDDISCUSSION401
2TheNaturalClassofAmbivalentAdpositions
Ambivalencecanbepredictedfrommorphologicalandcase-govern-
mentpropertiesofanadposition.
(6)Anadpositionisproductivelyambivalentifandonlyifit
iscomposedofaprepositionalandanominalmorpheme
anditsdependentbearsdativecase.
Thiscriterionsinglesoutthefollowinglexemes,amongthosetypically
labeledasprepositions:naperekor‘tospite,contraryto’,vopreki‘in
spiteof’,nazlo‘tospite’,navstre?u‘toward(anobjectmovinginthe
oppositedirection)’,v(o)sled,vdogonku‘following,after(amoving
object)’,napererez‘crossingthetrajectory(ofamovingobject)/cut-
tingacrossto’,srodni‘akinto’,vzamen‘asasubstitutionfor,instead
of’.Someofthesenominalcomponents—perekor,preki,dogonku,
pererez,zamen—(almost)donotappearelsewhereinthelanguage
,historically,these
areACC-markednounsthatusedtobewrittenseparatelyfromtheP-
morpheme;seeHill1977andtheRussianNationalCorpus(RNC).
Moreover,speakersofpresent-dayRussianmayerroneouslywrite
thesecollocationsastwoseparatewords(asisevidentfromtheRNC),
whichsuggeststhattheymightstillbeperceivedasP-Ncombinations.
Thereisahostoflesslexicalized,moresyntacticallytransparent
P-
composedoftheprepositionv‘in(to)’orna‘on(to)’andanominal

thecollectionofanexhaustivelist,soIprovidejustasample:votmest-
ku‘totakerevengeon(someone)’,vpiku‘tospite’,nagore‘tothe
distressof’,naradost’‘tothedelightof’,vute'enie‘forthecomfort
of’,vprotivopoloÅnost’‘incontrastto’,vprotivoves‘incontrastto’
(lit.‘asacounterweight’),nevprimer‘unlike’,nasmenu‘togive
wayto,toreplace’.
AqualitativecorpusstudyoftheRNCrevealsthatalltheambiva-
lentadpositionsandcollocationscollected(31overall)allowboth
pronominalandnonpronominaldativesintheprepositionalconfigura-

-
positionalconfiguration,butareagainfoundwithalladpositionsand
collocations,exceptvpiku‘tospite’,votmestku‘totakerevengeon
(someone)’,nas?astje‘luckilyfor’,vute'enie‘forthecomfortof’,
vprotivopoloÅnost’andvprotivoves—both‘incontrastto’.
1VprotivopoloÅnost’‘incontrastto’doesnotoccurasapostpositionin
theRNC,butexamplescaneasilybefoundontheInternet,whichsuggests
thatthisfactreflectsatendency,:.
402SQUIBSANDDISCUSSION
Ionlyconsidercaseswherethedativedependentisclearlyli-
censedbythepresenceoftheP-Nelement,thatis,inwhichomission
ofanambivalentadpositionrendersthesentenceungrammatical,as
in(7).
(7)Ondolgogljadelej*(vsled).

‘Hecontinuouslystaredatherasshewentaway.’
Alladpositionsdefinedin(6)havetwoadditionalpropertiesthat
,theymayappearwithout
anovertnominaldependent,asshownin(8).
(8)Navernoe,menjaspecial’nosozdaliv

protivoves.
counterweight
‘Apparently,Iwasspecificallycreatedasacounterweight.’
(RNC:,,Komsomol’skajaPravda)
Second,theydisallowthespecialadprepositional(pripredloÅnye)
formsof3rdpersonpronounsontheirnominaldependent,asshown
in(9).
(9)Ma'asdelalae`toemu;*nemuvotmestku

emu;*nemu.

‘Mashadidthistotakerevengeonhim.’
3Analysis
Thepropertiesofambivalentadpositionsoutlinedabovecanbeac-
countedforifwetreatthemasPPswiththedativedependentadjoined
tothem,ratherthanasmorphologicallycomplexP-headswithdative
“adpositions”withdativede-
pendentsinstantiateaspecialcaseoftheso-calledpossessivePPcom-
plex,discussedandanalyzedbyMatushansky(toappear)andMatu-
shanskyetal.(toappear),exemplifiedbythebracketedconstituentin
(10).
(10)Ee¨glazazagljanuli[gluboko[emuvdu'u]].

