- Chapters of books
- Working papers
- Report a publication
I say: Some issues in studying 19-century Russian
We consider the pilot project of the corpus of the 19th century to be a linguistic tool which will enable investigation of an unchartered field of research, “microdiachronic” changes. Microdiachrony will outline new linguistic objectives by means of comparing two language norms that are separated by the span of several centuries. The present study embraces three perspectives that are important to us in that they determine the possible future directions for research.
The first is the immense complexity of the mutual influence between the Russian and French languages of that time, which calls for more in-depth professional investigation.
The second perspective deals with the constructions that possess compound and non-compositional semantics; their semantic complexity stands out only when it strikes our eye, as readers or as linguists, by its incomplete compliance with the contemporary norm. In fact, the phrases ja (tebe) govorju, govorju ja, as well as the verbs of speech which have been long and thoroughly studied by linguists sound so habitual that it takes a special instrument to expose their non-triviality.
And finally, the third perspective consists in the semantic trajectory of the micro-changes of our construction, which also proves to be motivated (as well as the construction’s meaning itself). As a matter of fact, it is quite predictable that a construction with an initially very generic discourse meaning should narrow down the scope of its usage. It “freezes” in the two conspicuous discourse-significant and encompassing constructions – that of self-citation and of categorical incentive, and it undergoes different changes in their contexts. But such direction of development points to the widespread transition from the general modal meaning of intensity towards developing “intersubjective” meanings of the locutionary (speaker-oriented) modality – the transition that is thought to be characteristic of the grammaticalization of pre-modal meanings in general (cf. Bybee et al. 1994: 210-212, van der Auwera, Plungian 1998).
Nowadays great attention is paid both to knowledge reproduction-reception mechanisms, and technologies of relevant knowledge transferring. Relating to this, academic discourse research and discourse strategies of scientific knowledge transferring are in the focus of special attention. As far as English written academic discourse in Economics is underestimated in the process of studying, this research is of great timeliness. Discourse markers (DMs) play an important role in the process of text generation, in providing discourse grammar and sense integrity and optimization in transferring information from addresser to addressee. But beyond modern research are the aspects of DMs functioning depending on the level of students' professional and communicative competencies. The article focuses on special features of discourse markers in academic discourse in Economics. It is based on English written texts produced by Russian students majoring in Economics with different competence. The main objective is to reveal the difference of discourse markers functioning in terms of the level of students' foreign language professional competence. The authors succeeded in extending the DMs classification. Qualitative and quantitative analysis revealed the peculiarities in DMs functioning in academic discourse in Economics. The prevailing DMs are those which introduce new or additional information, taking the leading position in professional discourse in comparison with nonprofessional one. The second and the third positions in both discourses belong to the contrastive DMs and MDs of author's assessment. However, the qualitative analysis revealed that written texts of professional discourse highlighted the tendency of using DMs of different groups. It can be explained by students' high level of professional skills and, thus, by their ability to transfer scientific knowledge (by their high communicative competence). The peculiarity of DMs functioning in nonprofessional discourse is the occurrence of the same marker or monotony in using markers in one written text. It can be explained by the lack of the ability to use the cognitive-communicative strategy in transferring economic knowledge effectively. The research allows to substantially specify the understanding of creating and transferring the special knowledge process in English by non-natives. Moreover, it enables us to expand the understanding of academic discourse in a special sphere. The developed data can be the basis for differentiating of academic discourse, heterogeneous in its learning. DMs functioning regularities in terms of the level of foreign language professional competence are identified. Also, the prospects for further research in the sphere of DMs in academic discourse functioning are determined.
The collected papers contain articles by famous and young scientists on actual problems of philology (cognitive linguistics, lexical semantics, semiotics, pragmatics, text linguistics, stylistics; poetics, literary criticism; translation, intercultural communication). The issue also presents research on foreign language teaching methods. The edition is addressed to linguists, translators, teachers, postgraduates, students and a wide readership.
