Browsing results for Russian
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on March 14, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1986). Two Russian speech act verbs: Lexicography as a key to conceptual and cultural analysis. Folia Slavica, 8(1), 134-159.
Abstract:
This article studies in some detail two characteristic Russian speech act verbs: donosit’ доносить and rugat’ ругать, comparing them with a number of related English verbs. The Russian verbs that were chosen are at once extremely interesting and extremely challenging, from a semantic as well as from a pragmatic point of view. The analysis reveals the precise semantic structure of both verbs and, at the same time, demonstrates the value of the semantic metalanguage on which it relies as a tool for a cross-cultural comparison of speech acts and speech genres.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) ask, (E) condemn, (E) curse, (E) denounce, (E) dob in, (E) donosit' доносить, (E) inform on, (E) order, (E) rebuke, (E) report, (E) reprimand, (E) rugat' ругать, (E) scold, (E) tell tales on, (E) threat, (E) warn, (E) yell at
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on August 15, 2021.
Hill, Deborah (1987). A cross-linguistic study of value-judgement terms. MA thesis, Australian National University.
The purpose of this thesis is to try to establish the extent to which the words good, bad, true and right can be considered lexical universals. These words have been chosen because they are value-judgment terms that, individually, have been discussed at length by philosophers. It seems to be assumed by philosophers and semanticists that these words reflect concepts shared by speakers of all languages. By testing whether these words are candidates for lexical universals we can then see the extent to which this assumption is true.
On the basis of information from native speakers from 15 diverse languages, we can say that good and bad reflect language independent concepts (GOOD and BAD). However, in many languages, including English, the range of meaning of bad is narrower than the range of meaning of good. By looking at five of these fifteen languages we can see that the words right and true reflect concepts that are not language
independent. Thus, by taking a cross-linguistic approach, we can shed some light on the work done by language philosophers in the area of value-judgment terms.
The following languages are examined in this thesis: Arabic, Arrernte, Chinese (Mandarin), English, Ewe, Fijian, Finnish, Indonesian, Kannada, Korean, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, Turkish.
Research carried out in consultation with or under the supervision of one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on June 17, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1989). Prototypes in semantics and pragmatics: Explicating attitudinal meanings in terms of prototypes. Linguistics, 27(4), 731-769.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1989.27.4.731
Abstract:
This paper shows how pragmatic meanings encoded in different forms of address (such as titles, ‘polite’ pronouns, and personal names, including their expressive derivates) can be portrayed in a rigorous and illuminating way in NSM, and that such explications allow us to make the similarities and the differences between different pragmatic categories clear and explicit – both within a language and across language and culture boundaries.
It is argued that abstract features such as ‘solidarity’, ‘familiarity’, ‘(in)formality’, ‘distance’, ‘intimacy’, and so on do not provide adequate tools for the description and comparison of pragmatic meanings, because they are not self-explanatory and because they do not have any constant, language-independent value. (For example, the ‘distance’ implied by the English title Mr. is different from that implied by the French title Monsieur; and the ‘familiarity’ implied by Russian forms such as Misa or Vanja is quite different from that implied by English forms such as Mike or John.)
It is shown that many pragmatic meanings have a prototypical semantic structure: they present emotions and attitudes in terms of certain prototypical human relationships, rather than in terms of fully specified mental states and social relations. In particular, social and existential categories, such as children, women, and men, or people one knows well and people one does not know, provide important signposts in the universe of human relations encoded in language. The exact role such prototypes play in different pragmatic categories can be shown in a precise and illuminating way in verbal explications constructed in the proposed metalanguage.
