1. “Borrowing Verbs into Russian: A Usage-Based Approach”
Laura A. Janda
UNC-Chapel Hill

2. The problem
Nearly all Russian verbs are either Perfective (napisat’p ‘writep’) or Imperfective (pisat’i ‘writei’)
Except several hundred “Bi-aspectual” verbs (likvidirovat’p/i ‘liquidatep/i’)
Nearly all Bi-aspectual verbs are foreign borrowings
Scholars assume Bi-aspectual verbs = foreign borrowings
But
Nearly 40% of borrowed verbs are not Bi-aspectual
Bi-aspectual verbs behave differently from non-Bi-aspectual verbs

3. Outcomes
Empirical study confirms predictions of “cluster” model of Russian aspect
“Cluster” model has been suggested by Janda as alternative to traditional aspectual “pair” model
Study also suggests interaction between lexical semantics and grammatical aspect
Bi-aspectual verbs lack a Non-Completable (atelic) construal

4. Overview Traditional assumptions about Russian aspect
Traditional assumptions about borrowed and Bi-aspectual verbs
Janda’s “clusters” model and borrowed and Bi-aspectual verbs
Empirical study
Conclusions

5. 1. Traditional assumptions about Russian aspect
(Prototypical situation, ignoring Bi-aspectuals)
A given verb is either Perfective (marked) or Imperfective (unmarked) in all tenses and forms
Simplex base verbs (usually Imperfective) are combined with prefixes and suffixes to create new Perfective and Imperfective verbs

6. A typical verb and some of its relatives (i.e., a “cluster”)
pisat’i ‘write’i
napisat’p ‘writep’
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’
podpisat’p ‘signp’
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i

7. A typical verb and some of its relatives (i.e., a “cluster”)
pisat’i ‘write’i
napisat’p ‘writep’
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’
podpisat’p ‘signp’
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i
Root: pis

8. A typical verb and some of its relatives (i.e., a “cluster”)
pisat’i ‘write’i
napisat’p ‘writep’
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’
podpisat’p ‘signp’
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i
Perfectives
derived by
prefixation

9. A typical verb and some of its relatives (i.e., a “cluster”)
pisat’i ‘write’i
napisat’p ‘writep’
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’
podpisat’p ‘signp’
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i
Secondary
Imperfectives
derived by
suffixation

10. A typical verb and some of its relatives (i.e., a “cluster”)
pisat’i ‘write’i
napisat’p ‘writep’
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’
podpisat’p ‘signp’
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i
A Bi-aspectual verb,
likvidirovat’p/i ‘liquidatep/i’,
fills both roles

11. 2. Traditional assumptions about Bi-aspectual verbs
Questionable issues:
All verbs with borrowed stems in Russian are Bi-aspectual (Avilova 1968)
Foreign Bi-aspectual verbs are predominantly scientific, technical or professional terms (but cf. Mučnik 1966)
Bi-aspectual verbs resist use of aspectual morphology because they are foreign (Mučnik 1966, Avilova 1968, Gladney 1982)
Scholars don’t agree on which verbs are Bi-aspectual (Mučnik 1966, Gladney 1982, Čertkova & Čang 1998, Jászay 1999)

12. 2. Traditional assumptions about Bi-aspectual verbs
What we DO know
Borrowed verbs in Russian:
Have –ova- suffix, which gives verbal inflection but does not designate aspect
Bi-aspectual verbs
Over 90% are foreign borrowings
Can express both Perfective and Imperfective with the same morphological form (never ambiguous) (Isačenko 1960, Mučnik 1966, Avilova 1968, Galton 1976, Gladney 1982, Čertkova 1996, Jászay 1999, Zaliznjak & Šmelev 2000, but cf. Timberlake 2004)

13. 2. Traditional assumptions about borrowed and Bi-aspectual verbs
What we DON’T know
Are there non-Bi-aspectual (Imperfective) borrowed verbs?
Do Imperfective borrowed verbs behave differently from Bi-aspectual borrowed verbs?
Do semantic factors motivate aspectual status of borrowed verbs?
YES!
YES!
YES!

14. 3. Janda’s “clusters” model and borrowed and Bi-aspectual verbs
An alternative to the “pair” model:
Clusters of aspectually related verbs
Metaphorical motivations for aspect in Russian
More than one type of Perfective
Completability (telicity) distinguishes among Perfectives: A COMPLETABLE ACTION IS TRAVEL TOWARD A DESTINATION
Bi-aspectual verbs tend to lack Non-Completable (atelic) construal

15. “Pair” vs. “cluster” pisat’i ‘write’i napisat’p ‘writep’
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’
podpisat’p ‘signp’
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i
Typical aspectual pair
Secondary aspectual pairs

16. “Pair” vs. “cluster” pisat’i ‘write’i napisat’p ‘writep’ NATURAL (NP)
Cluster recognizes
different kinds of Perfectives
pisat’i ‘write’i
napisat’p ‘writep’ NATURAL (NP)
popisat’p ‘write for a whilep’COMPLEX ACT (CA)
podpisat’p ‘signp’ SPECIALIZED (SP)
podpisyvat’i ‘signi’
perepisat’p ‘revisep’ SPECIALIZED (SP)
perepisyvat’i ‘revise’i
Non-Completable !

