Sussex R., Cubberley P. The Slavic Languages

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

8.3.2.2 Derived secondary imperfectives

The strength of the pattern of producing imperfectives by suffixation of prefixed

perfectives has often been extended to the production of such derived forms in

competition to the basic, unaffixed, form:

(51) Bel vy

-pic

‘to drink’ [Prfv]: [Imprfv] pic

and vy-piva

8.3.2.3 Semantic suffixation

Semantic suffixation involves a range of derived imperfectives. Some suffixes are

simply thematic vowels or formants added to roots to form verb stems, and thus no

longer have a word-formational role (e.g. Rus pis-a

-t’). Others are associated with

grammatical or lexical meaning in various ways, which makes them more than just

grammatical in function:

(52) Semantic suffixation

change of state: -nu (Class II), -ej (Class III)

‘to go blind’: B/C/S sle

p-e-ti Rus sle

p-nu-t

Slk slep-nu

-t’

‘to turn white’: B/C/S be

l-e-ti Rus bel-e

-t

Slk bel-ie-t’

factitives: -i (Class IV)

‘to whiten’ B/C/S be

l-i-ti Rus bel-ı

-t

Slk biel-i-t’

‘to paint, to adorn’ B/C/S kra

s-i-ti Rus kras-ı

-t

Sorb krasn-i-c

statives: -e (Class IV), (Pal +)-a, -ej (Class III)

‘to be sitting’ B/C/S se

d-e-ti Rus sid-e

-t

Slk sed-ie-t’

‘to be/show white’ B/C/S be

l-e-ti Rus bel-e

-t

Slk bel-ie-t

Other areas of semantic verbal suffixation involve semelfactives, iteratives and

reflexives.

Semelfactive suffixes designate an action performed once. They use the

suffix -nu-:

(53) Semelfactives

Rus kric

-a

-t

‘to shout’ [Imprfv] krı

k-nu-t

‘to (give a) shout’

Cz pad-a-t ‘to fall’ [Imprfv] pad-nou-t ‘to fall down’

Blg pa

d-a-m ‘I fall’ [Imprfv] pa

d-n-a ‘I fall down’

Some unprefixed imperfective verbs may form iterative, or frequentative, forms –

‘to do something again/several times’ – by adding a suffix, usually -(a/i/y)va-, the

suffix widely used to make the imperfective of prefixed perfective verbs (e.g. 51):

(54) Iteratives

(54a) B/C/S bı``-ti ‘to be’ bı``-va-ti ‘to be occasionally’

8.3 Word formation and verbs 449

and by lengthening a stem vowel:

(54b) Slk hl’ada-t’ ‘to look’ hl’ada

-va-t’ ‘to look repeatedly’

Czech and Slovak are able to form a second (frequentative) imperfective by extra

suffixation:

(54c) Cz chod-it ‘to go’ [Indet] chod-ı

vat, chod-ı

v-a

vat ‘to go often’

Reflexive suffixed forms designate genuinely reflexive actions which return to the

subject of the sentence, either concretely or metaphorically:

(55) ‘to wash (oneself)’: Rus my

-sja Pol myc

sie˛ B/C/S mı``ti se

Alternatively, reflexives may designate reciprocal actions, where A does to B what

B does to A at the same time:

(56) ‘to meet, see one another (regularly)’:

Rus vstrec

-sja (meet), vı

det

-sja (see) Cz setka

vat se, vide

tse

Pol spotkac

sie˛ Sln sre

ˇati

‘to correspond (in writing)’:

Rus perepı

syvat

-sja (write) Cz dopisovat se

Blg korespondı

ram si Bel perapı

svac-ca

The passive and intransitive functions of the reflexive are noted above and the

reflexive in general also in 5.4.8 and 7.1.5. Reflexives are often omitted from the

word-formation properties of verbs, on account of the status of the reflexive

particle as a clitic in West and South Slavic.

A minor area of semantic suffixal verb formation concerns diminutives. This

area of word formation is very limited in contrast to the diminutive formations of

nouns (8.2), adjectives (8.4) and adverbs (8.5), and is unevenly spread across the

languages. The meaning of the verb is attenuated, somewhat as with procedurals,

with which verbal diminutives have some important points of contact:

(57) B/C/S pe``v-a-ti ‘to sing’ pev-u

ck-a-ti ‘to hum’

Mac kop-a ‘he digs’ kop-k-a ‘he digs lightly’

8.3.3 Other issues

Some common verbs show suppletive aspectual pairs:

(58) ‘take’: Imperfective Perfective

Rus brat

vzjat

Bel brac

uzja

450 8. Word formation

Pol brac

wzia˛ c

Sorb brac

wzac

‘come’: B/C/S do

laziti do

‘say’: Rus govorı

skaza

Slk hovorit’ povedat’

Etymologically, the perfective verbs are all originally prefixed, and should not

strictly have a further prefix added, though they sometimes do, with a semantic

distinction: Rus pred-skaza

‘to foretell’ [Prfv], Slk od-povedat’ ‘to answer’

[Imprfv]. A prefix added to the imperfective verbs will produce a semantically

distinct perfective verb: Rus vy

-brat

‘to choose’, u-govorı

‘to persuade’.

8.4 Word formation and adjectives

The word formation of adjectives is productive, but not as varied as word forma-

tion with nouns. Adjective-to-adjective formation is accomplished by some prefixes

and by hypocoristics. Adjectives are productively formed from other word-classes,

especially nouns, by suffixation.

It is common to divide adjectives into two types: qualitative and relative (or

‘‘relational’’). Qualitative adjectives are like Rus sla

byj ‘weak’ in (59). They are

gradable into degrees of comparison, may have hypocoristics, form derived nouns

and adverbs, and have short forms where the language allows (and where usage

retains them: 5.5.2) as well as the regular long forms:

(59) Rus sla

b-yj ‘weak’

sla

byj ‘very weak’

sla

b-en

k-ij (hypocoristic) ‘weakish, poorly’

slab-e

e ‘weaker’

sla

b-ost

‘weakness’

slab-

‘weak’ [Short]

sla

b-o ‘weakly’ [Adv]

Relative adjectives, which are all derived, have none of the above properties of

qualitative adjectives, with the minor exception of negative prefixes, which can be

prefixed productively with the meaning of ‘non-’. However, relative adjectives can

be metaphorized, which makes them able to form degrees of comparison, as well as

derived nominals and adverbials (60b):

(60a) Relative

Rus de

rev-o ‘wood’ > derev-ja

nn-yj ‘wooden, made of wood’

ne-derevja

nnyj ‘non-wooden’ (e.g. furniture)

8.4 Word formation and adjectives 451

(60b) Relative-become-qualitative

Rus derevja

nn-yj ‘wooden, as if made of wood’

derevja

nn-o ‘woodenly’, derevja

nn-ost

‘woodenness’

(e.g. of a performance in the theatre)

Relative adjectives are formed productively from nouns, including neologisms,

and they are much more numerous than qualitative adjectives. Townsend (1968/

1975) estimates the number of non-derived qualitative adjectives in Russian at

about 200–300, a figure which matches the information available for the other

languages.

8.4.1 Prefixation

There are numerous prefixed adjectives, but only small numbers which consist of a

prefix and a non-derived stem. In addition, the structure of most prefixed adjectives

shows the prefix and root forming an expanded stem which is then suffixed (8.1.4).

Only negative prefixes can productively be added to existing adjectives to form new

adjectives: Blg logı

en ‘logical’, ne-logı

en ‘illogical’.

Prefixed adjectives show transparent semantics. A few prefixes with gradable

adjectives can express excess or degree, though the orthography may make the

prefix look like a separate word:

(61) ‘too’: Pol za du

zy ‘too big’; Rus pere-nasel

ennyj ‘over-populated’

‘very’: Rus pre-mu

dryj ‘very wise’, Rus raz-ves

elyj ‘very merry’

‘ultra’: Sorb ultra-krotki ‘ultra-short’; Blg svra˘x-c

uvstvı

telen

‘ultra-sensitive’

Other prefixes have more varied semantic effects. A few function as pure prefixes,

but such prefixes are often foreign in origin, or the construction is a calque of a

foreign prefixed adjective (including originally Old Church Slavonic derivations

from Greek):

(62) ‘contra’: Blg protivo-zako

nen, Ukr proty-zako

nnyj ‘unlawful’

‘co-’: Rus so-vino

vnyj, Ukr spiv-vy

nnyj ‘co-guilty’

‘pre-’: Slk pred-posledny

, Pol przed-ostatni, Ukr pe

red-osta

nnij

‘penultimate’

However, most prefixed adjectives involve a prefix and an adjective-forming suffix

(below).

