Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk
Media registration certificate: ПИ № ФС 77 - 77284 от 10.12.2019
Bimonthly peer-review journal founded in January 1952 is the leading Russian academic journal devoted to linguistics.
Founders
- Russian Academy of Sciences
- V.V. Vinogradov Russian Language Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Publisher
- Russian Academy of Sciences
The journal is published under the auspices of Department of Historical and Philological Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
About the journal
The journal welcomes original research on linguistic theory, areal, typological, and comparative linguistics, sociolinguistics, computational and corpus linguistics, psycholinguistics, and related fields.
Preference is given to papers that make a theoretical contribution or present new empirical data of general interest. Papers assessing minor language-specific descriptive problems, as well as those dealing with “cultural concepts”, “linguistic consciousness”, literary science, and folklore studies are generally discouraged; the editorial board reserves the right to decline such articles without further consideration.
To submit a manuscript, please register and fill in the article submission form.
Ағымдағы шығарылым
Ашық рұқсат
Рұқсат берілді
Тек жазылушылар үшін
№ 5 (2025)
Special issue in memory of Leonid L. Iomdin
A foreword
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):7-10
7-10
The construction kak-to tak as a discourse marker
Аннотация
The article analyzes discourse functions of the expression kak-to tak ('kind of like that'), which encompass anaphora, deixis, hesitation, evaluation, and summation. These functions can be divided into referential, structural, and cognitive. The semantics of the marker arises from the interaction of two components: the indefiniteness associated with kak-to ('somehow') and the deixis conveyed by tak ('like that'). The deictic component dominates in anaphoric, deictic, and summative uses, while the indefinite component is more prominent in hesitative and evaluative contexts. Each function is associated with distinct syntactic, prosodic, and even gestural features. The construction kak-to tak exhibits a development from compositional usages to a grammaticalized discourse marker. While this evolutionary path is typical for demonstrative pronouns, it is rarely described for combinations involving indefinite elements. Diachronic analysis shows that the summative function is the most recent, whereas the other functions are already attested in 19th-century texts, where the evaluative use initially predominated.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):11–29
11–29
Microsyntax in Russian phraseology
Аннотация
The article examines the semantics and derivational history of reduplicated idioms vot-vot (lit. ‘here-here’), ni-ni (lit. ‘no-no’) and t’fu-t’fu (lit. ‘fie-fie’). In spite of the formal transparency of reduplicated idioms, their semantics is unpredictable and specific for every unit. In addition, their origin cannot be reduced to a single algorithm. The semantics of the idiom vot-vot is based on the reduplication of the deictic gesture, which, in the process of semantic evolution, has moved from spatial to temporal domain. In the next step of semantic development, the idiom vot-vot obtained the function of agreement. In contrast, the reduplicated idiom ni-ni inherited the idea of negation from the single ni, and is not related to deixis. The idiom t’fu-t’fu appears to go back to the gesture of folk magic to protect from evil, which differs significantly in function from the gesture of discontent, contempt, or indifference that accompanies the interjection t’fu. The specific features of the genesis of reduplicated idioms have a direct impact on their actual meanings.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):30–43
30–43
Interaction of locative adverbials with the meaning of the predicate
Аннотация
A whole series of locative adverbials group around the concept of distance between two points, for example, na tri kilometra (≈ ‘by three kilometers’ or ‘three kilometers away/further’), v trёh kilometrah (≈ ‘at the point three kilometers away’), za tri kilometra ( ‘three kilometers away from here’), na rasstojanii (protjaženii) trёh kilometrov (≈ ‘at a distance of three kilometers’), na pušečnyj vystrel (≈ ‘at a cannon shot’), na bezopasnoe rasstojanie ( ‘to a safe distance’), blizko ( ‘close’), vblizi ( ‘close by’), vplotnuju ( ‘next to’), daleko ( ‘far’), vdaleke ( ≈ ‘far off’), etc. Although the value of this distance is typically quite transparent, the points delimiting it are often left implicit. We study some types of sentences in which the identification of these points is non-obvious or even ambiguous. Depending on the choice of these points, two types of adverbial interpretation should be distinguished—source-oriented and goal-oriented interpretations. The factors shaping each interpretation depend on both the verb’s meaning and the adverbial’s nature. Several specific adverbials demonstrating unusual properties are described. The adverbial na pušečnyj vystrel ( ‘at a cannon-shot distance’) has opposite meanings in a number of uses. The adverbial na bezopasnoe rasstojanie ( ‘to a safe distance’) behaves differently with goal-oriented and source-oriented verbs: in the first case, it falls within the scope of the inchoative seme present in the verb’s meaning, while in the second case it lacks this capacity. Finally, it is shown that the expression bolee čem N ( ‘more than N’) has three types of interpretation in combination with goal-oriented verbs, in one of which it is paradoxically synonymous with the expression menee čem N ( ‘less than N’).
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):44–60
44–60
The Russian vsё ravno revisited
Аннотация
The article offers an analysis of the polysemy structure of the Russian syntactic phraseme vsё ravno. I propose to distinguish two classes of this unit’s uses — the predicative use, in which it has two valencies (a dative subject and an object complement clause) and expresses “absence of difference”, and the connective use, in which vsё ravno marks the logical relation between two situations established by the speaker. Depending on the nature of this relation in the connective use, two meanings are distinguished: “contrary to expectation” and “an argument”. The phrasemes vsё odno and vsё edino, which are quasi-synonymous with vsё ravno, are also considered. The typological significance of the semantic shifts that underlie the polysemy of the linguistic units in question is confirmed based on the Database of semantic shifts in the languages of the world (DatSemShift).
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):61–75
61–75
Mikhail Bulgakov’s “The Master and Margarita” and Yury Trifonov’s “Preliminary Results”: Parallels and their linguistic analysis
Аннотация
The article compares Mikhail Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita” with Yury Trifonov’s novella “Preliminary Results”. More than 30 pairs of text fragments are identified in which narrative, stylistic, and lexical similarities emerge. The study attempts to formalise these parallels using several linguistic methods: statistical counts of lexical overlap, analysis of coinciding multi-word fragments, detection of shared low-frequency vocabulary, and automatic measurement of semantic proximity. None of the applied methods reveals a statistically significant influence of one text upon the other. The conclusion discusses the fundamental possibilities of formalising intuitively perceived parallels in works of fiction and outlines potential directions for further research of this kind.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):76–90
76–90
The Russian vsë ravno: paradoxes of an incomplete morphologization
Аннотация
This article, based on representative corpus data, examines the non-trivial morphosyntactic properties of the experiential predicative vsë ravno (which, as we argue, emerged under Polish influence) in the Russian language from the 17th to the 21st centuries. While the semantic structure of this locution has been described in detail by Leonid Iomdin, its diachronic evolution and the morphosynthetic status of its components have rarely been addressed by linguists. It is shown that originally the elements vsë ‘everything’ and ravno ‘equal’ exhibited a high degree of morphosyntactic and prosodic autonomy (in particular, the set of linguistic units that could be inserted between them was remarkably broad), forming at the same time a semantically idiomatic complex. The contradiction between semantic cohesion and morphological autonomy was resolved in the history of Russian through the reduction of the morphosynthetic status of these elements and an increase in the morphological cohesion of the phrase vsë ravno. This process can be considered complete in the modern language for the construction P vsë ravno [čto/kak] Q meaning ‘P is equivalent/equal to Q’ and for the adverbial vsë ravno meaning ‘in any case; anyway’. However, in its original meaning (‘does not matter; no matter’), this unit shows signs of a secondary wordform with incomplete morphologization, especially under negation. In these latter contexts, it is still possible to insert a limited set of other units between vsë and ravno (primarily, the enclitic li and the subject dative forms of personal pronouns). Nevertheless, the tendency towards full morphological integration is clearly manifested even in negative contexts through the gradual “externalization” of these units into postposition: for example, the sequence ne vsë ravno li (+ dative) is particularly frequent in Russian poetry.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):91–117
91–117
Expanding relative clauses: Semantics, syntax, communicative organization
Аннотация
The paper discusses semantic, syntactic, and communicative features of expanding (relative) constructions, which are usually qualified as correlative with complement sentences («inversely subordinate»), cf.: On uehal, o čem ja ne znal lit. ‘He left, of which I did not know’ — Ja ne znal o tom, čto on uehal ‘I did not know he left’. The cases are considered in which the denotative status of the situation expressed in the main part and the propositional relative pronoun do not coincide: Menja pereveli v oddel gazet, o čem ja prosil Il’ičeva lit. ‘I was transferred to the newspaper department, which I asked Ilychev about’ (‘transferred’ — real status, ‘asked to be transferred to the newspaper department’ — unreal status). A comparison is made with the denotative statuses of subject noun phrases and anaphoric pronouns. It is shown that expanding constructions serve as the implementation of one of the narrative strategies, which brings events (facts) to the forefront and gives the status of an additional message to modal predicates.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):118-142
118-142
The one who loves is loved: Adjectives of emotional attitude with conversive polysemy in Russian
Аннотация
The article deals with Russian adjectives which can characterize both the subject and the object of an emotional attitude. This phenomenon in the verbal domain is usually described as lability. This type of metonymy is rarely attested in adjectives. However, it is very typical of adjectives denoting emotional attitude. Usually the senses ‘the one who is the subject of the feeling’ and ‘the one who is the object of the feeling’ are expressed by different words: ljubjaščij ‘loving’, vljublënnyj ‘in love’, nežnyj ‘tender’, laskovyj ‘affectionate’ characterize the one who loves, or their gestures, looks, voice, etc., whereas ljubimyj ‘beloved’, vozljublennyj ‘beloved’, dorogoj ‘dear’ describe the object of the feeling. However, there are cases when both meanings are expressed by one lexical unit. For example, the word ljubeznyj ‘amiable’ has the meaning ‘friendly’ (ljubeznaja sekretarsa ‘an amiable secretary’, on byl ko mne ljubezen ‘he was amiable to me’) or ‘dear’ (ljubeznyj drug ‘dear friend’), though the second meaning has become obsolete. The word milyj is freely used in contexts like mil mne ‘I like (somebody)’ and mil ko mne ‘(somebody) is friendly to me’. Often the adjective is ambiguous between two meanings: Eē mama očen‘ milaja ‘Her mom is very nice’, that is, rather cute or friendly; milaja ulybka ‘a nice smile’ is attractive or favorable. The adjective ljubovnyj ‘amorous’ used to have similar polysemy, but the passive meaning has been completely lost. I conclude that such polysemy is widespread and grounded in the language system. The described semantic shift also has typological parallels.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):143-153
143-153
Russian sentences of the type Mne negde spat′ ‘I have no place to sleep’: Once more
Аннотация
The paper describes Russian sentences of the form (i) Mne est′ gde spat′ ‘I have a place to sleep′ and (ii) Mne ØPRES Byt′I.1 negde spat′ ‘I have no place to sleep′. It is shown that there is no syntactic parallelism between such sentences: in (i), the wordform est′ is the present-tense form of the existential verb Byt′III.2 ≈ ‘there be′, and the wordform gde is the pseudo-relative pronominal adverb GDE2a , which depends on the verb in the infinitive (on spat′); in (ii), the wordform ØPRES Byt′I.1 is the zero present-tense form of the copula Byt′I.1 ‘be′, and negde ≈ ‘there being no place′ is a predicative pronominal adverb, which obligatorily depends on Byt′I.1 in the role of a support verb. The lexical entry for NEGDE is supplied. A phrase of the form gde mne spat′ lit. ‘where to me to sleep′ is a particular syntactic formation: a modal-infinitive phrase. Such a phrase and the verb Byt′III.2 constitute a syntactically discontinuous collocation of a special type. The problem of actant transfer in collocations with a support verb (from the base to the collocate) is considered; the schematic overviews of the vocables Byt′ and GDE are proposed.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):154-174
154-174
And all that (stuff): Non-grammatical means of expressing representative plurality in Russian
Аннотация
The study outlines the primary nomenclature of so-called universal extenders in the Russian language; systematizes their semantic, pragmatic, and structural properties; and demonstrates that universal extenders cover a semantic domain similar to that expressed by grammatical markers of representative plurality in other languages. Two main types of constructions with universal extenders are identified. Type 1 are coordinative constructions such as Egor Bulyčёv i drugie (‘Egor Bulychov and others’), where the first conjunct is the focal element X — the central member representing a set — and the second conjunct is a pronominal/adjectival phrase referring to a set of elements similar to or associated with X: i tak dalee (‘and so on’), i tomu podobnoe (‘and the like’), i vsё takoe pročee (‘and all that stuff’), i vsё v tom že duhe / v takom rode (‘and in the same vein/style’), etc. Type 2 are constructions like Operacija ‘Y’ i drugie priključenija Šurika (‘Operation ‘Y’ and Shurik’s Other Adventures’). These are coordinative structures where the first conjunct is the focal element and the second conjunct is a general term for the set to which the focal element belongs, with a compulsory modifier meaning “the remaining part” (drugie, inye ‘other’, ostal’nye ‘remaining’, pročie ‘the rest’) and an optional additional modifier expressing plurality, diversity, and variability (vsjakie, vsjačeskie, vsevozmožnye ‘all kinds of’, raznoobraznye ‘various, diverse’, raznye, različnye ‘different’). The study also shows that Russian has specific prosodic means functioning as universal extenders — both independently and in combination with lexical devices. The research is based on data from the main and multimedia corpora of the Russian National Corpus; for prosodic analysis, data from the pilot version of the prosodically annotated corpus of oral personal narratives What I Saw are also used.
Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. 2025;(5):174-188
174-188