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

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/