‘Hereyeslookeddeepintohissoul.’
(Matushanskytoappear)
AmbivalentadpositionsandcollocationsarestrikinglysimilartoPPs
likevdu'u‘intothesoul’,formingthebasisofthepossessivePP
complex:allofthemareP-Ncombinations,formallyidenticaltodirec-
tionalPPs,asevidencedbytheP-morphemesinvolved(v‘in(to)’and
na‘on(to)’)andthefrozenaccusativemorphologyonthenominal
.(to:.
SQUIBSANDDISCUSSION403
appear)tobecompatibleonlywithbaredativepossessorsorallative
PP-possessorsheadedbytheprepositionk‘to’.Indeed,whatwefind
withambivalentadpositionsaredativedependents,sometimeseven
alternatingwithk-PPs,whichstrengthenstheparallel.
(11)Knej;Ejnavstre?u;naperezbeÅalideti.

‘Kidsranouttomeet/intercepther.’
Furthersimilaritiesbetweenambivalentadpositionalphrasesandpos-
sessivePPcomplexesincludethenonobligatorypresenceofthedative
dependentandtheoptiontoplaceittotherightofthePP.
(12)Molodyeglazazagljanuliprjamovdu'u

(Fransuaze).
******@
‘(Her)******@oise’ssoul.’
(adaptedfromRNC:,1990–2000,Kaprizfa-
vorita)
Thesetwofactslendsupporttothestructuralanalysisinwhich
thedativedependentisanadjuncttothedirectionalPP/ambivalent
“adposition”(thisisoneoftheoptionsentertainedbyMatushansky
(toappear);theotheristomergeitinthespecifierofthedirectional
PP).Anotherargumentinfavoroftheadjunctionanalysiscomesfrom
thefollowingwordorderfacts:whentheadverbprjamo‘right’modi-
fiesa(directional)ambivalentPP,itmayeitherprecedeorfollowthe
left-attacheddative;again,analogouspossessivePPcomplexeswork
thesame,asshownin(13b–c).
(13)navstre?u;vrukiMa'e;ej

Ma'e;ejnavstre?u;

vruki

c.Ma'e;ejprjamonavstre?u;vruki

‘righttowardMasha/her;rightinMasha’s/herhands’
ThestructuresIproposeforambivalentadpositionalphrasestherefore
lookasfollows::.
404SQUIBSANDDISCUSSION
(14)
AdvPPP
(prjamo‘right’)PPKP

(prjamo‘right’)navstre?u‘toward’

AdvPPP
(prjamo‘right’)PPKP

(prjamo‘right’)navstre?u‘toward’
Whatdeterminesthewordorderoptionsin(13)?Corpusdataand
nativespeakers’judgmentsshowthatalthoughallvariantsgivenin
(13)aregrammatical,nonpronominaldativedependentspreferthe
prepositionalorder,(13a),whilethetwopostpositionalorders,
(13b–c),
ofthedativein(13a)requiresittobearnuclearstress(beingthemost
embedded,phrase-peripheralelement),whereasin(13b)and(13c)it

onlywhentheyarecontrastiveoraccompanypointing,butpredomi-
nantlyrefertotopics/givenelements(.,Erteschik-Shir1997:21,
138),inmostcasestheywouldoccurinnonprominentpositions,as
in(13b–c).NonpronominalDPsaredestressedlessoften(again,only
whentopical/given),sothepreferenceforthe“basic”wordorderin
(13a)
adjunctisgovernedbyinformation-structuraland/orprosodicconsid-
erations.
AsmallmodificationtoMatushanskyetal.’s(toappear)approach
isthatItreatthedativedependentasaKP(DatP)ratherthanasaPP

differencetoMatushanskyetal.’sproposalbutispreferableoninde-
pendentgrounds:recallthatthesedativedependentsmaynottakethe
specializedadprepositionalpronominalforms,(9).However,ifone:.
SQUIBSANDDISCUSSION405
positsanullP-headdominatingthedativedependent,onemightexpect
th