A characteristic use of the negative ne-/nie- is found with antonymous adjective

pairs, where prefixing ne-/nie- to one of the extremes takes the meaning more than

452 8. Word formation

halfway back to the other extreme: Ukr stary

j ‘old’, molody

j ‘young’, ne-molody

‘middle-aged, oldish’. However, it is not obvious what rules govern the choice of

which member of the antonymous pair will receive this prefix. A negativizing effect

is also achieved by the prefix bez- ‘without, -less’: B/C/S smr``tan ‘mortal’, be

(z)-

smrtan ‘immortal’, Rus gra

motnyj ‘literate’, bez-gra

motnyj ‘illiterate’.

8.4.2 Prefixation þ suffixation

Adjectives may show combined prefixation and suffixation, similar to the pattern

found with nouns (8.2). The most common pattern is for a prepositional phrase to

be adjectivalized, the preposition becoming a prefix and the new stem acquiring an

adjectivalizing suffix, usually -n-:

(63) Blg bezdo

m-(e)n-ø ‘homeless’: bez ‘without’ þ dom ‘house’ þ -n-

Pol wspo

łczes-n-y ‘contemporary’: w- ‘in’ þ spo

ł- ‘common’ þ czes

(< czas) ‘time’ þ -n-

8.4.3 Suffixation

The relation between semantic types of adjectives and their suffixes is not as

obvious as with the nouns. Depending on the semantic type of the source noun,

adjectives may express possession, composition, relation, location and many other

notions. It cannot be assumed that a cognate root will take the same suffix in the

various languages, with either native or foreign roots. In (64) adjectives are shown

with the suffix and the MascNomSg ending (note that the surface form of a suffix,

like that of an ending, may be zero, as in (64b); see 8.2):

(64a) Adjectives formed from zim-a ‘winter’

B/C/S z

m-sk-



i/z

m-nj-



i Mac zim-(e)n-

Bel zim-o

v-y/zı

m-n-i Rus zı

m-n-ij

Sorb zym-sk-i Pol zim-ow-y Cz zim-n-ı

(64b) Adjectives formed from zlat-/zolot-‘gold’

Sln zla

t-(

B/C/S zla

t-(a)n-

Blg, Mac zla

t-(e)n-

Bel zalat-(

)-y

Ukr zolot-(

)-y

Pol, Sorb złot-(

)-y Cz, Slk zlat-(

)-y

(64c) ‘philological’

Sln filolo

s-k-i B/C/S filo

s-k-



i Blg filolog-ı

esk-i/

Ukr filoloh-ı

ˇn-yj

Rus filolog-ı

ˇesk-ij

filolo

zˇ-k-i

Sorb filolog-isk-i Pol filolog-iczn-y Cz, Slk filolog-ick-y

8.4 Word formation and adjectives 453

Extending Townsend’s (1968/1975) approach from Russian to the other languages,

we divide adjective derivation patterns into seven topics:



short and long forms



adjectives in -n-



suffixes building relative adjectives



suffixes building qualitative adjectives



de-participial adjectives



diminutives and augmentatives



derived adjectives with more complex syntactic origins

8.4.3.1 Short and long forms

Proto-Slavic had about thirty suffixes for adjective formation, and in addition

formed both short (‘‘indefinite’’) and long (‘‘definite’’) adjectives. In modern

Slavic only B/C/S, and marginally Slovenian, retain the long form as a definiteness

marker, and then only with qualitative adjectives (5.4.3, 5.5.2.1). In the other

languages adjectives with both forms will use the short form after ‘‘be’’ predicates

and the long form elsewhere. However, the short form is on the decline in this

function, and is paradigmatically compromised (5.5.2.1). The more common pat-

tern is for derived adjectives to have either a short form or a long form, depending

on whether the suffix is inherently long or short. Possessives in -in- and -ov- are

short-form adjectives, but are not productive in East Slavic, where most adjectives

are long, and where the main function of possessives is to provide proper names. It

is only in South Slavic that there are reasonable numbers of non-possessive short

forms. Forms in -sk- are long, as are most suffixes forming relative adjectives. Some

typical examples also show variation in the selection of suffixes:

