Home → Releases → № 15. 2021 →

TEXTUAL FUNCTIONS OF ACTIVE INDEFINITE PARTICIPLES AND MODERN RUSSIAN ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLES IN A COMPARATIVE ASPECT

Linguistics , UDC: 81’367.7 DOI: 10.25688/2619-0656.2021.15.11

Authors

  • Vialsova Anna Candidate of Philology

Annotation

. The norms of using the adverbial participle in speech have been the subject of grammar, rhetoric and speech culture for almost three centuries — a period of a desperate struggle against the violation of the prescribed rules for the use of the adverbial participle. Modern grammar science looks at violations of the norms of the use of the adverbial participle in a different way: an analysis of the abusive uses of the adverbial participle helps both to reveal the grammatical properties of the verb form itself and to trace the modern trends of the language. In connection with the study of the properties of the modern adverbial participle, it becomes necessary to refer to the history of the formation of this verb form from the short form of the Church Slavonic participle. An analysis of the peculiarities of the use of short forms of active participles and definite form of participles in ancient Russian texts allows us to explain the functional mechanisms of participles and adverbial participles in the modern language, to outline the zone of their divergence. The article examined the cases of choosing the short form of the participle, which show that its textual functions in the ancient language were wider than the textual functions of the adverbial participle in the modern language. Based on material from hagiographic texts of the 11th — 17th centuries constructions that are not characteristic of modern adverbial participle were considered. It can be named three conditions for the normative use of the modern adverbial participle, which correspond to the structural components of this article. First, the adverbial participle in the modern language, unlike the Church Slavonic language, cannot be used absolutely as a predicate of a sentence. Secondly, one of the violations of the norms should be recognized as the heterogeneity along the time line of the adverbial participle and the predicate. However, in the Church Slavonic language, such contexts of the use of short participial forms are found. Finally, a comparative analysis of these verb forms with impersonal subject was performed. As a result, it was shown that for the modern adverbial participle, the narrowing of temporal functions is compensated by the expansion of the possibility of use with subjects of different types. It seems that an appeal to historical material can explain not only the grammatical properties of modern verb forms, but also violations of the grammatical norms of speech.

Tags:
adverbial participle , category of definitiveness and in-definitiveness , Church Slavonic language , Russian language , short forms of participle , type of subject.

