Constructions with Verbs of Speech: Semantic Predicament of Structure Reviewed

Introduction. Explanatory constructions in the Buryat language, namely, those with verbs of speech as their main predicate, have not been studied in detail so far. Their systematic study involves a detailed analysis of both the semantics of the predicate of the main clause and the structure of the entire construction. The purpose of the article was to identify the correlation between the semantics of verbs of speech and the structural type of constructions. For the purpose, it was necessary i) to identify the group of verbs of speech, ii) to make an inventory of the structures in question, iii) to identify their structural types and specific characteristics, iv) to distribute verbs of speech according to structural types, and v) to study the interdependence between the semantics of verbs and the types of constructions. Original literary texts of the Buryat electronic corps served as material for the study. Linguistic observation, description, component analysis, and structural modeling were used as methods of the analysis. Research results. Buryat explanatory clauses are of the three structural types: participial, participial with postpositions, and bifinite constructions. Each of them specializes in expressing information of a particular level of abstraction: bifinite constructions introduce direct speech; participial constructions with the accusative case of the dependent predicate convey indirect speech; participial constructions with postpositions name the theme. As the analysis of the distribution of verbs of speech by structural types shows, verbs with semantics suggesting a long speech act like ‘to tell’ are more often used in bifinite and postpositional constructions. Those with the meaning of a short speech act, or of the type ‘to add’, implement the valence of the speech in constructions with direct speech and conjunction gezhe. Verbs of speech that differ in their role in communication, for example, asuu-, hura- (ask), implement the valence of the speech in bifinite constructions with gezhe and participles in the accusative case. The author concluded that the structure of the constructions under study is largely dependent on the semantics of the verbs of speech.

1. Buryat Language Corpus. Available at: http://web-corpora.net/BuryatCorpus/search/?interface_language=ru (accessed: February 1, 2021). (In Bur.)

2. Baranova V. Grammaticalization paths of the verb gi- ‘say’ in Kalmyk. Mongolica Pragensia’ 15. Linguistics, Ethnolinguistics, Religion and Culture. 2015. Vol. 8. No. 2. Pp. 57–76. (In Eng.)

3. Bembeev E. V. On the dicendial verb ‘gikh’ usage: Quantitative analysis (of the texts of the Djangar epos). Izvestiya SOIGSI. 2017. No. 4. Pp. 65–76. (In Russ.)

4. Bertagaev T. A., Tsydendambaev Ts. B. Buryat Grammar: Syntax. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura, 1962. 316 p. (In Russ.)

5. Cristofaro S. Utterance complement clauses. In: Dryer M. S., Haspelmath M. (eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library, 2011. Chapter 128. Available at: http://wals.info/chapter/128 (accessed: September 15, 2019). (In Eng.)

6. Darzhaeva N. B. Conjunctions from the verb of speech ge- as a basis for the formation of new polypredicative constructions in the Buryat language. Vestnik of North-Eastern Federal University. 2020. No. 5 (79). Pp. 46–56. (In Russ.)

7. Givón T. Syntax: An Introduction. 2 vols. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2001 [1984; 1990]. XVII+500 p, X+406 p. (In Eng.)

8. Hashimoto K. Metarepresentational motivation: The grammaticalization of the verb of saying ge- in Mongolian. In: Tsukuba English Studies. Vol. 22. Tsukuba: University of Tsukuba, 2004. Pp. 35–49. (In Eng.)

9. Knyazev M. Yu. Kalmyk sentential objects. In: Studies in Kalmyk Grammar. Ser. ‘Acta Linguistica Petropolitana’. Vol. V. Part 2. St. Petersburg: Nauka. 2009. Pp. 525–580. (In Russ.)

10. Pyurbeev G. Ts. Kalmyk Grammar: Syntax. Elista: Kalmyk Humanities Research Institute (RAS), 2010. 298 p. (In Russ.)

11. Pyurbeev G. Ts. Verb гих in modern Kalmyk: Semantics and syntactic functions. In: Questions of Modern Kalmyk Grammar and Lexicology. Moscow: Nauka, 1976. Pp. 95–103. (In Russ.)

12. Sanzheev G. D. Syntax of Buryat Mongolian. Ulan-Ude: Burgiz, 1940. 130 p. (In Russ.)

13. Shvedova N. Yu. et al. (eds.) The Russian Grammar. Moscow: Nauka, 1980. 709 p. (In Russ.)

14. Skribnik E. K. Buryat emotive constructions with the complementizer geže. Siberian Journal of Philology. 2015. No. 2. Pp. 36–43. (In Russ.)

15. Skribnik E. K. Buryat polypredicative constructions with conjunction гэжэ. In: Conjunctions in Compound Sentence. Novosibirsk: Institute of History, Philology and Philosophy, 1987. Pp. 35–41. (In Russ.)

16. Skribnik E. K., Darzhaeva N. B. Buryat Grammar: Syntax of Compound (Polypredicative) Sentence. Vol. I. Ulan-Ude: Buryat Scientific Center (SB RAS), 2016. 315 p. (In Russ.)

17. Song J.-M. Grammaticalization of the verb ge- ‘to say’ in Khalkha Mongolian. Ōsaka keizai hōka daigaku sōgō kagaku kenkyūsho nenpō. 2002. Vol. 3. Pp. 29–38. (In Eng.)

18. Street J. C. On Quotation in Middle Mongolian: The Verb ke(m)e- ‘To Say’. Bloomington: The Mongolia Society, 2013. (Occasional Paper 27). 92 p. (In Eng.)