Eesti ja soome-ugri keeleteaduse ajakiri. Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics

Syntax of the Uralic languages: principal features and challenges. Introduction to the special issue of ESUKA – JEFUL

Maria Ovsjannikova — 2024-06-27

This introductory paper presents the context and current challenges of Uralic syntactic studies. The brief summary of seven selected papers from the SOUL-4 conference published in the present issue is followed by an overview of six topics from the domain of Uralic syntax, namely: differential object marking; object agreement; impersonal constructions; the syntax of minor parts of speech; subordination and nonfinite predication; and possessive constructions. The aim of this overview is to show how intricate and, in some ways, how unfamiliar Uralic syntax looks from the Standard Average European perspective and how many issues still await further study.

Kokkuvõte. Maria Ovsjannikova, Fedor Rozhanskiy: Uraali keelte süntaks: põhiomadused ja väljakutsed. Sissejuhatus. See sissejuhatav artikkel tutvustab Uurali süntaktiliste uuringute konteksti ja praeguseid väljakutseid. Esmalt tehakse lühikokkuvõte seitsmest SOUL-4 konverentsil ette kantud käesolevasse numbrisse valitud artiklist, millele järgneb ülevaade kuuest Uurali süntaksi valdkonna teemast, nimelt: diferentseeritud objekti markeerimine, objekti ühildumine, impersonaalsed konstruktsioonid, abisõnade süntaks, alistusseos ja mittefiniitne predikatsioon ning omastavate konstruktsioonide süntaks. Käesoleva ülevaate eesmärk on näidata, kui keeruline ja mitmes mõttes võõras on Uurali süntaks Euroopa keskmise standardi perspektiivist ning kui palju küsimusi ootab veel edasist uurimist.

Why partitive? Possible motivations for the partitive complement of Finnic adpositions

Tuomas Huumo — 2024-06-27

Adpositions localize an entity (Figure) with respect to another entity (Ground), designated by the complement of the adposition. Most Finnic adpositions are postpositions with a genitive Ground, while prepositions typically have a partitive Ground. This work is a cognitive-linguistic study of the synchronic and diachronic semantics of partitive-Ground adpositions. It is argued that adpositions with a partitive Ground select a proximal perspective to the locational relationship, while those with a genitive Ground select a distal perspective. Three alternative hypotheses are introduced and compared concerning the origin of two Finnish partitive-Ground adpositions, kohti ‘towards’ and päin ‘towards’: 1) These adpositions originated as instructive-case bodypart expressions of position (cf. selin ‘with one’s back at’), and their partitive Ground indicated a viewpoint person; 2) They were instructive forms with a meronymic-locative meaning, expressing a more precise target area within the Ground, together with a directionality toward that area; 3) The Ground of kohti and päin was originally a partitive object of ‘aiming’ or ‘shooting’ verbs, and the soon-to-be adpositions themselves were lexicalized adverbs of direction.

Kokkuvõte. Tuomas Huumo: Milleks partitiiv? Kaassõnade laiendit markeeriva partitiivkäände motiividest läänemeresoome keeltes. Kaassõnad suhestavad trajektori orientiiriga, mida väljendab kaassõna laiend. Enamik läänemeresoome keelte kaassõnadest on tagasõnad, mille laiend on genitiivis, eessõnade laiend aga on tavaliselt partitiivis. Käesoleva töö eesmärgiks on selgitada partitiivis laiendiga kaassõnade sünkroonilist ja diakroonilist semantikat kognitiivse lingvistika vaatenurgast. Autor väidab, et partitiivlaiendiga kaassõnad valivad asukohasuhtele proksimaalse perspektiivi, erinevalt genitiivlaiendiga kaassõnadest, mis valivad distaalse ja holistilise perspektiivi. Autor pakub välja kolm alternatiivset hüpoteesi, mis puudutavad kahe soome keele partitiivlaiendiga kaassõna, kohti ja päin (mõlemad tähendusega ’suunas, poole’), päritolu: 1) kaassõnad grammatiseerusid instruktiivis kehaosaväljenditest (vrd. selin ’seljaga millegi poole’) ja nende partitiivlaiend väljendas esialgselt vaatleja asukohta; 2) vormid olid lokatiivsed instruktiivid, mis väljendasid meronüümiliselt täpsemat sihtala orientiiri sees; 3) partitiivlaiend oli esialgselt objekt ning väljendas suunatud tegevuse (nt. ’sihtima’, ’laskma’) sihtkohta, tulevased kaassõnad aga olid suunda täpsustavad adverbid.

Are main clauses really ‘main’ clauses? The case of relative clauses in spoken Estonian and Finnish

Ritva Laury — 2024-06-27

The article concerns relative clause constructions and their main clauses in Estonian and Finnish conversation. The study shows that copula clauses and existential clauses predominate in the corpus data: these two clause types accounted for more than half of the main clauses. Such main clauses serve simply to introduce a referent which is then predicated upon in the relative clause and is likely to be subsequently discussed in the conversation. In addition, relative clauses are also used without any main clauses, headed with just a nominal, a free NP. The article thus shows that the main clauses of relative clauses in Estonian and Finnish conversation tend to be syntactically light. They are also pragmatically light, since it is the relative clause, and not the main clause, which contains the main information in the clause combination. This raises a question about the subordinate status of the relative clause.

Kokkuvõte. Ritva Laury, Renate Pajusalu, Marja-Liisa Helasvuo: Kas pealause on tõesti „pea”lause? Relatiivlaused eesti ja soome suulises keeles. Artikkel tegeleb relatiivlausete konstruktsioonide pealausetega eesti ja soome suulistes vestlustes. Uurimus näitab, et predikatiivlaused ja eksistentsiaallaused on suulises kõnes kõige tavalisemad, nendesse lausetüüpidesse kuulus üle poole meie materjali pealausetest. Sellised pealaused ainult esitlevad referenti, mille kohta just relatiivlause annab olulist informatsiooni. Relatiivlause konstruktsiooniga vestlusesse toodud referent on hiljem tihti edasise vestluse oluline teema. Lisaks kasutatakse relatiivlauseid tihti ilma pealauseteta, nii et nad laiendavad vaba nimisõnafraasi. Artikkel näitab seega, et eesti ja soome vestluste relatiivlausete pealaused on süntaktiliselt kerged. Nad on kerged ka pragmaatiliselt, kuna just relatiivlause, mitte aga pealause, annab põhilise informatsiooni. Siit tekib küsimus relatiivlause kui kõrvallause staatusest ja selle alistatusest.

Conditional converb of the verb ‘say’ as a conditional marker in Forest Enets

Maria Ovsjannikova — 2024-06-27

In Forest Enets conditional constructions, the protasis clause is typically headed by a conditional converb. The conditional converb of the verb man- ‘say’ also serves as a conditional marker in the form mab or mabut, which is typically used along with the lexical predicate in a finite form. This corpus-based study aims to explore the properties of the marker mab(ut). I analyse the differences in its use by Forest Enets speakers of two generations and propose a scenario for the development of this marker. I examine its distribution with respect to phonological form, possessive marking, and position in the clause, as well as the aspectual properties of the constructions in which it features. The proposed source of the marker is a construction with the meaning ‘you might say’, which originally introduced an event in the following clause as a potential example and later developed into a clause-connecting particle.

Kokkuvõte. Maria Ovsjannikova: Konditsionaalne konverbivorm tegusõnast ‘ütlema’ kui tingimuslik marker metsaeenetsi keeles. Metsaeenetsi keeles on tingimuslikes konstruktsioonides esineva tingimuslause peasõnaks harilikult konditsionaalne konverb. Tegusõna man- ‘ütlema’ konditsionaalne konverb võib konditsionaalse markerina esineda ka kujudel mab või mabut, mida kasutatakse tüüpiliselt koos leksikaalse öeldisverbi finiitse vormiga. Siinne korpuspõhine uuring keskendub markeri mab(ut) omadustele. Analüüsin selle markeri kasutuserinevusi kahe põlvkonna metsaeenetsi keele rääkijate vahel ja pakun välja selle markeri võimaliku arengutee. Uurin markeri distributsiooni selle järgi, mis on tema fonoloogiline vorm, possessiivne markeering, ning positsioon osalauses, ka uurin nende konstruktsioonide aspektilisi omadusi. Mainitud markeri arvatav allikas on konstruktsioon tähendusega ‘võib öelda’, mis on algselt sisse juhatanud järgnevas osalauses esinevat olukorda kui potentsiaalset näidet, ja mis on hiljem arenenud osalauseid ühendavaks partikliks.

Syntax and functions of the Ingrian discourse particles no and nu

Elena Markus — 2024-06-27

This paper examines the syntax and functions of the discourse particles no and nu in narratives and conversations recorded from speakers of Soikkola Ingrian in 2006–2013. The Ingrian particle no is probably Finnic in origin, while the particle nu was most likely borrowed from the Russian language. The goal of this research is to find out how different or similar no and nu are in contemporary Ingrian from the point of view of their syntactic positions and functions. Four structural positions are distinguished, in relation to the position of the particle in a turn and in a clause, and no striking differences are observed in the distribution of no and nu across positions. The typical functions of no and nu are analysed separately in each of the four structural positions, and the functional range is found to be similar for both particles. It is also notable that in the Russian speech of Ingrian speakers, no is sometimes used as a discourse particle, although this would not be possible in standard Russian. The research concludes that at the period under investigation the two particles were on the way to complete merger, and can be treated as phonetic variants in a synchronic description of Ingrian, despite the quantitative prevalence of no over nu.

Kokkuvõte. Elena Markus: Isuri diskursusepartiklite no ja nu süntaks ja funktsioonid. Artikkel uurib diskursusepartiklite no ja nu süntaksit ja funktsioone narratiivides ja isuri keele Soikkola murde kõnelejate vestluste salvestistes aastatel 2006–2013. Isuri partikkel no on ilmselt läänemeresoome päritolu, partikkel nu on aga tõenäoliselt laenatud vene keelest. Uurimuse eesmärk on välja selgitada, kui erinevad või sarnased on no ja nu tänapäeva isuri keeles süntaktiliste positsioonide ja funktsioonide poolest. Eristada võib nelja struktuurpositsiooni sõltuvalt partikli asukohast kõnevoorus ja lausungis, positsioonist lähtuvalt aga no ja nu vahel suuri erinevusi märgata ei olnud. Partiklitele tüüpilisi funktsioone analüüsiti eraldi igas struktuurpositsioonis ning selgus, et ka funktsioonide ulatus on mõlema partikli puhul sarnane. On ka märkimisväärne, et isuri keele kõnelejad kasutavad partiklit no diskursusepartiklina vahel ka vene keeles, kuigi vene keele standardis selline kasutus võimalik ei ole. Uurimusest järeldub, et vaadeldaval ajaperioodil on kaks partiklit üheks liitumas ning neid võib isuri keele sünkroonilises kirjelduses käsitleda kui foneetilisi variante, kuigi kvantitatiivselt on partikkel no eelistatum kui partikkel nu.

Syntax of the numeral phrase in Soikkola Ingrian

Fedor Rozhanskiy — 2024-06-27

This article describes the numeral phrase in Soikkola Ingrian. It focuses on the external syntax of the numeral phrase (first of all, case marking of its components) and on the number agreement between the numeral phrase in the subject position and the predicate. The sources of data are (a) a collection of spontaneous speech samples recorded in 2006–2013, (b) samples of spontaneous speech published by previous researchers, (c) elicited material recorded in 2006–2023. Though the numeral phrase in Soikkola Ingrian preserves most of the common Finnic traits, it has some less com- mon features, e.g. agreement in all numeral phrases with a numeral ending in ‘one’ or expressing approximate quantity through a reversed word order. Most likely these features arose due to the contact influence of Russian.

Kokkuvõte. Fedor Rozhanskiy: Numeraalfraasi süntaks isuri keele Soikkola murdes. See artikkel kirjeldab numeraalfraasi isuri keele Soikkola murdes. Artikli keskmes on numeraalfraasi välissüntaks (eeskätt selle komponentide käändemärgistus) ja arvu ühildumine numeraalfraasi ning predikaadi vahel. Andmeallikad on (a) 2006.–2013. aastal salvestatud spontaanse kõneüksuste kogu, (b) varasemate uurijate avaldatud spontaanse kõne näited, (c) 2006.–2023. aastal salvestatud küsitletud materjal. Kuigi numeraalfraas Soikkola murdes säilitab enamiku tavalistest läänemeresoome keele tunnustest, on sellel mõningaid vähemlevinud omadusi, näiteks ühildumine kõigis numeraalfraasides numbriga ’üks’ lõppeva numeraali või ligikaudse koguse väljendamise kaudu pööratud sõnajärjega. Need omadused on tekkinud tõenäoliselt vene keele kontakti tulemusena.

Impersonal or passive? Some approaches to analysis (based on the Veps and Estonian languages)

Polina Oskolskaia — 2024-06-27

This article deals with constructions of the form “to be + passive participle” in Veps and Estonian. Depending on the syntactic context, these constructions can be considered either impersonal or passive. Cases where the syntactic properties of the context do not allow us to determine whether a construction is impersonal or passive are the main object of the study. The article proposes two approaches to analysing these cases, using a corpus study in Veps and the analysis of a native speaker survey in Estonian. Analysis of the Veps data shows that 66% of the sample collected cannot be unambiguously attributed to the impersonal or the passive construction. At the same time, there is a correlation between polarity and construction choice: the passive occurs more often in negative contexts and the impersonal occurs more often in affirmative contexts. The results of the Estonian survey show that 88% of constructions are interpreted as passive. Verb tense and stative/dynamic semantics do not correlate with construction type, but there is a relationship between the preverbal position of the nominative argument and the passive construction. It was assumed that in the impersonal construction the argument has a special status and is not a prototypical object but has both object and subject features.

Kokkuvõte. Polina Oskolskaia: Kas impersonaal või passiiv? Mõned lähenemised umbisikuliste konstruktsioonide analüüsile (vepsa ja eesti keele materjali põhjal). Artiklis käsitletakse „olla + passiivne partitiiv -tud“ konstruktsioone vepsa ja eesti keeles. Sõltuvalt süntaktilistest tingimustest võivad need konstruktsioonid olla impersonaalsed või passiivsed. Artiklis uuritakse neid olukordi, kus konteksti süntaktilised omadused ei võimalda täpselt kindlaks teha, kas konstruktsioon on impersonaalne või passiivne. Tehakse ettepanek kaaluda kahte lähenemist selliste olukordade analüüsimiseks vepsa keele korpusuuringu ja eesti keele emakeelekõnelejate küsitluse analüüsi näitel. Vepsa andmete analüüs näitab, et 66% kogutud valimist ei saa üheselt seostada ei impersonaali ega passiivi konstruktsiooniga. Samal ajal esineb korrelatsioon polaarsuse ja konstruktsioonivaliku vahel: passiiv esineb sagedamini eitavates kontekstides ja impersonaal esineb sagedamini jaatavates kontekstides. Eesti keele uuringu tulemused näitavad, et 88% konstruktsioonidest tõlgendatakse passiivina. Verbi aeg ja statiivne / dünaamiline semantika ei korreleeru konstruktsioonitüübiga, kuid on olemas seos nominatiivse argumendi preverbaalse positsiooni ja passiivkonstruktsiooni vahel. Eeldati, et impersonaalses konstruktsioonis on argumendil eriline staatus ja see ei ole prototüüpne objekt, vaid sellel on nii objekti kui ka subjekti tunnused.

Syntactic properties and information structure of constructions with plural-marked adjectives in Beserman

Maria Usacheva — 2024-06-27

The present article investigates Beserman constructions which contain adjectives inflected for number and nouns that they modify semantically. Prototypically adjectives do not show agreement in number with the head noun. Under certain circumstances, however, they may be marked for number by a nominal plural suffix -(j)os and a 3Sg possessive marker, or by a predicative adjectival suffix -(j)eś. Elicitation and corpus data show that constructions with the suffix -(j)os and a 3Sg possessive marker are used in contrastive contexts. As for -(j)eś-marked adjectives, we claim that two types of construction should be distinguished. Postposed -(j)eś-marked adjectives, according to syntactic tests, retain their original predicative properties. Preposed -(j)eś-marked adjectives share important properties with “prototypical” attributes in Beserman, and may be used under various information structure conditions, thus drifting towards holding the status of pure agreement constructions.

Kokkuvõte. Maria Usacheva, Maria Brykina: Besermani mitmuslike omadussõnadega konstruktsioonide süntaktilised omadused ja infostruktuur. Käesolev artikkel uurib Besermani keele konstruktsioone, mis hõlmavad arvus käänatud omadussõnu ja neid täiendavaid nimisõnu. Prototüüpselt omadussõnad ei ühildu arvus nominaalse põhisõnaga. Teatud tingimustel võivad nad siiski arvu väljendada nominaalse mitmuse sufiksi -(j)os ja kolmanda isiku ainsuse possessiivsufiksiga või predikatiivse adjektiivsufiksiga -(j)eś. Me usume, et sufiksiga -(j)os ja kolmanda isiku ainsuse possessiiv- suffiksiga konstruktsioonid on atributiivse nominalisatsiooni näited. Korpuse andmed ja küsitlus näitavad, et neid kasutatakse kontrasti väljendamiseks. Mis puudutab -(j)eś-markeriga omadussõnu, siis väidame, et eristada tuleks kahte tüüpi konstruktsioone. Järelasendis -(j)eś-markeriga omadussõnad säilitavad süntaktiliste testide kohaselt oma esialgsed predikatiivsed omadused. Eesasendis -(j)eś-markeriga omadussõnad jagavad olulisi omadusi “prototüüpsete” Besermani atribuutidega ja neid võib kasutada erinevates infostruktuuri tingimustes, mis lähendab neid ühildumiskonstruktsioonidele.