(65) Adjectives formed from neb(es)- ‘sky’ (on the syllable -es- see 5.5.1.6)

B/C/S ne

b-es(a)n-

/ne

b-esk-



i Blg neb-e

s(e)n-

Rus, Ukr neb-e

sn-yj Bel njab-e

sn-y Cz, Slk neb-esk-y

Pol nieb-iesk-i (also ‘blue’) Sorb njebj-esk-i

Vowel  zero alternations (4.2.1) may occur in the stem when the short-form

masculine singular (nominative) has a zero ending (Blg nebe

sen).

8.4.3.2 Adjective suffixation: -n-

The -n- suffix (Proto-Slavic -{n-) is productive in all the languages. It builds both

qualitative and relative adjectives, and is the only major adjective-forming suffix to

fulfil both these roles. The noun bases are usually inanimate. Velars and some

consonants like /c/ at the end of the preceding stem undergo mutation, and some

454 8. Word formation

stem-final paired consonants soften (additive palatalization), subject to standard

phonological constraints and with some variation across the languages:

(66) Blg B/C/S Ukr Cz

‘river’ [Noun]: rek-a

k-a rı

k-a r

ek-a

‘river’ [Adj] re

ˇ-

(e)n-

ˇ-n-



i rı

ˇk-ov-yj

ˇ-n-y

‘science’ nau

k-a na

uk-a nau

k-a nauk-a

‘scientific’ nau

(e)n-

ˇ-(a)n-

,-n



i nauk-o

v-yj nauk-ov-y

The suffix -n- is also involved in some extended suffixes like -ic

n-, -enn-, -ovn-. There

are some doublets with the suffixes -ic

ˇn-

and -ic

ˇesk-

, e.g. Rus e

konomı

ˇnyj/

konomı

eskij, with effects like that of English economical/economic, French

conome/e

conomique. The adjective in -n- is either ambiguous as to qualitative/

relative, or is qualitative (here in the meaning of ‘money-wise, thrifty’), and the

adjective in -ic

esk- has the relative meaning ‘related to the science of economics’.

Similarly Slk hospoda

rsky/ekonomicky

‘economic’ vs hospoda

rny ‘economical’.

8.4.3.3 Suffixes building relative adjectives

The equivalent of ‘linguistic’ in the Slavic languages gives a useful illustration of the

variation of suffix selection and use in relative adjectives.

(67) ‘linguistic’

B/C/S lingvı

st-ic



i Sln lingvist-ı

(e)n-

, jezikoslo

v-(e)n-

Blg lingvist-ı

(e)n-

, lingvist-ı

ˇesk-i,

ezikove

d-sk-i

Rus lingvist-ı

esk-ij, jazykove

d-c

esk-ij

Ukr linhvist-y

n-yj, movozna

v-c

-yj

Cz lingvist-ick-y

/jazykove

d-n-y

Pol je˛ zykoznaw-cz-y

Sorb linguist-isk-i

We give only a brief overview of some typical processes of adjective-formation

here, focusing especially on two types: (1) the -sk- suffix, which represents the

derivation pattern of a large number of suffixes which build adjectives, some with

limited range and zero productivity; and (2) possessive adjectives.

The suffix -sk- is productive and widespread in Slavic, for both animates and

inanimates, as well as personal proper names and the names of nationalities:

(68) Blg B/C/S Ukr Cz

‘sea’ [Noun]: mor-e

mo`` r-e mo

r-e mor

-e

‘sea, naval’ [Adj]: mo

r-sk-i mo

r-sk-



i mor-s

k-y

j mor-sk-y

‘town’ [Noun]: grad gra

dmı

sto me

sto

‘town’ [Adj]: gra

d-sk-i gra

d-sk-



i mı

s(t-s)

k-yj me

ˇst-sk-y

8.4 Word formation and adjectives 455

There are also many proper (family) names in -sk-, like Rus Stravı

nskij (conven-

tionally ‘Stravinsky’), Dostoe

vskij (Dostoevsky), Stanisla

vskij (Stanislavsky),

ajko

vskij (Tchaikovsky); Pol Wis

niewski, Da˛ browski; Mac Todorovski,

Dimitrovski.

