지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Within current syntactic theories, one of the main objects of investigation and sources of contention is the so-called pro-drop parameter. While there is considerable controversy surrounding the formulation of this parameter and its correlations with other syntactic and morphological parameters. the core of the phenomenon is the existence of rich system of verb agreement, such that most of the morphosyntactic features of the absent subject pronoun are retrievable from the verb morphology. In this sense, nobody would dispute that modern Russian is not a pro-drop language. i.e., in an unmarked discourse situation a speaker of Russian does not by default omit subject pronouns. Nor would anyone doubt that Old Russian is a pro-drop language. i.e., subject pronouns are omitted in the default discourse situation. In this regard, Old Russian is like the rest of the Slavic languages, and modern Russian displays an innovative loss of null pronominal subjects. The goal of this paper is to document the historical transition of Russian from the earlier state to the present state: when, how, and insofar as we can judge, why did it change when all its sister Slavic languages did not?
Providing statistical information about null pronominal subjects, a series of case studies of individual texts is given. It is evident that the system of null pronominal subjects underwent a striking degradation during the second half of the 17th century. In other words, during a relatively short period in the 17th century the texts make the transition from the earlier, canonical "pro-drop"state wherein about 75-80% of pronominal subjects are null to essentially the modern state where only about 25% of them are null, the rest being overt.
How is a difficult question to answer. However, the pattern of the loss of null subject pronouns shows us clearly that it was not an abrupt change in the language, but rather a phased increase in the frequency of overt vs. null pronouns over a relatively brief interval of time. Graphic comparison of the decline in null pronominal subjects with other changing parameters in the system of verbal morphology shows that there is a clear correlation between the phenomenon of morphological "richness" and the incidence of null vs. overt subject pronouns. These diachronic changes track each other fairly closely.
Why is probably too ambitious a question for this or any other diachronic linguistic analysis to answer. Nonetheless, the strong correlation between the degradation in several factors contributing to the overall morphological richness of the verbal system and the decline in the frequency of null pronominal subjects is surely too solid to be a coincidence; there must be a causal relation. Of particular interest is the observation that while the loss of the agreeing copula in the present tense shows a strong, direct correlation to the loss of pro-drop, the loss of the homonymous auxiliary in the perfect (the only remaining productive preterite form in the latest texts examined) shows no clear correlation to the decline in pro-drop. This strongly suggests that "richness" is the relevant characteristic of the old Russian verbal system, rather than "uniformity per se.
Providing statistical information about null pronominal subjects, a series of case studies of individual texts is given. It is evident that the system of null pronominal subjects underwent a striking degradation during the second half of the 17th century. In other words, during a relatively short period in the 17th century the texts make the transition from the earlier, canonical "pro-drop"state wherein about 75-80% of pronominal subjects are null to essentially the modern state where only about 25% of them are null, the rest being overt.
How is a difficult question to answer. However, the pattern of the loss of null subject pronouns shows us clearly that it was not an abrupt change in the language, but rather a phased increase in the frequency of overt vs. null pronouns over a relatively brief interval of time. Graphic comparison of the decline in null pronominal subjects with other changing parameters in the system of verbal morphology shows that there is a clear correlation between the phenomenon of morphological "richness" and the incidence of null vs. overt subject pronouns. These diachronic changes track each other fairly closely.
Why is probably too ambitious a question for this or any other diachronic linguistic analysis to answer. Nonetheless, the strong correlation between the degradation in several factors contributing to the overall morphological richness of the verbal system and the decline in the frequency of null pronominal subjects is surely too solid to be a coincidence; there must be a causal relation. Of particular interest is the observation that while the loss of the agreeing copula in the present tense shows a strong, direct correlation to the loss of pro-drop, the loss of the homonymous auxiliary in the perfect (the only remaining productive preterite form in the latest texts examined) shows no clear correlation to the decline in pro-drop. This strongly suggests that "richness" is the relevant characteristic of the old Russian verbal system, rather than "uniformity per se.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. 고대 러시아어의 과거시제, 연계사, 대명사의 변천
Ⅲ. 텍스트 분석
Ⅳ. 대명사 영주어와 다른 문법요소들과의 상호관계
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Theories of the Null Subject Parameter and Korean
언어
1993 .12
-
A Plea for Null Arguments
영어영문학연구
2019 .01
-
고대노브고로드 방언 영주어 체계와 인칭 자질
러시아어문학연구논집
2015 .01
-
Null Subject in Obligatory Control
언어
2014 .12
-
Semantic Differences between Null Pronouns and Overt Pronouns
영어영문학연구
2006 .01
-
The Structure of Null Subjects
언어과학
2005 .01
-
Null Arguments and the Theory of pro
언어
2010 .09
-
The Acquisition of Overt and Null Pronouns in L2 Korean by English Speakers
응용언어학
2013 .06
-
A Pronoun Analysis of Null Arguments in Korean
어학연구
2020 .08
-
국어 정형 통제문의 영주어(Null Subject) 고찰
언어학
2010 .04
-
Null Arguments
영어영문학연구
2011 .01
-
[Retracted] A Study of Subject Omission
새한영어영문학
2014 .05
-
The Pronominal Use of Korean
Korea Journal
1975 .09
-
인칭대명사 생략 문장의 A-B번역 양상: 소설 <프라자호텔>을 중심으로
통역과 번역
2019 .01
-
Evolution of the Pattern of Pronouns and Pronominal Adverbs in Artificial Language
Journal of Universal Language
2003 .03
-
Korean pro's: Not Topic Oriented
생성문법연구
2015 .01
-
A Study on the Null Subject in English Imperatives
영어학연구
2005 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
한국의 러시아어 교육 30년, 교육 연구 동향과 과제 : 메타 분석적 관점에서 살펴본 연구사를 중심으로
한현희
노어노문학
2018
.06
러시아어 접두사 구문의 통합적 의미 기술
안혁
노어노문학
2017
.12
성경에서 유래한 현대 러시아어 관용구의 변이성 연구
최윤희
언어과학연구
2010
.06
현대 러시아어에 있어서의 소멸어(устаревшие слова) : 오줴고프 사전 1952년과 1995년 비교를 중심으로
김성완
한국노어노문학회 학술대회 발표집
2002
.06
러시아어 텍스트에 표현된 동사 시제-상과 의사소통유형과의 상관성 연구
조미령
한국노어노문학회 학술대회 발표집
2005
.06
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-892-014909565