Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Russian verbal forms (was: (In)transitive verbs

From:Alexander Savenkov <savenkov@...>
Date:Tuesday, February 10, 2004, 22:37
Hello,

2004-02-09T20:26:45+03:00 Tamas Racsko <tracsko@...> wrote:

>> My wife confirms, you can say : Chto ty ponavydelyval >> ? or Chto ty ponavydumyval ? as familiar forms. The >> author says that such forms (3 prefixes) are seldom >> used, and only in spoken language.
> As far I know, in case of <ponevydelyvat'> even its base > <vydelyvat'> is familiar.
The base, the stem is <del>, as you know.
> Or, to be precise, it's familiar in the > meaning 'to make, to do' (its "original" non-familiar meaning is: > 'to manufacture, to process').
> I think it possible that <vydelyvat'> -- only in its familiar > meaning -- in the spoken language isn't considered as a prefixed > verb at all, but it's lexicalized in the background as an > indivisible lexeme, an alternation of its non-prefixed (non- > familiar) synonym <delat'>.
It is considered a prefixed word. This is because <podelyvat'>, <sdelat'>, <poddelat'>, and many other exist.
> I suppose it can be the reason why this > word can take two additional verbal prefixes, and this analysis > probably can explain also why only a limited subset of words can > have more than two prefixes.
Other words can have more than two prefixes. See my other letter.
> However, there's another possible > solution: the colloquial <pona-> is not a prefix chain but a single > prefix.
I'm not an expert on this. All I can say that there are the verbs <navydelyvat'>, <povydelyvat'(sya)>, and <ponadelat'>. I.e. <po> seems to be a separate prefix.
> Both solutions have Slovak parallelisms: verbs like <navs<tнvit'> > 'to visit' are not considered as compound, i.e. you can divide them > only on syllable boundaries -- <nav-s<tнvit'> -- but not on the > etymological morpheme boundaries -- *<na-vs<tнvit'>.
In Russian it is <navestit'>. <Na> can be cut off pretty easily since there are <izvestit'>, <perevesti> etc. What about Slovak?
> In addition, there's a verbal prefix <vz-> in Slovak. It behave > like an indivisible morpheme, but orginally it's a compound of > prefixes <v-> and <z->.
This prefix is not for verbs only in Russian. Are you sure it originally consisted of two prefixes? Alexander. -- Alexander Savenkov http://www.xmlhack.ru/ savenkov@xmlhack.ru http://www.xmlhack.ru/authors/croll/