Translations:
Into Polish:
Chapter 2 (pp. 49-81) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1999), Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
More information:
More recent publications building on this one are:
Chapters 7 and 8 (pp. 225-307, 309-325) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1992), Semantics, culture, and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) (personal names), (E) Father, (E) given names, (E) madame, (E) mademoiselle, (E) miss, (E) monsieur, (E) Mr, (E) Mrs, (E) Ms, (E) nicknames, (E) Pan, (E) Pani, (E) Professor, (E) red, (E) salty, (E) Sir, (E) uncle, (E) vous, (E) vy, (E) woman, (E) wy
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on June 17, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1989). Soul and mind: Linguistic evidence for ethnopsychology and cultural history. American Anthropologist, 91(1), 41-58.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1989.91.1.02a00030
Abstract:
The Russian word duša ‘soul’ has a much wider scope of use than the English word soul and embodies a different folk psychology (fully congruent with what has been described as the Russian “national character”). The English word mind stands for an Anglo-Saxon folk category that has been reified as an objective category of thought. The decline and fall of the concept soul and the ascendancy of mind in English are linked with changes in the cultural history and in the prevailing Western ethnophilosophy.
Translations:
Into Polish:
Chapter 14 (pp. 522-544) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1999), Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
More information:
A more recent publication building on this one is:
Chapter 1 (pp. 31-63) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1992), Semantics, culture, and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) duša душа, (E) mind, (E) soul
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 10, 2018.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1989). Russian personal names: The semantics of expressive derivation. Folia Slavica, 9, 314-354.
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 10, 2018.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1990). *Emotivity in language structure. Semiotica, 80(1/2), 161-169.
Review of Bronislava Volek. Emotive signs in language and semantic functioning of derived nouns in Russian.
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on June 22, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1990). Duša (soul), toska (yearning), sud’ba (fate): Three key concepts in Russian language and Russian culture. In Zygmunt Saloni (Ed.), Metody formalne w opisie języków słowiańskich (pp. 13-32). Bialystok: Bialystok University Press.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) duša душа, (E) sud'ba судьба, (E) toska тоска
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 10, 2018.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1992). The semantics of interjection. Journal of Pragmatics, 18(2/3), 159-192. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(92)90050-L
Translated into Russian as:
Вежбицкая, А. [Wierzbicka, Anna] (1999). Семантика междометия. In Вежбицкая, А. [Wierzbicka, Anna], Семантические универсалии и описание языков, под ред. Татьяна В. Булыгиной [Semantic universals and the description of languages, ed. Tatyana V. Bulygina] (pp. 611-649). Москва [Moscow]: Языки русской культуры [Languages of Russian Culture].
An expanded version of this paper was published earlier as chapter 8 (pp. 285-339) of:
Wierzbicka, Anna (1991, 2003). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
This paper argues that interjections – like any other linguistic elements – have their meaning, and that this meaning can be identified and captured in the Natural Semantic Metalanguage developed by the author and her colleagues. A number of interjections from English, Polish, Russian, and Yiddish are discussed, and rigorous semantic formulae are proposed which can explain both the similarities and the differences in their range of use. For example, the English interjection yuk! is compared and contrasted with its nearest Polish and Russian counterparts fu!, fe!, rfu!. The author shows that while the meaning of interjections cannot be adequately captured in terms of emotion words such as disgust, it can be captured in terms of more fine-grained components, closer to the level of universal semantic primitives. The role of sound symbolism in the functioning of interjections is discussed, and the possibility of reflecting this symbolism in the semantic formulae is explored.
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on January 22, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1992). Defining emotion concepts. Cognitive Science, 16(4), 539-581. DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog1604_4
This article demonstrates that emotion concepts – including the so-called basic ones, such as anger or sadness – can be defined in terms of universal semantic primitives such as GOOD, BAD, DO, HAPPEN, KNOW, and WANT, in terms of which all areas of meaning, in all languages, can be rigorously and revealingly portrayed.
The definitions proposed here take the form of certain prototypical scripts or scenarios, formulated in terms of thoughts, wants, and feelings. These scripts, however, can be seen as formulas providing rigorous specifications of necessary and sufficient conditions (not for emotions as such, but for emotion concepts), and they do not support the idea that boundaries between emotion concepts are “fuzzy”. On the contrary, the small set of universal semantic primitives employed here (which has emerged from two decades of empirical investigations by the author and colleagues) demonstrates that even apparent synonyms such as sad and unhappy embody different – and fully specifiable – conceptual structures.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) amazement, (E) anger, (E) appalled, (E) ashamed, (E) contented, (E) delighted, (E) depressed, (E) despair, (E) disappointment, (E) distressed, (E) embarrassed, (E) excited, (E) frightened, (E) frustration, (E) glücklich, (E) grief, (E) guilt, (E) happy, (E) heureux, (E) humiliated, (E) hurt, (E) indignant, (E) indignation, (E) pleased, (E) pride, (E) relief, (E) remorse, (E) sad, (E) sčastliv, (E) shocked, (E) sorrow, (E) sorry, (E) surprise, (E) triumph, (E) unhappy, (E) upset, (T) English
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on June 20, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1995). Lexicon as a key to history, culture, and society: “Homeland” and “fatherland” in German, Polish and Russian. In René Dirven, & Johan Vanparys (Eds.), Current approaches to the lexicon (pp. 103-155). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Abstract:
Since many languages, especially European languages, have words denoting ‘native country’, the concepts embodied in these words may be assumed to transcend language boundaries. In fact, words that appear to match in this way are laden with historical and cultural significance, and often differ from one another in particularly telling ways, offering valuable insight into different national traditions and historical experiences. This general proposition is illustrated here through an analysis and comparison of three cultural key words of modern German and Polish: Heimat, Vaterland, and ojczyzna. A cursory discussion of the Russian word rodina is also included.
In addition to universals, the explications rely on the words country, born, and child. These words (referred to in later work as semantic molecules) can be defined in terms of the universals, but to do so within the explications of such complex cultural concepts as Heimat, Vaterland, ojczyzna, and rodina would be confusing and counterproductive.
Translations:
Into Polish:
Chapter 12 (pp. 450-489) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1999), Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
More information:
A more recent publication building on this one is:
Chapter 4 (pp. 156-197) of Wierzbicka, Anna (1997), Understanding cultures through their key words: English, Russian, Polish, German, Japanese. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) Heimat, (E) ojczyzna, (E) rodina, (E) Vaterland
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on March 13, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1995). Dictionaries and ideologies: Three examples from Eastern Europe. In Braj B. Kachru, & Henry Kahane (Eds.), Cultures, ideologies and the dictionary: Studies in honor of Ladislav Zgusta (pp. 181-195). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
This paper considers three lexicographic definitions from three Eastern European dictionaries, produced under communist rule. In each case, the word under discussion presents ideological difficulties for the dictionary’s editors — either because its meaning is politically incorrect, i.e. reflects an outlook incompatible with the official communist ideology, or because it is politically sensitive, and can be used as a potent ideological tool in both desirable and undesirable political contexts.
Each of the three definitions concerns a keyword, that is, a word especially important in the life of the society in question and reflecting this society’s experience and values. The three keywords discussed are the German word Vaterland (roughly, ‘fatherland’), the Russian word smirenie (roughly, ‘humility’, ‘resignation’) and the Polish word bezpieka (roughly, ‘state security’).
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) bezpieka, (E) smirenie, (E) Vaterland
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 10, 2018.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1995). Kisses, handshakes, bows: The semantics of nonverbal communication. Semiotica, 103(3/4), 207-252. DOI: 10.1515/semi.1995.103.3-4.207
Gestures, and other forms of meaningful bodily behaviour, differ from culture to culture: the Japanese bow, Anglos shake hands, Russians kiss and embrace, the Tikopia press noses, and so on. However, although in different societies different types of bodily behaviour are favoured, the meaning expressed by at least some of them may be the same everywhere. In fact, it is only when we assume sameness of meaning that we can explain why certain universally interpretable gestures are favoured or avoided in some societies but not others (for example, why Anglos avoid, and the Japanese favour, bowing).
Of course, not all forms of bodily behaviour are universal or universally interpretable. Some are based on local conventions, and although these too are more likely to be partly iconic or indexical in nature than to be totally arbitrary, they may nonetheless be totally incomprehensible to outsiders. But many gestures, postures, facial expressions, and so on can be assigned ‘universal meanings’; and this applies even to those forms of behaviour that are not universally attested.
The same level of extended body parts (whether noses or hands) appears to suggest sameness, and, by implication, equality of the two people. The contact of the corresponding body parts (nose-to-nose, hand-to-hand, mouth-to-mouth) appears to suggest expected, assumed, or desired sameness of feelings. Voluntary bodily contact (if it is not of the kind that would cause the addressee to feel ‘something bad’, in particular pain) implies ‘good feelings toward the addressee’. And so on.
Clearly, much further research is needed before the exact meaning of gestures, postures, and facial expressions can be stated with certainty and precision; and before the universal aspects of nonverbal communication can be identified and distinguished from those that are culture-specific. It is important to recognize, however, that, universal or not, the meanings of gestures, postures, and facial expressions can be described in a rigorous and yet illuminating manner; and that they can be described in the same framework as arbitrary, ‘local’ gestures (such as, for example, clapping), and indeed, as vocal symbols (that is, speech). Smiles, kisses, interjections, and articulated utterances carry messages of the same kind. To understand human communicative behaviour, we need an integrated description of verbal and nonverbal communication. The ‘Natural Semantic Metalanguage’ based on universal semantic primitives provides a tool with the help of which such an integration can be achieved.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) arm-linking, (E) blushing, (E) bow, (E) bowing, (E) clapping, (E) crawling position, (E) crying, (E) hand-holding, (E) handshake, (E) hug, (E) kiss, (E) kiss on the hand, (E) kneeling, (E) laughter, (E) nose-to-nose contact, (E) ob'jatie, (E) prostration, (E) Sir, (E) slap on the back, (E) smile, (E) stamping one's foot, (E) wringing someone's hand
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 10, 2018.
Mostovaia, Anna D. (1996). Spatial metaphor in grammar: Studies in semantics of selected Russian constructions. PhD thesis, Australian National University. PDF (open access)
The present study investigates how the abstract meanings of prepositional phrases, often treated as metaphorically motivated, can be accurately described. The semantics of a number of Russian constructions with the preposition в v ‘in, into’ is considered. The constructions fall into the following categories: (1) constructions where a noun after в v refers to a person’s internal state or an emotion; (2) constructions where a noun after в v refers to a category of property transfer (such as a gift or a reward); (3) constructions where a noun after в v refers to a social role (such as a teacher). For each construction, a number of semantic constraints (additional to the general semantic categories of emotions, transfers and roles) on nouns that can be used after в v ‘in, into’ are described, and a semantic formula in the Natural Semantic Metalanguage corresponding to the meaning of the given construction is proposed. A possible metaphorical motivation for each of the described semantic constraints is also discussed.
Research carried out in consultation with or under the supervision of one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on August 19, 2021.
Mostovaja, Anna D. (1997). *Social roles as containers in Russian. International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics, 41, 119-141.
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on June 20, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1997). Understanding cultures through their key words: English, Russian, Polish, German, Japanese. New York: Oxford University Press.
Abstract:
This book develops the dual themes that languages can differ widely in their vocabularies, and are sensitive indices to the cultures to which they belong. The author seeks to demonstrate that every language has key concepts, expressed in (cultural) key words, which reflect the core values of a given culture. She shows that cultures can be revealingly studied, compared, and explained to outsiders through their key concepts, and that NSM provides the analytical framework necessary for this purpose. The book demonstrates that cultural patterns can be studied in a verifiable, rigorous, and non-speculative way, on the basis of empirical evidence and in a coherent theoretical framework.
Table of contents:
- Introduction
- Lexicon as a key to ethno-sociology and cultural psychology: Patterns of “friendship” across cultures
- Lexicon as a key to ethno-philosophy, history, and politics: “Freedom” in Latin, English, Russian, and Polish
- Lexicon as a key to history, nation, and society: “Homeland” and “fatherland” in German, Polish, and Russian
- Australian key words and core cultural values
- Japanese key words and core cultural values
Translations:
Into Polish:
(Chapter 3 only) Wierzbicka, Anna (1999). Język – umysł – kultura [Language, mind, culture]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Wierzbicka, Anna (2007). Słowa klucze: Różne języki – różne kultury. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
Into Russian (Chapters 1, 2 and 3 only):
Chapters 7 (pp. 263-305), 8 (pp. 306-433) and 9 (pp. 434-484) of Вежбицкая, Анна (1999), Семантические универсалии и описание языков [Semantic universals and the description of languages]. Москва [Moscow]: Языки русской культуры [Languages of Russian Culture].
Вежбицкая, Анна (2001). Понимание культур через посредство ключевых слов. Москва [Moscow]: Языки славянской культуры [Languages of Slavic Culture].
Into Japanese:
アンナ・ヴィエルジュビツカ著 [Anna Wierzbicka] (2009). キーワードによる異文化理解: 英語・ロシア語・ポーランド語・ 日本語の場合 . 東京 [Tokyo]: 而立書房 [Jiritsu Shobō].
More information:
Chapter 4 builds on: Lexicon as a key to history, culture, and society: “Homeland” and “fatherland” in German, Polish and Russian (1995)
Chapter 5, section 2 builds on: Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction (1991), chapter 5
Chapter 5, section 3 builds on: Australian b-words (bloody, bastard, bugger, bullshit): An expression of Australian culture and national character (1992)
Chapter 6 builds on: Japanese key words and core cultural values (1991)
Reviewed by:
Peeters, Bert (2000). Word, 51(3), 443-449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2000.11432505 / Open access
This review includes several suggestions for improvements to the explications in the book, as well as a revised explication of the Russian word друг drug.
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
The tags mentioned below are limited to those not listed in work on which this book is based.
Tags: (E) colleagues, (E) drug друг, (E) family, (E) freedom, (E) friend, (E) koledzy, (E) libertas, (E) liberty, (E) mate, (E) omoiyari 思いやり, (E) podruga подруга, (E) prijatel' приятель, (E) przyjaciel, (E) rodnye родные, (E) rodzina, (E) svoboda свобода, (E) tovarišč, (E) volja воля, (E) wolność, (E) znajomi, (T) English
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 10, 2018.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1998). Anchoring linguistic typology in universal semantic primes. Linguistic Typology, 2(2), 141-194. DOI: 10.1515/lity.1998.2.2.141
In essence, “grammar is one and the same in all languages”, but to establish what this universal grammar really looks like we have to investigate and compare many diverse languages, and for this we need a powerful and universally applicable metalanguage based on empirically established lexico-grammatical universals. The rough and incomplete outline of universal grammar sketched in this paper constitutes both a summary of the results arrived at by theoretical and empirical work over more than three decades (in the so-called “NSM” framework) and a program for further investigations. The author tries to show that it is possible to base investigations of universal grammar and typology on a truly universal, non-technical, non-arbitrary and intuitively intelligible tertium comparationis, and thus give it a secure and reliable foundation.
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) [grammatical] patient, (E) information questions, (E) kivat', (E) opustit', (E) polar questions, (E) that [relative pronoun], (E) when, (E) where, (T) English
Published on August 2, 2018. Last updated on August 31, 2018.
Bogusławski, Andrzej (1998). The semantic primitives ‘someone’, ‘something’ and the Russian contradistinction -nibud’ vs. -to. In Maciej Grochowski, & Gerd Hentschel (Eds.), Funktionsworter im Polnischen (pp. 33-35). Oldenburg: BIS.
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on June 16, 2019.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1998). “Sadness” and “anger” in Russian: The non-universality of the so-called “basic human emotions”. In Angeliki Athanasiadou, & Elzbieta Tabakowska (Eds.), Speaking of emotions: Conceptualisation and expression (pp. 3-28). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110806007.3
Abstract:
The English words sad and angry (or sadness and anger) do not have exact equivalents in Russian, just as the Russian words грусть grust’, печаль pečal’, and сердиться serdit’sja do not have exact equivalents in English. How, then, are we to understand claims that ‘sadness’ or ‘anger’ are universal human emotions?
Emotions cannot be identified without words, and words always belong to particular cultures and carry with them a culture-specific perspective. The only words that are, in a sense, culture-independent are lexical universals, realized in English as good and bad, want, know, feel, think, and say, and so on. Any innate and universal cognitive scenarios that play a special role in human emotional lives all over the world would have to be identified via such lexical universals, not via culture-specific words such as sadness or anger. It may be true that ‘sadness’ and ‘anger’ are universally found in all cultures; but they are found there by native speakers of English. Observers looking at these cultures from a different cultural perspective will probably find something else.
Translations:
Into Russian:
Chapter 10 (pp. 503-525) of Вежбицкая, Анна (1999), Семантические универсалии и описание языков [Semantic universals and the description of languages]. Москва [Moscow]: Языки Русской Культуры [Languages of Russian Culture].
Chapter 1 (pp. 15-43) of Вежбицкая, Анна (2001), Сопоставление культур через посредство лексики и прагматики [Comparison of cultures through vocabulary and pragmatics]. Москва [Moscow]: Языки Славянской Культуры [Languages of Slavic Culture].
Rating:
Research carried out by one or more experienced NSM practitioners
Tags: (E) anger, (E) angry, (E) gnev гнев, (E) grust' грусть, (E) pečal' печаль, (E) sadness, (E) serdit'sja сердиться
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on September 3, 2018.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1998). Russian emotional expression. Ethos, 26(4), 456-483. DOI: 10.1525/eth.1998.26.4.456
Translated into Russian as:
Вежбицкая, А. [Wierzbicka, Anna] (1999). Выражение эмоций в русском языке: заметки по поводу «Русско-английского словаря коллокаций, относящихся к человеческому телу». In Вежбицкая, А. [Wierzbicka, Anna], Семантические универсалии и описание языков, под ред. Татьяна В. Булыгиной [Semantic universals and the description of languages, ed. Tatyana V. Bulygina] (pp. 526-546). Москва [Moscow]: Языки русской культуры [Languages of Russian Culture].
This article examines Russian “emotional ideology” as reflected in the Russian language, and especially in the Russian collocational system. Colloquial collocations involving the human body, seen as an organ of emotional expression, are the focusfor comparingfolk models of the body and emotion in Russian and Anglo cultures. A theory of “cultural scripts” forms the basis of generalizations from the linguistic evidence.
Published on May 12, 2017. Last updated on August 19, 2021.
Mostovaja, Anna D. (1998). On emotions that one can “immerse into”, “fall into” and “come to”: The semantics of a few Russian prepositional constructions. In Angeliki Athanasiadou, & Elzbieta Tabakowska (Eds.), Speaking of emotions: Conceptualisation and expression (pp. 295-330). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110806007.295
This paper examines the projection of a few spatial relations such as ‘an object being immersed in a deep container’, ‘a person coming to a place’ and ‘an object located in a place’ into the domain of emotions. In this paper I will attempt to describe what kinds of words referring to emotions and inner states can be treated as containers for those experiencing them in four Russian constructions with the preposition
V ‘in/into’ and different verbs. We will see that although all of these constructions present an emotion experienced by a person as if it were a container or a place, semantic constraints on X are different for
each of the four constructions. Differences in semantic constraints associated with the constructions are caused by differences in meaning between verbs used in the constructions.
