Russian RAZ-: A case of semantic camouflage Laura A. Janda Tore Nesset University of Tromsø

From space to aspect? Conventional wisdom: Our alternative Hypothesis: Purely aspectual prefixes are semantically “empty” Our alternative Hypothesis: Spatial meanings are the driving force behind aspectual distinctions in Russian How can this be tested empirically? Large database Statistical analysis Semantic analysis of non-prefixed and prefixed verbs

Our contribution General arguments why prefixes aren’t empty The number of aspectual prefixes The statistical distribution of the prefixes Prefixation of borrowings Prefix variation Case study of the raz- prefix Used in various types of perfectives with spatial meaning Spatial meaning attested in putatively purely aspectual uses as well

Russian aspectual prefixation RAZ-tajat’ ‘melt’ pf Natural perfective Purely perfectivizing prefix Specialized perfective Lexical prefix Complex act Superlexical prefix tajat’ ‘melt’ ipf vit’ ‘twist’ ipf žeč’ ‘burn’ ipf THE SAME PREFIX RAZ- DOES ALL THREE THINGS!!! THEY ARE NOT THREE DIFFERENT GROUPS OF PREFIXES. RAZ- vit’ ‘develop’ pf RAZ-žeč’ ‘kindle’ pf

Russian aspectual prefixation Natural perfective Purely perf prefix We focus on this part Imperfective This part has been studied a lot Specialized perfective Lexical prefix Complex act Superlex prefix Affects argument structure Adverbial meanings

Why purely perfectivizing prefixes aren’t empty (1) Assume: Only purpose of prefixes is to mark perfective aspect How many prefixes are needed? Reasonable answer: ONE Russian has 19 relevant prefixes (Krongauz 1998) M.A. Krongauz The number of prefixes suggests that they are not pure markers of aspect.

Why purely perfectivizing prefixes aren’t empty (2) Numbers from Exploring Emptiness database at UiT Assume Prefixes are pure aspectual markers Prediction Even distribution of prefixes across base verbs they combine with The UNeven distribution suggests that the prefixes do different jobs.

Why purely perfectivizing prefixes aren’t empty (3) ZA-asfal’tirovat’ COVER Assume Prefixes are pure aspectual markers Prediction Prefixes are assigned to borrowings in random fashion But Native speakers have intuitions Borrowings are assigned prefixes in a consistent way. PRO-fil’trovat’ MOVE THROUGH The consistent assignment of prefixes to borrowings suggests that prefixes are not semantically empty.

Why purely perfectivizing prefixes aren’t empty (4) Assume Prefixes are pure aspectual markers Fact 28% of base verbs combine with 2 or more prefixes Prediction Prefix combinations distributed evenly EXPLAIN WHAT IT MEANS FOR ONE VERB TO COMBINE WITH SEVERAL PREFIXES. MENTION GRUZIT’ WITH ZA-, NA- AND PO- AS NATURAL PERFECTIVES. COMBINATION IS RESTRICTED BECAUSE PREFIXES HAVE MEANING. IF THEY WERE EMPTY, THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY REASON WHY THEY COULDN’T COMBINE FREELY. THE MEANINGS MAKE IT HARDER FOR 3-WAY COMBINATIONS THAN 2-WAY COMBINATIONS ETC. Skewed distribution of prefix combinations suggests that prefixes are not empty.

Why purely perfectivizing prefixes aren’t empty (5) Assume Prefixes are pure aspectual markers Fact 61 attested combinations of 2 prefixes Predictions Prefix combinations distributed evenly SKEWED DISTRIBUTION TO CONTINUES TO DECREASE AND END UP WITH ZERO. Skewed distribution of two-prefix combinations suggests that prefixes are not empty.

The rest of the paper explores the semantics of raz- … But in order to drive home their point, they need to do semantic analysis of the prefixes. All these arguments are suggestive… The rest of the paper explores the semantics of raz-

Structure of the argument Explore meaning of raz- in verbs where its meaning is UNcontroversial: Specialized perfectives (lexical prefixes) Complex act perfectives (superlexical prefixes) Compare with the use of raz- in verbs where its meaning is controversial: Natural perfectives (purely aspectual prefixes) The same meaning attested in (1) and (2). Raz- has the same meaning in all types of perfectives. There is no semantically empty raz- in Russian.

Meaning: A network model Category: Network of related subcategories Prototype: Central subcategory that is the best example of the category as a whole Extension relations: Subcategories relate to the prototype via e.g. metaphor and metonymy. Schema: Categories may have a general schema that covers all subcategories.

General schema and prototype for raz- “APART”: Outward movement in various directions from a point The general schema is instantiated in a variety of subcategories Prototype = “PHYSICAL APART” Physical object divided in pieces To explode is RAZorvat’sja

Specialized/complex act perfectives razgruzit’ ‘unload’ rastoptat’ ‘trample’ 10. UN-, DIS- (metaphor) 9. UN-, DIS- rastvorit’ ‘dissolve’ raspilit’ ‘saw apart’ rasšifrovat’ ‘decipher’ 1. PHYSICAL APART 5. SOFTEN, DISSOLVE 2. CRUSH razdut’ ‘inflate’ 6. SWELL 4. SPREAD (metaphor) 3. SPREAD razdosadovat’ ‘annoy’ razvolnovat’sja ‘become upset’ raskatat’ ‘roll out’ raskalit’ ‘make red-hot’ razreklamirovat’ ‘publicize all over’ 7. EXCITE 11. INGRESS. 8. EXCITE (metaphor)

Natural perfectives 10. UN-, DIS- (metaphor) 9. UN-, DIS- 1. PHYSICAL APART 5. SOFTEN, DISSOLVE 2. CRUSH 6. SWELL 4. SPREAD (metaphor) 3. SPREAD 7. EXCITE 11. INGRESS. 8. EXCITE (metaphor)

Natural perfectives Only in specialized perfectives 10. UN-, DIS- (metaphor) 9. UN-, DIS- 1. PHYSICAL APART 5. SOFTEN, DISSOLVE 2. CRUSH 6. SWELL 4. SPREAD (metaphor) 3. SPREAD 9-10 CANNOT BE NP, BECAUSE NEGATION CANNOT BE INVISIBLE. 11. CANNOT BE NP, BECAUSE THE QUANTITATIVE MEANING OF INGRESSION IS BY DEFINITION A COMPLEX ACT/SUPERLEXICAL PREFIX. 7. EXCITE 11. INGRESS. Only in complex acts 8. EXCITE (metaphor)

Semantic overlap and the illusion of emptiness Specialized perfectives & complex acts Natural perfectives: VERB MEANING VERB MEANING APART APART RAZ- VERB STEM RAZ- VERB STEM Prefix and verb have different meanings The meaning of the prefix stands out Prefix and verb have overlapping meanings The meaning of the prefix is “invisible” An illusion of semantic emptiness is created

Wrapping up Aspectual prefixes in Russian have a spatial basis are not semantically empty General arguments why prefixes aren’t empty The number of aspectual prefixes The statistical distribution of the prefixes Prefixation of borrowings Prefix variation

Wrapping up (2) Case study of the raz- prefix Used in various types of perfectives with spatial meaning Spatial meaning “APART” attested in putatively purely aspectual uses as well

RAZojtis’ ‘walk in different directions’ WITH SOME STATE FUNDING WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THIS INTO SOMETHING REALLY SILLY! John Cleese in the Monty Python sketch “Ministry of silly walks”