Nam ne pisalos’ i mečtalos’: alternating dative reflexive constructions revisited
Нам не писалось и мечталось: еще раз o дательных возвратных конструкциях с двойным чередованием
Type de document :
Compte-rendu et recension critique d'ouvrage
Titre :
Nam ne pisalos’ i mečtalos’: alternating dative reflexive constructions revisited
Нам не писалось и мечталось: еще раз o дательных возвратных конструкциях с двойным чередованием
Нам не писалось и мечталось: еще раз o дательных возвратных конструкциях с двойным чередованием
Auteur(s) :
Paykin-Arroues, Katia [Auteur]
Savoirs, Textes, Langage (STL) - UMR 8163 [STL]
van Peteghem, Marleen [Auteur]

Savoirs, Textes, Langage (STL) - UMR 8163 [STL]
van Peteghem, Marleen [Auteur]
Titre de la revue :
Russian Linguistics
Pagination :
1-25
Éditeur :
Springer Verlag
Date de publication :
2017
ISSN :
0304-3487
Mot(s)-clé(s) en anglais :
Verb
dative
reflexive
subject
agentivity
experiencer
dative
reflexive
subject
agentivity
experiencer
Discipline(s) HAL :
Sciences de l'Homme et Société/Linguistique
Résumé en anglais : [en]
Our study deals with the dative reflexive construction identified through a double alternation: a nominative vs. dative marking of the subject and a non-reflexive vs. reflexive form of the verb, as in ja ne rabotaju ‘I do ...
Lire la suite >Our study deals with the dative reflexive construction identified through a double alternation: a nominative vs. dative marking of the subject and a non-reflexive vs. reflexive form of the verb, as in ja ne rabotaju ‘I do not work’ vs. mne ne rabotaetsja ‘I do not feel like working’. We argue that this construction subsumes two subtypes: subtype 1, taking one-argument verbs such as rabotat’ ‘work’, and subtype 2, occurring with two-argument verbs such as dumat’ ‘think’. In both subtypes, the shift from nominative to dative goes hand in hand with a decrease in subject agentivity. We show that the properties usually associated with subtype 1 and extended by various authors to the dative reflexive construction, such as modal reading, or the necessary presence of an adverbial or a negation, are not defining for the construction as a whole, nor for subtype 1. These properties merely facilitate the decrease in subject agentivity entailed by the nominative to dative shift, and the observed differences between the two subtypes are due to the initial semantic role of the subject, generally an agent in subtype 1 and an experiencer in subtype 2.Lire moins >
Lire la suite >Our study deals with the dative reflexive construction identified through a double alternation: a nominative vs. dative marking of the subject and a non-reflexive vs. reflexive form of the verb, as in ja ne rabotaju ‘I do not work’ vs. mne ne rabotaetsja ‘I do not feel like working’. We argue that this construction subsumes two subtypes: subtype 1, taking one-argument verbs such as rabotat’ ‘work’, and subtype 2, occurring with two-argument verbs such as dumat’ ‘think’. In both subtypes, the shift from nominative to dative goes hand in hand with a decrease in subject agentivity. We show that the properties usually associated with subtype 1 and extended by various authors to the dative reflexive construction, such as modal reading, or the necessary presence of an adverbial or a negation, are not defining for the construction as a whole, nor for subtype 1. These properties merely facilitate the decrease in subject agentivity entailed by the nominative to dative shift, and the observed differences between the two subtypes are due to the initial semantic role of the subject, generally an agent in subtype 1 and an experiencer in subtype 2.Lire moins >
Langue :
Anglais
Vulgarisation :
Non
Collections :
Source :