Authors
- Borisova Elena Doctor of Philology, Professor
Annotation
The article focuses on contradictions in paradigms of some grammatical categories: irregular word formation, suppletivism, grammatical category ambiguity, etc. A reasonable number of exceptions is quite common for any language. But when the deviations of the norm become abundant, there is a necessity for their systematic description. The article analyzes these exceptions based on the dynamics of language entities development. According to many historical grammar descriptions, the majority of exceptions exist due to ongoing changes in the language. To describe this phenomenon, the dynamic model of transition from state 1 to state 2 is proposed. A great number of exceptions can be explained by synchronic state comprising the effect of two or more states that co-exist at the moment. For example, Russian passive can be expressed by a participle with a suffix -им,- ем (-im,-em) or by the reflexive form of verbs -ся (-sya)-forms). This co-existence of two grammar forms can be modeled by two trends in grammar. Such approach is called micro-diachronic, as it goes about widely understood now-a-day situation that includes some decades and maybe centuries. The language of this period is still ‘modern’ and can be understood by native speakers, but the alternations are evident.
The model of co-existing trends in diachronics (or precisely, micro-diachronics) is applied to the oppositions of Russian aspect, the category that is known to be complex and contradictive. The semantics of aspectual opposition is described with such notions as specific meanings (progressive, multiple, factive, etc.) and contexts of usage (negative and interrogative sentences, various modalities etc.) To sum it up, three oppositions are taken to model the development of this category: opposition “achieving the result vs, the process of achieving it” (completion), opposition of “ending or progressing the time that is denoted by predicates”, and opposition of “multiplication of acts”. The 2nd opposition is supposed to be leading, though one cannot predict the real process of the category development.