TY - CHAP

T1 - Побудительные реплики и их компоненты в русском устном диалоге: количественное описание

AU - Блинова, Ольга Владимировна

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - 1. The paper analyses imperative utterances using a subcorpus of 239500 words from the “One Day of Speech” corpus (further referred to as ORD). The article covers only utterances with the 2nd person Sg and Pl forms of the verb in the imperative mood. There are 2353 verb forms of this kind and 2025 utterances that contain them.2. Each imperative utterance is viewed as a sequence of components that consistsof a core component (an imperative or an imperative construction) and“meaningful components,” i.e., components that are regularly used in imperativeutterances and often shift the utterance along the politeness/impolitenessscale and categoricity/non-categoricity scale. Among meaningful componentsthe following are common:• forms of address;• personal pronouns;• particles davaj, davajte [let’s], nu, -ka, že, na, a, da, vot, prosto and their combinations;• politeness formulae, explicit request markers such as prošu tebja [I ask you];• various verbal modifiers, including downgraders nemnožko [a bit], tichonečko[slowly, carefully]) and intensifiers bystro [quickly], sročno [urgently],objazatel’no [necessarily], sejčas že [now], uže [already], nakonec [at last] andothers;• emotive interjections;• imperative interjections etc.Some other meaningful components are: references to the ongoing/completedspeech act (the present and past indicative forms of the 1st person from theverbs govorit’ [speak], skazat’ [say], povtorjat’ [repeat] and others); lexicalmeans of diminishing the strength and authoritativeness of the utterance thatexpress suppositions (downtoners such as možet byt’, možet [maybe, perhaps]);lexical means of diminishing the strength and authoritativeness of the utterancethat express uncertainty (hedges such as kak by [sort of]); expressionsthat explain the reasons of action (grounders); “appealers” such as da? ladno?chorošo?.The following features are taken into account in the description of imperativeutterances: the number of its meaningful components, their positions inthe imperative utterance, their positions with respect to the core componentof the utterance; presence of iterations, co-occurrence of the meaningful components in the utterance.3. According to the ORD data there are 10 verbs most frequently used in theimperative mood (2nd person Sg or Pl): slušat’ [listen] (ipm 1048,20), smotret’[look] (ipm 651,47), podoždat’ [wait] (ipm 488,60), skazat’ [say] (ipm 363,32),izvinit’ [excuse] (ipm 267,27), dat’ [give, perfect verb] (ipm 263,09), idti [go](ipm 250,57), posmotret’ [look, verb with a prefix] (ipm 233,86), davat’ [give,imperfect verb] (ipm 171,22), vzjat’ [take] (ipm 146,16).Thus, imperative utterances dialogue most contain verbs that regulate spokeninteraction: verbs that establish contact and attract the listener’s attention(slušat’, smotret’, posmotret’ [listen, look]); the verb podoždat’ [wait] that ismostly used to convey the meanings ‘don’t start speaking’ and ‘stop speakingfor a while’, verbs of saying (skazat’, govorit’ [say, speak]).The three most frequent verbs show the following additional features:a. Slušaj(te) [listen!] usually appears at the very beginning of the utterance,which itself appears at the beginning of a turn in the dialog. The verb isfrequently used without any arguments or indeed without any meaningfulcomponents of the imperative utterances, except forms of address, emotiveinterjections, and some particles (mostly the particle nu).b. Smotri(te) [look!] is mostly used in its primary meaning ‘look at somethingto see’ and in the meaning ‘pay attention’ (94% of all uses). 6% ofuses represent illocutionary phraseological units that have these contextualcharacteristics: when used with the subject present, one gets a constructionthat expresses surprise (ty smotri kakaja! [Look, what kind of personshe is!]); smotri can mean ‘decide for yourself ’ often in combination withthe pronoun sam(a) [oneself] (nu smotri sama [well, decide it yourself]);a construction with the dative actant means threat (nu smotri mne! [youshall see!]). Posmotri [look with a prefix] doesn’t have any of the specializedmeanings that illocutionary smotri has.c. Podoždi(te) [wait!] is mostly used in the meanings ‘don’t start speaking yet’and ‘stop speaking for a while.’ The meaning of the 1st type is likely to beused in the non-initial position inside the utterance. The meaning of thesecond type is typically used in the initial position (сf. podoždi / daj vzroslyjedjadi pogovorjat [wait, let adult men talk]). Often it starts the utterance thatcontains a request for confirmation of more detailed information (podoždi /a počemu u nego korotkije volosy? [wait / and why does he have short hair?]).These imperatives are not used with modifiers, politeness formulae, “appealers”like ladno? [ok?]. Modifiers and other meaningful components ofthe imperative utterances are used only with podoždat’ [wait] in its directmeaning. Thus, the meanings of podoždi ‘don’t start speaking yet’ and ‘stopspeaking for a while’ are also contextually isolated.4. Negation is most frequently used with the verb govorit’ [speak] (ipm with negation 70.99), as well as with other verbs of speech and speech actions: kričat’[shout], sporit’ [argue], sprašivat’ [ask]. The verbs of emotional and mentalstates (zabyt’ [forget], volnovat’sja [be nervous], pereživat’ [worry], obižat’sja[be offended], nadejat’sja [hope] and others) also form a significant part ofthe negated imperatives list. In more than half of the cases govorit’ [speak]with negation is used in the utterances of the type i ne govori [don’t even saythis] (ipm with negation 37.58) that usually express agreement with the othercommunicant (aga // vot imenno // ne govori [yes / sure/ don’t even say this]).5. Imperfect and perfect imperatives (II and PI) are distributed as follows: positive II – 1032 (47%), positive PI – 1180 (53%); negative II – 127 (90%), negativePI – 14 (10%).PI with negation is used in preventive constructions. Prohibitive meaning ofPI can be seen in a specialized construction with ne vzdumaj [don’t you dare]and ne počurajsja [don’t shun away from doing smth]. The most common negative imperative in the corpus is ne zabud’(te) [don’t forget]. Thus, usingPI with negation is typical of some mental causatives.When analyzing positive II, the semantic components mentioned by E.V.Padučeva (2010) as determining pragmatic aspects of the II usage were takeninto account, i.e., “attention to the initial phase,” “immediately” and “thesituation determines the action.” I compared the component structure of theimperative utterances with positive II and PI, with respect to the followingcharacteristics: politeness formula, primary means of creating the effect ofemphatic persuasion, and the means of conveying the idea of immediacy(adverbial modifiers, the fact of being included in the iterative chains, particlesdavaj, davajte, nu, že).The most significant differences between II and PI are in the way theyare used with politeness formula, adverbial modifiers and particles davaj(davajte) [let’s]. For instance, II imperatives are much less frequently usedwith politeness formula than PI imperatives (10 uses of II (1,2%) vs. 76 PIuses (6,4%)). Adverbial modifiers with II imperative are used in 2.6% ofall utterances compared to PI imperative with 5.5%. It is essential that thesemantic component of II imperative “immediately” rarely gets additionalcontextual support in imperative utterances.Adverbial modifiers that diminish the intensity of the action are mostly used indiminutive forms when accompanying II imperatives: (tichonečko, spokojnen’ko,potichonečku [slowly, carefully] and others). Some II utterances (including thosewith diminishers) are characterized by a function of accompanying the actionwith speech; it can also be seen in utterances where II imperative is combinedwith the particle davaj (davajte) [let’s] and repetitions of that particle.6. In conclusion, this paper suggests a componential analysis of imperativeutterances: information about the regular collocations (elements of the contextadjacent to the verb in the imperative utterance) was used in the analysis ofthe most frequently used verbs, imperatives with negation as well as II andPI imperatives. One result of the analysis is that the most frequent verbs inthe most frequent types of uses demonstrate limited ability to combine withdifferent components of imperative utterances. Such imperatives develop intodiscourse markers.