Reading utilises at least two neural pathways. The temporal lexical route visually maps whole words to their lexical entries, whilst the nonlexical route decodes words phonologically via parietal cortex. Readers typically employ the lexical route for familiar words, but poor comprehension plus precocity at mechanically 'sounding out' words suggests that differences might exist in autism. Combined MEG/EEG recordings of adults with autistic spectrum conditions (ASC) and controls while reading revealed preferential recruitment of temporal areas in controls and additional parietal recruitment in ASC. Furthermore, a lack of differences between semantic word categories was consistent with previous suggestion that people with ASC may lack a 'default' lexical-semantic processing mode. These results are discussed with reference to dual-route models of reading.
Chapter 3 deals with the interaction of language and culture that make two facets of Russian English. Section 1, prepared by Zoya Proshina, provides for the comparison between Russian and English. It describes typological characteristics of Russian and English and their common features and distinctions on different language levels, which may have an impact on the features of Russian English. It is known that language contact between English and an indigenous language is usually a two-way process that leads to nativization of English and Englishization of the indigenous language. Englishization of Russian is elucidated by Alexandra Rivlina and Zoya Proshina in section 2. In section 3, Alexandra Rivlina elabo-rates on English and Russian code-mixing and code-switching. She argues that English-Russian hybridization is increasingly widely used in Russian discourse, especially in the form of word play based on code-mixing. Section 4, by Svetlana Ter-Minasova, focuses the discussion on the contemporary changes in Russian mentality and culture caused by the sudden ‘intrusion’ of English into the Russian language, culture, and lifestyle. The impact of English culture via the English language in its various forms (mass media, advertisement, the avalanche borrowing, etc.) on the Russian culture can be seen in different domains: in the business domain, change of attitudes to patronymics; in academic papers, change of style, a great damage inflicted on the Russian linguacultural picture of the world by poor translations from English into Russian. Section 5, by Victor Kabakchi and Elena Beloglazova, characterizes the way English adjusts to expressing Russian culture-loaded concepts.
The paper continues research into words denoting everyday life objects in the Russian language. This research is conducted for developing a new encyclopedic thesaurus of Russian everyday life terminology. Working on this project brings up linguistic material which leads to discovering new trends and phenomena not covered by the existing dictionaries. We discuss derivation models which gain polularity: clipped forms (komp < komp’juter ‘computer’, nout < noutbuk ‘notebook computer’, vel < velosiped ‘bicycle’, mot<motocikl ‘motorbike’), competing masculine and feminine con- tracted nouns derived from adjectival noun phrases (mobil’nik (m.) / mo- bilka (f.) < mobil’nyj telefon (m.) ‘mobile phone’, zarjadnik (m.) / zarjadka (f.) < zarjadnoe ustrojstvo (n.) ‘AC charger’), hybrid compounds (plat’e- sviter ‘sweater dress’, jubka-brjuki ‘skirt pants’, shapkosharf ‘scarf hat’, vilkolozhka ‘spork, foon’). These words vary in spelling and syntactic behav- iour. We describe a newly formed series of words denoted multifunctional objects: mfushkaZ< MFU < mnogofunkcional’noe ustrojstvo ‘MFD, multi- function device’, mul’titul ‘multitool’, centr ‘unit, set’. Explaining the need to compose frequency lists of word meanings rather than just words, we of- fer a technique for gathering such lists and provide a sample produced from our own data. We also analyze existing dictionaries and perform various experiments to study the changes in word meanings and their comparative importance for speakers. We believe that, apart from the practical usage for our lexicographic project, our results might prove interesting for research in the evolution of the Russian lexical system.
29th vol. of the "Dictionary of Russian Language of the 11th-17th cc."
The dictionary is the implementation of the project “Lexicographic presentation of Modern Russian everyday speech”. This dictionary describes Modern Russian everyday speech vocabulary. The Dictionary is a fundamental research work giving the first detailed description of lexical, semantic, grammatical and stylistic properties of an everyday word, its combinability, paradigmatic relations and pragmatic conditions of its use in speech.
The volume includes proceedings of the 23th Scandianvian Conference of Linguistics (SCL 23) that was held at Uppsala University 1–3 October 2008. It includes studies covering a wide spectrum of approaches to linguistics, for example, cross-linguistic typological studies, linguistic variation and language change in contact situations as well as studies relating to bilingualism and to second and foreign language learning.
The paper reviews D.G. Miller's recent book, "External influences on English: From its beginnings to the Renaissance".
The article examines the main trends in the study of the Stalinist period and the phenomenon of Stalinism in connection with the mass opening of the archives.