New cognitive framework for russian aspect--论文代写范文精选

俄罗斯语言的意义被定义为总和所表达的动作动词,在俄罗斯方面的研究有很长的历史,但直到最近,理论方面的基石被提出来进行更严格的审查。这里应该注意,术语行动不是一个行动，而是由一个动词语义描述。下面的essay代写范文进行详述。

Abstract 
The validity of the traditional approach to the semantics of verbal aspect in Russian based on the features “boundedness” and “totality” is questioned. It is argued that these features are not inherent in the meaning of all perfective verbs and cannot be regarded as the semantic invariant of aspectuality. A different approach is suggested, based on the analysis of morphological and syntactic evidence and on the assumption that the cognitive function of grammar is to categorize relevant human experience. It is shown that aspectual oppositions reflect the different cognitive statuses of the events expressed by paired verb lexemes: observed events are categorized in the form of aspectually marked verbs, whereas aspectually unmarked verbs categorize events without reference to observation. The grammatical meaning of aspect is defined as indication to the source of information about the event which can be definite (based on observation), or indefinite (based on speaker’s knowledge), and has little to do with “boundedness” or “totality”. The suggested analysis is consistent with the central claim of autopoiesis as the theory of the living: "Everything said is said by an observer to another observer".

Introduction
Verbal aspect as a grammatical category is singled out in different languages due to the existence of a system of grammatical (morphological) forms whose meaning is not limited to the reflection of the usual tripartite system of temporal distinctions, but also includes (at least such is the belief) an additional characteristic feature of the process (activity, state) expressed by the verb, that is, the manner in which the process occurs or activity is carried out. The manner, or character of the action flow and its distribution in time is considered to be a semantic categorial feature known as aspectuality. However, the semantics of aspect continues to cause much dispute. Aspect studies in different languages take as a starting point the classical aspectual system in Slavic, in which the basic distinction between what is known as PERFECTIVE (PF) and IMPERFECTIVE (IMP) is morphologically sustained. 

It is exactly at this point that the whole controversy starts, for there is a profound lack of agreement on what the actual meanings of these aspect forms are. One of the most acclaimed interpretations of aspect meaning is that based on the notion of boundedness: “Boundedness is the idea of completeness (exhaustion) of the temporal manifestation of the action as expressed by the verb” (Бондарко, Буланин 1967: 47). Thus, the meaning of the Russian PF is defined as the totality of the action expressed by the verb, whereby the action is viewed as a spot-like, non-continuous event that reaches its bounds and whereupon a certain result of this action is obtained. The meaning of the IMP aspect is usually associated with continuity and linearity of the action in its occurrence, without any reference to action’s bounds per se, and with its processual and generic-factual function (Шведова, Лопатин 1989; Xраковский 1990).

Boundedness and Totality
Aspect studies in Russian have a long history, but it has been only recently that the cornerstone of the theory of aspect — the notion of boundedness — was brought to closer scrutiny. Doubts have been expressed about the plausibility of the assumption that actions expressed by verbs have any bounds imposed on them by the verb meaning. It should be noted here that the term ‘action’ used to refer to whatever the verb stands for, is not a very good or convenient one: it is not an action that is described by a verb lexeme, but rather an activity, or process of which an action is, or can be, but a part. The notion of ‘action’ belongs to syntax; an action is not the referent of the verb itself, it is the referent of the verbal phrase.

The Syntax of Aspect
As has been shown by Glovinskaya (Гловинская 1982), there is a certain relationship between the aspectual forms and the general meaning of the context in which they are used, and an aspectual analysis must take into consideration the figure of observer. Similar suggestions have been made by others as well (Падучева 1986; Бондарко 1988; Кошелев 1988). Moreover, the Russian term “vid” used to refer to the respective grammatical category, is related to the verb “videt'” ‘see’ whose etymology can be traced from the Latin videre and Gr. εΐδος ‘that which is seen’. However, this relationship between the grammatical meaning of the Russian verb and the figure of the observer has not been given sufficient attention. 

As has been shown elsewhere (Кравченко 1992, 1993, 1996, 1999, Kravchenko 2001), the observer (as opposed to the speaker) is the primary point of reference for indexical phenomena in language and must be taken into account in the analysis of such grammatical categories as person, tense, aspect, voice, etc. The meaning of these categories cannot be fully explicated without tying it to the figure of observer. I suggest that we now take a look at the functional properties of aspectually paired verbs in two types of context of which one contains explicit indication to the observer as the source of information about the event while the other is neutral in this respect.

The Meaning of Aspect
Examples illustrating the difference in meaning between aspectually paired verbs could be provided ad infinitum. This distinction consistently reflects the contrast between two types of knowledge about the event: phenomenological knowledge based on individual empirical experience, and structural knowledge based on abstraction. In other words, the grammatical term vid (literally meaning “view”) unambiguously specifies the distinctive feature of the aspectual contrasts, which is the cognitive status of the event expressed by the verb: observed events are contrasted to events reference to which does not imply the observer. 

Consequently, paired verbs of the idti/xodit' (‘go’) type traditionally labeled as IMP, constitute bona fide aspectual oppositions in the same way as the PF1/IMP2 and PF2/IMP2 verbs do. The difference between the cognitive statuses of paired verbs was intuitively felt by Potebnya (compare his “concrete” vs. “habitual” events) and by Jakobson (“determinate” vs. “indeterminate”). Other explanations of the semantic difference between the paired verbs (“duration” vs. “frequence”, or”directedness” vs. “undirectedness”) also stem from the cognitive semantics of the verb: motion in space as an event categorized by the aspectually marked IMP1 verb is, in a prototypical situation, present (= exists) at the moment of utterance, it unfolds even as the speaker is describing it — hence the idea of duration associated with such an event. When a moving object is being observed, the idea of directedness of its motion is always present as the observer’s eyes follow the object’s trajectory.

Conclusion 
As a grammatically consistent and functionally oriented analysis shows, the grammatical term vid unambiguously specifies the distinctive feature of aspectual contrasts in Russian, namely, the cognitive status of the event expressed by the verb: observed events are categorized in the form of aspectually marked verbs, whereas aspectually unmarked verbs categorize events without reference to observation. Consequently, the grammatical meaning of aspect is defined as indication to the source of information about the event which can be definite (based on observation), or indefinite (based on the speaker’s knowledge), and has very little to do with “boundedness” or “totality” as the so-called semantic invariant. The suggested cognitive framework for Russian aspect parallels a similar framework for English (Кравченко 1990; 1997; Kravchenko 2002), providing a unified methodology for cognitively oriented typological studies of aspect in different languages.（essay代写)

51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。（essay代写)
更多essay代写范文欢迎访问我们主页 www.51due.com 当然有essay代写需求可以和我们24小时在线客服 QQ:800020041 联系交流。-X（essay代写)