Download Free Accusative Genitive Under Negation In Russian Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Accusative Genitive Under Negation In Russian and write the review.

This study investigates the reasons for choosing the genitive or accusative case for propositional nouns with verbs in negative sentences. The probable reason for the recommendation in grammars to choose the genitive case with abstract nouns in negative construction is two constructions overlapping: the negative construction and the construction of descriptive predicate. The study examines 22 examples taken from the National Corpus of the Russian Language 2000-2017 with the propositional abstract object otvet (answer). The examples are divided into two groups - with the object included in the construction of the descriptive predicate and with the verb naming one proposition, and two-subject-constructions. The examples of both groups mostly contain genitive nouns, but for different reasons.
The genitive/accusative opposition in Slavic languages is a decades-old linguistic conundrum. Shedding new light on this perplexing object-case alternation in Russian, this volume analyzes two variants of genitive objects that alternate with accusative complements—the genitive of negation and the intensional genitive. The author contends that these variants are manifestations of the same phenomenon, and thus require an integrated analysis. Further, that the choice of case is sensitive to factors that fuse semantics and pragmatics, and that the genitive case is assigned to objects denoting properties at the same time as they lack commitment to existence. Kagan’s subtle analysis accounts for the complex relations between case-marking and other properties, such as definiteness, specificity, number and aspect. It also reveals a correlation between the genitive case and the subjunctive mood, and relates her overarching subject matter to other instances of differential object-marking.
The genitive/accusative opposition in Slavic languages is a decades-old linguistic conundrum. Shedding new light on this perplexing object-case alternation in Russian, this volume analyzes two variants of genitive objects that alternate with accusative complements—the genitive of negation and the intensional genitive. The author contends that these variants are manifestations of the same phenomenon, and thus require an integrated analysis. Further, that the choice of case is sensitive to factors that fuse semantics and pragmatics, and that the genitive case is assigned to objects denoting properties at the same time as they lack commitment to existence. Kagan’s subtle analysis accounts for the complex relations between case-marking and other properties, such as definiteness, specificity, number and aspect. It also reveals a correlation between the genitive case and the subjunctive mood, and relates her overarching subject matter to other instances of differential object-marking.
Based on data from a wide range of languages, the book discusses the ways in which case interacts with meaning.
Focusing on issues of case theory and comparative grammar, this study treats selected problems in the syntax of the Slavic languages from the perspective of Government-Binding theory. Steven Franks seeks to develop parametric solutions to related constructions among the various Slavic languages. A model of case based loosely on Jakobson's feature system is adapted to a variety of comparative problems in Slavic, including across-the-board constructions, quantification, secondary predication, null subject phenomena, and voice. Solutions considered make use of recent approaches to phrase structure, including the VP-internal subject hypothesis and the DP hypothesis. The book will serve admirably as an introduction to GB theory for Slavic linguists as well as to the range of problems posed by Slavic for general syntacticians.
This volume presents a range of studies testing some of the latest models and hypotheses in the field of second/third language acquisition, such as the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Slabakova, 2008, 2016), the Scalpel Model (Slabakova, 2017), and the Interface Hypothesis (Sorace & Serratrice, 2009) to name a few. The studies explore a variety of linguistic properties (e.g., functional morphology, linguistic properties at the syntax-discourse interface) by focusing on distinct populations (L2 acquisition, L3/LN acquisition, Heritage Speakers), while also considering the links between experimental linguistic research, generative linguistics, and, in some cases, language pedagogy. Dedicated to Roumyana Slabakova, each chapter can be directly linked to her work in terms of the empirical testing of extant hypotheses, the formulation of new models and ideas, and her efforts to advance the dialogue between different disciplines and frameworks. Overall, the contributions in the volume bear evidence of Slabakova’s enduring influence in the field as a collaborator, teacher, and researcher.
This thesis examines the optionality of Russian genitive case under negation, using native-speaker data and online resources, such as Internet search engines and linguistic corpora. Of special interest is assessing the role of negative intensifier phrases in selecting genitive or other grammatical case forms. The paper includes a discussion of the pros and cons of relying on online resources in linguistic research, as well as an overview of the use of the Russian National Corpus, a highly robust linguistics research tool.
This manuscript is a revision of my 1982 MIT dissertation of the same name. A previous version of sections of chapters 1 and 5 appeared as 'Case Agreement in Russian', in The Mental Representation of Gram matical Relations, edited by Joan Bresnan, MIT Press, 1983. I am grateful to MIT Press for permission to reproduce parts of that article here. I would like to express my appreciation to Catherine V. Chvany, who has read several versions of this manuscript over the years, and provided encouragement and invaluable comments. Thanks go also to Johanna Nichols whose careful reading and useful suggestions have improved the book. I am also deeply grateful to Joan Bresnan, Ken Hale, Morris Halle, Beth Levin, and Jane Simpson for helpful discussions of the material contained herein. For sharing their native intuitions, special thanks go to Alina Israeli, Boris Katz, and Evgenij Pinsky, and to Liza Chernyak, Volodja Gitin, Victoria Koff, Larissa Levin, Victoria Schiller, and Elena Semeka-Pankra tova. Joyce Friedman, Beth Levin, and Jane Simpson kindly provided assistance with bibliographical references and proofreading. This manuscript was prepared using the computer facilities at Boston University, and lowe a large debt of gratitude to the following people for providing access to equipment and technical assistance: William H. Henneman, Philip Budne, Barry Shein, and Paul Blanchard. IX INTRODUCTION The study of case, once primarily of interest to philologists, has only recently begun to receive the attention it deserves from syntacticians.
The papers in this volume investigate the semantics of aspect from both a theoretical and a crosslinguistic point of view, in a wide range of languages from a number of different language families. The papers are all informed by the belief that a thorough exposure to the expression of aspect crosslinguistically is crucial for progress in understanding how the semantics of aspect works and what the semantic basis of aspectual distinctions is. The languages discussed include Russian, English, Dutch, Hebrew, Mandarin, Japanese and Kalaallisut. The issues discussed in this volume include the centrality of measuring and counting in an understanding of telicity; the importance of the singular/plural distinction in the study of aspect; the importance of homogeneity as a property of event types; the flexibility of lexical classes; and the interaction between expressions of aspect and the particular morphosyntactic structure of a language.