How to link insert

Vialsova, A. . (2021). TEXTUAL FUNCTIONS OF ACTIVE INDEFINITE PARTICIPLES AND MODERN RUSSIAN ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLES IN A COMPARATIVE ASPECT Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", № 15. 2021, 182-196. https://doi.org/10.25688/2619-0656.2021.15.11
References
1. Mandel’shtam O. (2001). Stihotvoreniya. Proza [Poems. Prose]. M.L. Gasparov (Ed.). Har’kov: Folio. 736 p. (In Russ.).
2. Pasternak B.L. (1989). Sobranie sochinenij. V 5 t. [The Complete Works. In 5 vols.]. Moscow: Khudozh. lit. Vol. 1. 751 p. (In Russ.).
3. Plyuhanova M.B. (1989). Pustozerskaya proza [Prose of Pustosersk]. Moscow. (In Russ.).
4. Skazanie o Borise i Glebe. [The legend of Boris and Gleb]. L.A. Dmitriev (Ed.). URL: http://lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/default.aspx?tabid=4871. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
5. Stetsenko A.N. (1972). Istoricheskii sintaksis russkogo iazyka [Historical Syntax of the Russian Language]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola. 360 p. (In Russ.).
6. The General Internet-Corpus of Russian (GICR). URL: https://int. webcorpora.ru/drake/. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
7. Zhitie Aleksandra Nevskogo [Life of Aleksandr Nevsky]. URL: http://lib. pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=4962. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
8. Zhitie Korniliya Komelskogo [Life of Kornilius Komelsky]. URL: http://lib. pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=10578. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
9. Zhitie Sergiya Radonezhskogo [Life of Sergius of Radonezh]. URL: http:// lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=4989. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
10. Zhitie Feodosiia Pecherskogo [Life of Theodosius Pechersky]. URL: http:// lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=4872. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
11. Povest’ o zhitii Mihaila Klopskogo [The story of the of Mikhail Klopsky]. URL: http://lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/default.aspx?tabid=5062. Accessed: 01.07.2021.
12. Bondarko А.V. (2001). Osnovy funktsional’noi grammatiki: Iazykovaia interpretatsiia idei vremeni [Basics of Functional Grammar: Language Interpretation of the Idea of Time]. Saint Petersburg: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta. 260 p. (In Russ.).
13. Borkovskii V.I. (1949). Sintaksis drevnerusskikh gramot. (Prostoe predlozhenie) [Syntax of Old Russian Letters (a Simple Sentence)]. L’vov: Izd-vo L’vov. Un-ta. 390 p. (In Russ.).
14. Dobrushina E.R. (2014). Korpusnye issledovaniya po morfemnoj, grammaticheskoj i leksicheskoj semantike russkogo yazyka [Corpus-based research on morphemic, grammatical, and lexical semantics of the Russian language]. Moscow: PSTGU. Pp. 96–119. (In Russ.).
15. Dobrushina E.R. (2020). Absolyutivnye deeprichastiya: norma i uzus, mikrodiahroniya i sovremennoe polozhenie. [Absolute Transgressives: Their Standard and Occurrence, Microdiachrony and Current State]. Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. III: Filologiya. Issue. 63. Pp. 9–18. (In Russ.).
16. Sokolova E.V. (2019). Prichastie, deeprichastie, glagol v soznanii shkol’nika XXI veka: chto proiskhodit i o chem eto govorit [Communion, verbal adverbs, verb in the consciousness of a student of the XXI century: what is happening and what does it mean]. Russkij yazyk za rubezhom [Russian language abroad]. No 2. Pp. 19–22.
17. Tolstoi N.I. (1957). Znachenie kratkikh i polnykh form prilagatel’nykh v staroslavianskom iazyke (na materiale evangel’skikh kodeksov) [Meanings of Short and Long Forms of Adjectives in the Old Slavonic Language (Based on the Material of the Evangelical Codices)]. Voprosy slavianskogo iazykoznaniia [The Questions of Slavic Linguistics]. Ed. 2. Pp. 43–122. (In Russ.).
18. Zapol’skaia N.N. (1985). Funktsionirovanie prichastii v russkom iazyke kontsa XVII–XVIII v. [Functioning of Participles in Russian at the end of the XVII–XVIII c.]. Candidate’s thesis. Moscow. 206 p. (In Russ.).
19. Zhivov V.M. (2011). Sochinitel’nye soyuzy mezhdu prichastnym oborotom i glavnym predlozheniem v pamyatnikah vostochnoslavyanskoj pis’mennosti [Coordinating conjunctions between the participle and the main sentence in the East Slavic writings]. Bibleistika. Slavistika. Rusistika: K 70-letiyu zaveduyushchego kafedroj bibleistiki professora Anatoliya Alekseevicha Alekseeva [Bible Studies. Slavistics. Russian Studies. For the 70-anniversary of the head of the Department of Biblical Studies prof Alekseeva A.A.]. Saint Petersburg: Filologicheskii fakul’tet SPbGU. Pp. 404–425. (In Russ.).
20. Zhivov V.M. (2011). Pozitsiia prichastnykh oborotov i ikh diskursivnye svoistva v iazyke russkikh letopisei [The Position of Participial Constructions and Their Discursive Properties in the Language of Russian Chronicles]. Slovo i iazyk: Sb. statei k vos’midesiatiletiiu akad. Iu. D. Apresiana [The Word and the Language. Collection of Articles for the 80th Anniversary acad. Iu.D. Apresiana]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul’tur. Pp. 473–492. (In Russ.).
Download file .pdf 106.71 kb