Note that the preceding syllable in almost all of these is -ov-/-ev- or -in-, which

represent the other type of common suffixal adjective formation, that of possessive

adjectives, a type also found in possessive pronouns in some languages. The suffixes

used are -ov-, -in- and -j-. The group in -j- mainly derives possessives from names of

animals and a few other select nouns. In stem-final position consonants undergo

mutation, and paired consonants may soften. In the east the masculine nominative

singular has the fill vowel /i/; the form is short even where the long form is well

established (East Slavic and Czech); (Polish has few possessive adjectives; and for

Slovak and Sorbian, see 5.5.2):

(69) Blg B/C/S Ukr Cz

‘fish’ [Noun]: rı

b-a rı``b-a ry

b-a ryb-a

‘fish’ [Adj] rı

b-i rı``blj-



i ry

b-’jac

ˇ-yj

ryb-ı

‘God’ [Noun] Bog Bo

g Bog Bu

‘God’s’ [Adj] bo

zˇ-ı

bo``zˇ-jı¯ bo

zˇ-yj bozˇ-ı

‘wolf’ [Noun] va

lk vu

k vovk vlk

‘wolf’ [Adj] va

-i vu%c

-jı¯ vo

-yj vlc

-ı

The second group of possessive adjectives takes the suffix -ov- with masculine bases

(o/jo-declension), and -in- with bases in -a (a-declension), most of which are

feminine. This group also shows the short form. Their declension patterns may

show mixed paradigms (5.5.2) and there are often modern replacements or variants

adding -sk- to form a normal long-form adjective:

(70) Blg B/C/S Ukr Cz

‘uncle’ [Noun]: c

-o u%j



ak-

dja

k-o stry

‘uncle’s’ [Adj] c

-ov-

u%j



ak-ov-

dja

d’k-iv-

stry

c-ovsk-y

‘nut’ [Noun]: o

rex-

rah-

horı

ech-

‘nut’s’ [Adj] o

rex-ov-

rah-ov-

horı

x-ov-yj or

ech-ovsk-y

(For kinship terms, see 9.2.1.) This group includes many proper names, including the

patronymics formed from proper names, as well as many nominalized adjectives

that now make surnames: Rus Iva

n-o

v (Iva

n), Pop-o

v (pop ‘[Orthodox] priest’),

´ˇ

skin (Pushkin) (pu

´ˇ

sk-a ‘cannon’), Sa

xar-ov ( sa

xar ‘sugar’), Gorbac

(Gorbachev) (gorba

‘hunchback’), Xru

ˇ-

ev (Khrushchev) (xru

‘May-beetle’).

Here too belong surnames like Le

n-in (the River Le

na in Siberia) and Sta

l-in

(stal

‘steel’).

456 8. Word formation

In East Slavic and Polish, these possessive adjectives are literary or have given

way to the genitive, and remain mainly in fossilized phrases: Rus ma

m-in syno

‘mother’s son’ (i.e. namby-pamby); Rus su

k-a ‘bitch’, su

k-in syn ‘son of a bitch’;

Rus ada

m-ov-o ja

bloko ‘Adam’s apple’. The genitive is well maintained in the rest of

West Slavic.

For syntactic aspects of ‘‘possession’’, see 6.1.2.2 and 7.1.7.

8.4.3.4 Suffixes building qualitative adjectives

Only a few suffixes build qualitative adjectives, usually from existing qualitative

adjectives with an attenuating sense. They include -ovat- and -av-: ‘white’: Rus be

l-yj,

Pol biał-y; ‘whitish’: Rus bel-ova

t-yj, Pol biał-aw-y. There can be doublets with

relational pairs as a result of the metaphorization of some relative adjectives into

qualitative adjectives: see Rus e

konomı

nyj/e

konomı

eskij above. While it is the

-ic

ˇn-

suffix of such doublets which metaphorizes, this suffix is only secondarily a

formant of qualitative adjectives.