AB - 1. The paper analyses imperative utterances using a subcorpus of 239500 words from the “One Day of Speech” corpus (further referred to as ORD). The article covers only utterances with the 2nd person Sg and Pl forms of the verb in the imperative mood. There are 2353 verb forms of this kind and 2025 utterances that contain them.2. Each imperative utterance is viewed as a sequence of components that consistsof a core component (an imperative or an imperative construction) and“meaningful components,” i.e., components that are regularly used in imperativeutterances and often shift the utterance along the politeness/impolitenessscale and categoricity/non-categoricity scale. Among meaningful componentsthe following are common:• forms of address;• personal pronouns;• particles davaj, davajte [let’s], nu, -ka, že, na, a, da, vot, prosto and their combinations;• politeness formulae, explicit request markers such as prošu tebja [I ask you];• various verbal modifiers, including downgraders nemnožko [a bit], tichonečko[slowly, carefully]) and intensifiers bystro [quickly], sročno [urgently],objazatel’no [necessarily], sejčas že [now], uže [already], nakonec [at last] andothers;• emotive interjections;• imperative interjections etc.Some other meaningful components are: references to the ongoing/completedspeech act (the present and past indicative forms of the 1st person from theverbs govorit’ [speak], skazat’ [say], povtorjat’ [repeat] and others); lexicalmeans of diminishing the strength and authoritativeness of the utterance thatexpress suppositions (downtoners such as možet byt’, možet [maybe, perhaps]);lexical means of diminishing the strength and authoritativeness of the utterancethat express uncertainty (hedges such as kak by [sort of]); expressionsthat explain the reasons of action (grounders); “appealers” such as da? ladno?chorošo?.The following features are taken into account in the description of imperativeutterances: the number of its meaningful components, their positions inthe imperative utterance, their positions with respect to the core componentof the utterance; presence of iterations, co-occurrence of the meaningful components in the utterance.3. According to the ORD data there are 10 verbs most frequently used in theimperative mood (2nd person Sg or Pl): slušat’ [listen] (ipm 1048,20), smotret’[look] (ipm 651,47), podoždat’ [wait] (ipm 488,60), skazat’ [say] (ipm 363,32),izvinit’ [excuse] (ipm 267,27), dat’ [give, perfect verb] (ipm 263,09), idti [go](ipm 250,57), posmotret’ [look, verb with a prefix] (ipm 233,86), davat’ [give,imperfect verb] (ipm 171,22), vzjat’ [take] (ipm 146,16).Thus, imperative utterances dialogue most contain verbs that regulate spokeninteraction: verbs that establish contact and attract the listener’s attention(slušat’, smotret’, posmotret’ [listen, look]); the verb podoždat’ [wait] that ismostly used to convey the meanings ‘don’t start speaking’ and ‘stop speakingfor a while’, verbs of saying (skazat’, govorit’ [say, speak]).The three most frequent verbs show the following additional features:a. Slušaj(te) [listen!] usually appears at the very beginning of the utterance,which itself appears at the beginning of a turn in the dialog. The verb isfrequently used without any arguments or indeed without any meaningfulcomponents of the imperative utterances, except forms of address, emotiveinterjections, and some particles (mostly the particle nu).b. Smotri(te) [look!] is mostly used in its primary meaning ‘look at somethingto see’ and in the meaning ‘pay attention’ (94% of all uses). 6% ofuses represent illocutionary phraseological units that have these contextualcharacteristics: when used with the subject present, one gets a constructionthat expresses surprise (ty smotri kakaja! [Look, what kind of personshe is!]); smotri can mean ‘decide for yourself ’ often in combination withthe pronoun sam(a) [oneself] (nu smotri sama [well, decide it yourself]);a construction with the dative actant means threat (nu smotri mne! [youshall see!]). Posmotri [look with a prefix] doesn’t have any of the specializedmeanings that illocutionary smotri has.c. Podoždi(te) [wait!] is mostly used in the meanings ‘don’t start speaking yet’and ‘stop speaking for a while.’ The meaning of the 1st type is likely to beused in the non-initial position inside the utterance. The meaning of thesecond type is typically used in the initial position (сf. podoždi / daj vzroslyjedjadi pogovorjat [wait, let adult men talk]). Often it starts the utterance thatcontains a request for confirmation of more detailed information (podoždi /a počemu u nego korotkije volosy? [wait / and why does he have short hair?]).These imperatives are not used with modifiers, politeness formulae, “appealers”like ladno? [ok?]. Modifiers and other meaningful components ofthe imperative utterances are used only with podoždat’ [wait] in its directmeaning. Thus, the meanings of podoždi ‘don’t start speaking yet’ and ‘stopspeaking for a while’ are also contextually isolated.4. Negation is most frequently used with the verb govorit’ [speak] (ipm with negation 70.99), as well as with other verbs of speech and speech actions: kričat’[shout], sporit’ [argue], sprašivat’ [ask]. The verbs of emotional and mentalstates (zabyt’ [forget], volnovat’sja [be nervous], pereživat’ [worry], obižat’sja[be offended], nadejat’sja [hope] and others) also form a significant part ofthe negated imperatives list. In more than half of the cases govorit’ [speak]with negation is used in the utterances of the type i ne govori [don’t even saythis] (ipm with negation 37.58) that usually express agreement with the othercommunicant (aga // vot imenno // ne govori [yes / sure/ don’t even say this]).5. Imperfect and perfect imperatives (II and PI) are distributed as follows: positive II – 1032 (47%), positive PI – 1180 (53%); negative II – 127 (90%), negativePI – 14 (10%).PI with negation is used in preventive constructions. Prohibitive meaning ofPI can be seen in a specialized construction with ne vzdumaj [don’t you dare]and ne počurajsja [don’t shun away from doing smth]. The most common negative imperative in the corpus is ne zabud’(te) [don’t forget]. Thus, usingPI with negation is typical of some mental causatives.When analyzing positive II, the semantic components mentioned by E.V.Padučeva (2010) as determining pragmatic aspects of the II usage were takeninto account, i.e., “attention to the initial phase,” “immediately” and “thesituation determines the action.” I compared the component structure of theimperative utterances with positive II and PI, with respect to the followingcharacteristics: politeness formula, primary means of creating the effect ofemphatic persuasion, and the means of conveying the idea of immediacy(adverbial modifiers, the fact of being included in the iterative chains, particlesdavaj, davajte, nu, že).The most significant differences between II and PI are in the way theyare used with politeness formula, adverbial modifiers and particles davaj(davajte) [let’s]. For instance, II imperatives are much less frequently usedwith politeness formula than PI imperatives (10 uses of II (1,2%) vs. 76 PIuses (6,4%)). Adverbial modifiers with II imperative are used in 2.6% ofall utterances compared to PI imperative with 5.5%. It is essential that thesemantic component of II imperative “immediately” rarely gets additionalcontextual support in imperative utterances.Adverbial modifiers that diminish the intensity of the action are mostly used indiminutive forms when accompanying II imperatives: (tichonečko, spokojnen’ko,potichonečku [slowly, carefully] and others). Some II utterances (including thosewith diminishers) are characterized by a function of accompanying the actionwith speech; it can also be seen in utterances where II imperative is combinedwith the particle davaj (davajte) [let’s] and repetitions of that particle.6. In conclusion, this paper suggests a componential analysis of imperativeutterances: information about the regular collocations (elements of the contextadjacent to the verb in the imperative utterance) was used in the analysis ofthe most frequently used verbs, imperatives with negation as well as II andPI imperatives. One result of the analysis is that the most frequent verbs inthe most frequent types of uses demonstrate limited ability to combine withdifferent components of imperative utterances. Such imperatives develop intodiscourse markers.

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/urban-voices-sociolinguistics-grammar-pragmatics-spoken-russian

U2 - 10.3726/978-3-653-05675-4

DO - 10.3726/978-3-653-05675-4

M3 - глава/раздел

SN - 978-3-631-70674-9

SP - 95

EP - 124

BT - Urban Voices: The Sociolinguistics, Grammar and Pragmatics of Spoken Russian

A2 - Thielemann, Nadine

A2 - Richter, Nicole

PB - Peter Lang

CY - Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien

ER -