On Some Strategies for Expressing Attribution in the Orok Language
DOI: 10.23951/2307-6119-2024-4-92-99
The article examines strategies for expressing attributive relations in languages of different typologies to implement national communicative behavior and reflect the semantic-syntactic features of Tungus-Manchu languages. In the Tungus-Manchu languages, where the class of adjectives is quite sparse, attributive semantics is realized by morphosyntactic means: proper attributives, possessive constructions, and possession constructions. In the Tungus-Manchu languages, non-possession constructions are used to express negative attributive meanings, forming possessive adjectives with the negative particle -ana, which semantically correspond to the Russian negative adjectives with the prefixes не- and без-. The structure of an attributive construction traditionally consists of at least two components: a definition (an adjective as the main means of expressing attributive semantics) and a definitum (a name of nominative semantics, which in Russian, for example, indicates the categorial characteristics of a defining adjective: number, case, and gender). Neutral, for example Russian ‘про солдатск=ую наград=у‘ or ‘по старой железн=ой дорог=е‘. In possessive constructions (noun + noun in possessive form), the relationships are realized at the level of word order: the first component – possessor – is a noun, the second substantivally expressed component is definite, the connection between them is established by possessive suffixes that reflect the personal number of the possessor. In the Tungus-Manchu languages, there are different types of possessive constructions, substantival and pronominal, which differ in the grammatical affiliation of the possessor (the noun itself or a pronoun-noun). Possessive constructions are formalized by possessive adjectives and are represented in the Tungus-Manchu languages as one-component but semantically complex constructions that realize the semantics of the phrase (‘to possess something denoted as a nominal base: to have something denoted as a base’ – a noun) and as two-component constructions: The first component is a noun denoting a characteristic feature by quantity or quality, quite regularly in the instrumentalis form (a form without case indicators is acceptable) and a possessive adjective. Adjectives in this category exclusively fill a postposition in relation to the defined object. Semantic criteria regulate the qualification of possessive constructions expressing attributive relationships: As equivalents of the definitions agreed upon in Russian, some components characterize the inalienable properties of a subject – a person or another living being (аси=лу ‘женой обладающий = женатый’, геда=ди путтэ=лу ‘одним ребенком не обладающий = бездетный’). When denoting alienable properties, the semantics of the adjective possession corresponds to the inconsistent definitions of the Russian language (нари куче=лу ‘человек, ножом обладающий = человек с ножом’).
Keywords: attribution, possessiveness, possessive construction, grammatical status of the possessor, constructions of possession and non-possession
References:
1. Boldyrev B. V. Evenkiysko-russkiy slovar’ [Evenki-Russian dictionary]. Novosibirsk: SB SAR Publ., 2000 (in Russian).
2. Arhiv Novikovoy. Novikova K. A. Polevye zapisi, sdelannye vo vremya ekspediciy na o. Sahalin v 1949–1950 gg., v 5 tetradyakh, khranyashchiesya v Institute filologii Sibirskogo otdeleniya RAN. g. Novosibirsk, ul. Nikolaeva, 8 [Novikova archive. Novikova K. A. Field notes made during expeditions to the island. Sakhalin in 1949–1950, in 5 notebooks, stored at the Institute of Philology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Novosibirsk, st. Nikolaeva, 8] (in Russian).
3. Petrova T. I. Yazyk orokov (ul’ta) [Oroc language (ulta)]. Leningrad: Nauka Publ., 1967. 156 p. (in Russian).
4. Ozolinya L. V. Prityazhatel’nye konstrukcii v orokskom yazyke [Possessive constructions in the Orok language]. Sibirskiy filologicheskiy zhurnal – Siberian Philological Journal, no. 3, 2007, pp. 149–157 (in Russian).
5. Ulitin A. N. Materialy po Gol’dskomu (nanayskomu) yazyku [Materials on the Gold (Nanai) language]. Yazyk i myshlenie – Language and thinking, 1933, no. 1, pp. 119–147 (in Russian).
6. Avrorin V. A. Grammatika nanayskogo yazyka [Grammar of the Nanai language]. Moscow – Leningrad: RAS Publ., 1959, vol. 1, 282 p. (in Russian).
7. Cincius V. I. Ocherk morfologii orochskogo yazyka [Essay on the morphology of the Oroch language]. Uchenye zapiski LGU – Scientific Notes of LSU, 1949, no. 8. Seriya vostokov. Nauk, vyp. 1, pp. 119–158 (in Russian).
8. Petrova T. I. Ocherk grammatiki nanayskogo yazyka [Essay on the grammar of the Nanai language]. Leningrad: Uchpedgiz Publ., 1941, 168 p. (in Russian)
9. Romanova A. V., Myreeva A. N. Ocherki uchurskogo mayskogo i tottinskogo govorov [Essays on the Uchur May and Tottin dialects]. Leningrad: Nauka Publ., 1964, 170 p. (in Russian).
10. Arkhiv Ozolini. Ozolinya L. V. Polevye zapisi, sdelannye vo vremya ekspedicij na o. Sahalin v 1989–2000 gg. v 7 tetradyakh, hranyashchiesya v Institute filologii Sibirskogo otdeleniya RAN. g. Novosibirsk, ul. Nikolaeva, 8 [Ozolini archive. Ozolinya L. V. Field notes made during expeditions to the island. Sakhalin in 1989–2000 in 7 notebooks, stored at the Institute of Philology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Novosibirsk, st. Nikolaeva, 8] (in Russian).
11. Sedykh A. P. Propoziciya, modus, diktum v nacional’nykh yazykakh [Proposition, modus, dictum in national languages]. Nauchnye vedomosti Belgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki – Scientific Bulletin of Belgorod State University. Humanities, 2008, no. 15, pp. 51–56 (in Russian).
( 172.41 kB ) 
( 144.99 kB )
Issue: 4, 2024
Series of issue: Issue № 4
Rubric: LINGUISTICS
Pages: 92 — 99
Downloads: 172