17. Completable vs. Non-Completable
Unambiguously Completable
Sestra ideti v kino.
‘My sister is goingi to the movie theater.’
Ambiguous
Sestra pišeti dissertaciju.
‘My sister is writingi her dissertation.’
Sestra pišeti naučnuju fantastiku.
‘My sister writesi science fiction.’
Unambiguously Non-Completable
Sestra rabotaeti v kabinete.
‘My sister is working/worksi in her office.’
Bi-Aspectual
verbs tend
to be of
this type
NP, SP
NP, SP
Non-Bi-aspectual
verbs tend to be
of these types CA CA

18. 4. Empirical study Hypothesis:
Bi-aspectual borrowed verbs are strongly Completable (telic), so they will be unlikely to form Complex Act Perfectives with po-
Imperfective borrowed verbs will be more likely to form Complex Act Perfectives with po-

19. 4. Empirical study Methodology:
Cull all foreign verbs from a single source
Sort Bi-aspectual vs. Imperfective
Collect data on frequency of unprefixed and po- prefixed (Complex Act Perfective) forms

20. 4. Empirical study 555 foreign verbs in Wheeler 1972/1992
349 (63%) Bi-aspectual
206 (37%) Imperfective
Bi-aspectual
borrowed verbs
Imperfective
unpref
po- pref
Avg # hits
1,903 51
1,973
265
Max # hits
77,799
2,444
25,784
1,697
Min # hits 19 20
Is this significant?
Yes! Logistic regression model using Pearson’s
statistic yields and the associated
p-value is <.0001

21. High-frequency Bi-aspectual borrowings with zero po- perfectives:
Covering a surface
gummirovat’p/i ‘coat with rubberp/i’, meblirovat’p/i ‘upholsterp/i’, metallizirovat’p/i ‘coat with metalp/i’, ornamentirovat’p/i ‘ornamentp/i’, plakirovat‘p/i ‘platep/i’, satinirovat’p/i ‘polishp/i’
Removal
demaskirovat’p/i ‘unmaskp/i’, deblokirovat’p/i ‘unblockp/i’, demilitarizirovat’p/i ‘demilitarizep/i’, demobilizirovat’p/i ‘demobilizep/i’, denacionalizirovat’p/i ‘privatizep/i’, dezertirovat’p/i ‘desertp/i’
Physical change of state
denaturirovat’p/i ‘denaturep/i’, gofrirovat’p/i ‘crimpp/i’, granulirovat’p/i ‘granulatep/i’, kristallizovat’sjap/i ‘crystallizep/i’, temperirovat’p/i ‘temperp/i’, vulkaniz(ir)ovat’p/i ‘vulcanizep/i’
Cultural/Linguistic change of state
anglizirovat’p/i ‘anglicizep/i’, evropeizirovat’p/i ‘europeanizep/i’, germanizirovat’p/i ‘germanifyp/i’, internacionalizirovat’p/i ‘internationalizep/i’, latinizirovat’p/i ‘latinizep/i’, dešifrirovat’p/i ‘decipherp/i’

22. High-frequency Bi-aspectual borrowings with zero po- perfectives:
Arrangement/Organization
decentralizovat’p/i ‘decentralizep/i’, dezorganizovat’p/i ‘disorganizep/i’, èšelonirovat’p/i ‘echelonp/i’, flankirovat’p/i ‘flankp/i’, frakcionirovat’p/i ‘fractionatep/i’, kollektivizirovat’p/i ‘collectivizep/i’
Budgetary arrangement
assignovat’p/i ‘allocatep/i’, debetovat’p/i ‘debitp/i’, kapitalizirovat’p/i ‘reinvestp/i’, monopolizirovat’p/i ‘monopolizep/i’
Proclamation
dekretirovat’p/i ‘decreep/i’, denonsirovat’p/i ‘denouncep/i’, dezavuairovat’p/i ‘disavowp/i’, indossirovat’p/i ‘endorsep/i’, inkriminirovat’p/i ‘incriminatep/i’, kanon(iz)irovat’p/i ‘canonizep/i’, ratificirovat’p/i ‘ratifyp/i’

23. 5. Conclusions Both Bi-aspectual and Imperfective borrowed verbs exist
Clusters model predicts that Bi-aspectual verbs will be unlikely to form Complex Act Perfectives with po- -- this hypothesis is confirmed
Foreign borrowings with Completable construals become Bi-aspectuals, other verbs become Imperfectives
Grammatical aspect is influenced by lexical semantics

24. THANK YOU
The author would like to thank John Korba for collecting data and Chris Wiesen for assistance with statistical analysis. Thanks are also due to Tore Nesset and the reviewers for: Dagmar Divjak and Agata Kochanska, eds. Slavic Contributions to Cognitive Linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics Research. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter

25. Bibliography, p 1
Anderson, Cori Biaspectual Verbs in Russian and their Implications on the Category of Aspect. Honors Thesis, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.
Avilova, N. S “Dvuvidovye glagoly s zaimstvovannoj osnovoj v russkom literaturnom jazyke novogo vremeni”. Voprosy jazykoznanija:
Avilova, Natal’ja S Vid glagola i semantika glagol’nogo slova. Moscow: Akademija nauk SSSR.
Bertinetto, Pier Marco and Denis Delfitto “Aspect vs. actionality: Why they should be kept apart”. Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Dahl, Östen (ed.), , Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bondarko, Aleksandr V Vid i vremja russkogo glagola. Moscow: Prosveščenie.
Bondarko, Aleksandr V Principy funkcional’noj grammatiki i voprosy aspektologii. Leningrad: Nauka.
Comrie, Bernard Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press.
Čertkova, Marina Ju Grammatičeskaja kategorija vida v sovremennom russkom jazyke. Moscow: Moscow State University.
Čertkova, Marina Jurevna and Pej-či Čang “Evoljucija dvuvidovyx glagolov v sovremennom russkom jazyke”. Russian linguistics 22:
Dahl, Östen Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Dickey, Stephen M Parameters of Slavic Aspect. A Cognitive Approach. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

26. Bibliography, p 2
Dickey, Stephen M “Aspectual pairs, goal orientation and po- delimitatives in Russian.” Glossos 7:
Durst-Andersen, Per Mental Grammar: Russian Aspect and Related Issues. Columbus, OH: Slavica.
Forsyth, J A grammar of aspect: Usage and meaning in the Russian verb. Cambridge: Cambridge U Press.
Galton, Herbert The main functions of the Slavic verbal aspect. Skopje: Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
Gladney, Frank Y “Biaspectual verbs and the syntax of aspect in Russian”. Slavic and East European Journal 26:
Glovinskaja, Marina Ja Mnogoznačnost’ i sinonimija v vido-vremennoj sisteme russkogo glagola. Moscow: Russkie slovari.
Isačenko, Aleksandr V Grammatičeskij stroj russkogo jazyka v sopostavlenii s slovackim. Morfologija, čast vtoraja. Bratislava: Vydavatel’stvo Slovenskej akadémie vied.
Jakobson, Roman O. 1957/1971. “Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb”. In Selected Writings II. The Hague: Mouton,
Janda, Laura A “A metaphor in search of a source domain: the categories of Slavic aspect”, Cognitive Linguistics 15:
Janda, Laura A. Forthcoming a. “Aspectual clusters of Russian verbs”. Studies in Language.
Janda, Laura A. Forthcoming b. “Inflectional Morphology”. Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens. Oxford: Oxford U Press.

27. Bibliography, p 3
Jászay, László “Vidovye korreljaty pri dvuvidovyx glagolax”. Studia Russica 17:
Lakoff, George Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: U of Chicago Press.
Maslov, Jurij S “Sistema osnovnyx ponjatij i terminov slavjanskoj aspektologii”. Voprosy obščego jazykoznanija:
Mazon, André Emplois des aspects du verbe russe. Paris: Librairie ancienne Honoré Champion.
Mehlig, Hans Robert “Gomogennost’ i geterogennost’ v prostranstve i
vremeni”. Revue des etudes Slaves 66:
Mehlig, Hans Robert “Nekotorye zamečanija po povodu opisanija katergorii vida v russkom jazyke”. Russian Linguistics 21:
Mučnik, I. P “Razvitie sistemy dvuvidovyx glagolov v sovremennom russkom jazyke”. Voprosy jazykoznanija:
Ožegov, Sergej I. 1949/1989. Slovar’ russkogo jazyka. Mosow: Russkij jazyk.
Padučeva, Elena V Semantičeskie issledovanija. Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury.
Schooneveld, Cornelis H. van Semantic transmutations: Prolegomena to a calculus of meaning. Vol. 1: The cardinal semantic structure of prepositions, cases, and paratactic conjunctions in contemporary standard Russian. Bloomington: Physsardt.

28. Bibliography, p 4
Smith, Carlota S The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Šaxmatov, A. A Sintaksis russkogo jayzka (Russian syntax). Leningrad. Učpedgiz.
Švedova, Natal’ja Ju., et al Russkaja grammatika. Moscow: Nauka.
Tatevosov, Sergej “The parameter of actionality”. Linguistic Typology 6:
Timberlake, Alan “Invariance and the syntax of Russian aspect”, in Paul Hopper, ed. Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,
Timberlake, Alan A Reference Grammar of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge U Press.
Vinogradov, V. V Sovremennyj russkij jazyk. Grammatičeskoe učenie o slove (Modern Russian. Grammatical analysis of the word). Moscow: Učpedgiz.
Vinogradov, Viktor V Russkij jazyk, 2nd ed. Moscow: Vysšaja škola.
Wheeler, Marcus. 1972/1992. The Oxford Russian-English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zaliznjak, A. A Grammatičeskij slovar’ russkogo jazyka (Grammatical dictionary of Russian). Moscow: Russkij jazyk.
Zaliznjak, Anna A. and Aleksej D. Šmelev Vvedenie v russkuju aspektologiju (Inroduction to Russian aspectology). Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury.