Home How morphological decomposition manifests itself in the duration of the inter-morpheme period of silence in Russian prefixed verbs
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

How morphological decomposition manifests itself in the duration of the inter-morpheme period of silence in Russian prefixed verbs

  • Sergei Monakhov EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: April 12, 2024
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Summary

This study tests the morphological gradience theory on Russian prefixed verbs. With the help of a specially designed experiment, I offer evidence that verbs with prefixes that have prepositional counterparts and verbs with prefixes that exist only as bound morphemes reveal significant differences in terms of their morphological decomposition. In the pronunciation of native speakers, there tends to be a significantly longer silent period between prepositional prefixes and bases than between unprepositional prefixes and bases due to the compositional nature of the former and the non-compositional nature of the latter. Drawing on these findings, I contend that Russian prefixed verbs can be analysed as constructional schemas and that the degree of their morphological decomposition depends upon the different levels of activation of their sequential and lexical links.

References

Arkadiev, Peter & Andrey Shluinsky. 2015. Verb-Classifying Aspectual Systems: Towards a Typology. Vestnik SPbGU 3. 4–24.Search in Google Scholar

Aylett, Matthew & Alice Turk. 2004. The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech 47. 31–56.10.1177/00238309040470010201Search in Google Scholar

Baayen, R. Harald & Robert Schreuder. 2000. Towards a psycholinguistic computational model for morphological parsing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 358. 1–3.10.1098/rsta.2000.0586Search in Google Scholar

Bell, Alan & Jurafsky, Daniel & Fosler-Lussier, Eric & Girand, Cynthia & Gregory, Michelle & Daniel Gildea. 2003. Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 113: 1001–1024.10.1121/1.1534836Search in Google Scholar

Bergsma, Shane & Bhargava, Aditya & He, Hua & Grzegorz Kondrak. 2010. Predicting the Semantic Compositionality of Prefix Verbs. In Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 293–303.Search in Google Scholar

Biskup, Petr. 2012. Slavic Prefixes and Adjectival Participles. In Ziková, M. & Dočekal, M. (eds.), Slavic Languages in Formal Grammar: Proceedings of FDSL 8.5, Brno 2010. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 271–289.Search in Google Scholar

Biskup, Petr. 2015. On (Non-)Compositionality of Prefixed Verbs. In Ziková, M. & Caha, P. & M. Dočekal. (eds.), Slavic Languages in the Perspective of Formal Grammar: Proceedings of FDSL 10.5, Brno 2014. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 59–78.Search in Google Scholar

Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2020. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.1.21. Retrieved in April 2020 from http://www.praat.org.Search in Google Scholar

Bundgaard-Nielsen, Rikke L. & Brett J. Baker. (2020). Pause acceptability indicates word-internal structure in Wubuy. Cognition 198: 104167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104167.Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology. A Study on the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.9Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511612886Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2007. Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, Cognition, and Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Clopper, Cynthia G. & Rory Turnbull. 2018. Exploring variation in phonetic reduction: Linguistic, social, and cognitive factors. In Cangemi, F. & Clayards, M. & Niebuhr, O. & Schuppler, B. & M. Zellers, (eds.), Rethinking Reduction. Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter, pp. 25–72. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110524178-002.Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Dehé, Nicole et al. (eds.). 2002. Verb-Particle Explorations. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110902341Search in Google Scholar

Diessel, Holger. 2019. The Grammar Network: How Linguistic Structure is Shaped by Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108671040Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele. 2006. Constructions at Work: The nature of Generalizations in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.003.0002Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics 19: 1–33.10.1515/COG.2008.001Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer. 2001. Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics 39, 1041–1070.10.1515/ling.2001.041Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer. 2003. Causes and Consequences of Word Structure. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203495131Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale. 2013. The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Iacobini, Claudio & Francesca Masini. 2007. Verb-particle Constructions and Prefixed Verbs in Italian: Typology, Diachrony and Semantics. In Booij, G. et al. (eds.), On-line Proceedings of the Fifth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM5) Fréjus 15–18 September 2005. University of Bologna.Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2014. Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jurafsky, Daniel & Bell, Alan & Gregory, Michelle & William D. Raymond. 2001. Probabilistic relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical production. In Bybee, J. & P. Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 229–254.10.1075/tsl.45.13jurSearch in Google Scholar

Koo, Terry & Li Mae. 2016. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine 15 (March). 155–163. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012Search in Google Scholar

Kuperman, Victor & Joan Bresnan. 2012. The effects of construction probability on word durations during spontaneous incremental sentence production. Journal of Memory and Language 66. 588–611.10.1016/j.jml.2012.04.003Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 2009. Cognitive (Construction) Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 20/1. 167–176.10.1515/COGL.2009.010Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Volkmar. 2009. Aspekt und Tempus. In Kempgen S., Kosta P., Berger T. & K. Gutschmidt (eds.), Slavische Sprachen—Slavic Languages (HSK 32.1). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, pp. 526–556.Search in Google Scholar

Lorenz, David & David Tizón-Couto. 2017. Coalescence and contraction of V-to-Vinf sequences in American English – Evidence from spoken language. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2015-0067.Search in Google Scholar

Markova, Angelina. 2011. On the Nature of Bulgarian Prefixes: Ordering and Modification in Multiple Prefixation. Word Structure 4(2). 244–271.10.3366/word.2011.0013Search in Google Scholar

Matushansky, Ora. 2002. On formal identity of Russian prefixes and prepositions. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 42. 217–253.Search in Google Scholar

Monakhov, Sergei. 2021. Russian prefixed verbs as constructional schemas. Russian Linguistics 45(1). 45–73.10.1007/s11185-021-09238-1Search in Google Scholar

Pluymaekers, Mark & Ernestus, Miriam & R. Harald Baayen. 2005. Lexical frequency and acoustic reduction in spoken Dutch. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 118. 2561–2569.10.1121/1.2011150Search in Google Scholar

Shvedova, Natalia. (ed.). 1980. Russkaya Grammatika [Russian Grammar]. Moscow: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Tihonov, Andrei. 1998. Russkij Glagol: Problemy Teorii i Leksikografirovanija [Russian Verb: Problems of Theory and Lexicography]. Moscow: Academia.Search in Google Scholar

Tremblay, Antoine & R. Harald Baayen. 2010. Holistic processing of regular four-word sequences: A behavioral and ERP study of the effects of structure, frequency, and probability on immediate free recall. In Wood, D. (ed.), Perspectives on Formulaic Language: Acquisition and Communication. London: The Continuum International, pp. 151–173.Search in Google Scholar

Wiland, Bartosz. 2012. Prefix stacking, syncretism, and the syntactic hierarchy. In Ziková, M. & M. Dočekal (eds.), Slavic Languages in Formal Grammar: Proceedings of FDSL 8.5, Brno 2010. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 307–324.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2024-04-12
Published in Print: 2024-03-25

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 3.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/slaw-2024-0003/html
Scroll to top button