Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 17 items for

  • Author or Editor: Egbert Fortuin x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All
Authors: and

Summary

A corpus-based analysis is provided of the Russian adverbs teper’ and sejčas, testing a number of hypotheses put forward by Mel’čuk (1985). The hypothesis that teper’ (and not sejčas) is inherently associated with the feature of “contrast” or “juxtaposition” is verified by our analysis. However, it is not always reflected in objectively identifiable contextual features. As a result, we argue that a difference must be made between “contrast” as part of the meaning of a word and as part of the context. Finally, it is shown how systematic differences in use between teper’ and sejčas boil down to the presence versus absence of the feature “contrast” (or “juxtaposition”), and how the deictic nature of sejčas explains some restrictions on its use.

In: Dutch Contributions to the Sixteenth International Congress of Slavists. Linguistics
Authors: and

Summary

A corpus-based analysis is provided of the Russian adverbs teper’ and sejčas, testing a number of hypotheses put forward by Mel’čuk (1985). The hypothesis that teper’ (and not sejčas) is inherently associated with the feature of “contrast” or “juxtaposition” is verified by our analysis. However, it is not always reflected in objectively identifiable contextual features. As a result, we argue that a difference must be made between “contrast” as part of the meaning of a word and as part of the context. Finally, it is shown how systematic differences in use between teper’ and sejčas boil down to the presence versus absence of the feature “contrast” (or “juxtaposition”), and how the deictic nature of sejčas explains some restrictions on its use.

In: Dutch Contributions to the Sixteenth International Congress of Slavists. Linguistics

Modality is among the broadest notions used in linguistics. Therefore the term modality is delimited here into four categories of dispositional (participant-internal), circumstantial (often called dynamic), deontic, and epistemic modality. This grid is then applied to a variety of linguistic phenomena in Slavic languages to indicate functions belonging to these four categories, either as their core function or by recurrent and sufficiently reliable implicatures. These means include (i) distinct markers (words, morphemes), (ii) constructions, and (iii) suprasegmental properties. Particular attention is paid not only to modal auxiliaries and other core means, but also to less well-known derivational means like deverbal deadjectives and to the role of aspect in diverse constructions.

in Encyclopedia of Slavic Languages and Linguistics Online