8.4.3.5 De-participial adjectives

Participles are a rich and productive source of adjectives. Starting from a base of

morphology shared with adjectives, participles may lose their tense and aspect

information, and become genuine adjectives. This process can result in homo-

nyms, where one form relates to the verb, and the other to the new adjectivalized form:

(71a) Adjectives from the present active participle (‘-ing’)

Slk ved-iet’ ‘to know’ vse-vedia-c-i ‘omniscient’ (‘‘all-knowing’’)

Blg gor-ja

‘to burn’ gor-e

st-

‘very hot’

Russian makes use of the Old Russian suffix -c

- in the adjectival

sense vs the regular RusChSl participial suffix -

Rus gor-e

‘to burn’ gor-ja

ˇ-ij

‘burning’ gor-ja

ˇ-ij

‘hot’

(71b) Adjectives from past active participles (or aorist l-participle)

Blg zre

j-a ‘to mature’ zrja-l-

‘mature’

Rus usta

-t

‘to get tired’ usta

-l-yj ‘tired’

(71c) Adjectives from the present passive participle

Rus ljub-ı

‘to love’ ljub-ı

myj ‘favorite’

ispra

v-it

‘to correct’ ne-isprav-ı

m-yj ‘incorrigible’

(71d) Adjectives from the past passive participle

B/C/S zna`` -ti ‘to know’ zna

-n-

‘known, familiar’

Blg razse

j-a ‘to distract’ razse

j-an-

‘absent-minded’

Russian may use a single -n- for the adjective in place of the usual participial -nn-:

8.4 Word formation and adjectives 457

Rus zˇ a

r-it

‘to roast, fry’ zˇ a

r-enn-yj ‘roasted’

zˇ a

r-en-yj ‘roast, fried’ (Neut zˇ a

r-en-oe ‘roast meat’)

There are other, less regular, deverbal adjective formations:

(72a) B/C/S zau

zim-ati ‘to occupy’ zauzı

m-ljiv-

‘enterprising, solicitous’

(72b) Slk tvor-it’ ‘to create’ tvor-iv-y

‘creative’

8.4.3.6 Diminutives and augmentatives

Diminutives and augmentatives do not change the part of speech, and they usually

do not change other properties like gender either. Only qualitative adjectives

regularly form diminutives and augmentatives, which is semantically consistent with

their ability to form the degrees of comparison (8.4.1). Diminutive adjectives are less

common in South Slavic than in the other languages. The use of diminutives with

adjectives mirrors that with nouns (8.2.2). Diminutive suffixes used with adjectives

include:

(73) ‘small’ ‘very small, fine, tiny’

-en

k- Ukr mal-y

j mal-e

k-yj

-jusen

k- Rus ma

len

k-ij mal-ju

sen

k-ij

-ic

k- Slk mal-y

mal-ic

k-y

-ulink- Slk drobn-y

drobn-ulink-y

In a noun phrase both adjectives and nouns may carry a diminutive suffix:

Rus xu

d-en

k-ij mal

ˇı

sk-a ‘a skinny little boy’.

As with nouns, adjectives may show a diminutive form in one language which is,

in fact, the standard form: Ukr maly

j,Czmaly

‘small’, Rus ma

l-en

k-ij. The original

Rus ma

lyj still exists, but only in fossilized phrases: bez ma

l-ogo ‘almost’ [lit.

‘without a little’], abstract meaning: ma

lyj bı

znes ‘small business’, or as the pre-

dicative short form:

pk-a mne mal-a

‘the hat is (too) small for me’.

Augmentatives (mainly East Slavic) include:

(74) -u

- Rus to

lst-yj ‘fat’ tolst-u

´ˇ

-ij ‘very fat’

-enn- Bel zdaro

v-y ‘healthy’ zdarav-e

nn-y ‘robust’

-ezn- Ukr star-y

j ‘old’ star-e

zn-y ‘very old’

8.4.3.7 Combination, coordination and subordination

Derived adjectives with more complex syntactic origins are mainly adjectivalized

compound nouns, but may also derive from adjectival phrases (we use the IPA

stress style in (75–76) to avoid confusion with other diacritics):

458 8. Word formation