Russian converb constructions corresponding to Swedish purposive för att ‘in order to’ + infinitive constructions

2024-03-26T22:11:33+01:00

The present investigation explores the contexts that trigger purposive interpretations of Russian converbs. The contrastive method is used to elicit purposive converb usages from Swedish corresponding constructions, namely, [för att ‘in order to’ + infinitive] constructions. Two main structural types are observed. One analytic construction, in which imperfective converbs specify mental acts of wishing, trying, or intending [converb + infinitive], e.g., želaja najti ‘wishing to find’. The second construction is synthetic, comprising of imperfective converbs without infinitives [converb]: otyskivaja ‘trying to find’. Both constructions involve mental acts of intending, wishing, or trying, which are explicit in the analytic constructions and implicit in the synthetic constructions. In the synthetic constructions, a concrete eventuality denoted by a finite matrix verb serves as a means of fulfilling an intended outcome, denoted by an abstract manner-neutral converb form. In this sense, the purposive meaning that is expressed hinges on a means:purpose (means:end) complementarity as an effect of manner:result complementarity. Differing degrees of the Subject’s involvement in the progression of the attainment of the intended outcomes can be observed, ranging from preparatory steps to achieved results. An important observation is that purposive converb constructions (either synthetic or analytic) may occur with markers of assumed evidentiality, such as slovno ‘like’, kak by ‘as if’, and vidimo ‘apparently’.

On not starting with a blank page: Russian classics as a palimpsest for writers 1980-2020

2024-10-25T10:56:52+02:00

Between 1980 and 2020 Russia’s writers experienced profound changes in their personal and professional lives, as history presented yet another tabula rasa, but when sitting down to write (and despite the advice of Alexander Genis), writers did not see a blank page, but one covered with existing titles, characters, plots, settings, fixed expressions (krylatye vyrazheniia) and the reflections and shadows, literal and figurative, of earlier works. Unlike what Vladimir Kantor describes as Soviet-era erzatsliteratura (15) the classics offered high drama and low farce, the deepest as well as the most charmingly superficial protagonists, unforgettable flights of language, and urgent topics of the day presented against a backdrop of eternal spiritual and moral questions. For those writers wishing to circumvent the klassiki, while still linking themselves to Russia’s past, there were pre-modern religious and folk narratives, lengthening the canon’s timeline while appearing to free it from western influences or imperial ambitions.

After tracing how the reputation of Russia’s klassiki and their desirability as a model changed over time, this paper will offer a descriptive survey of how specific characteristics of predecessors’ works reappeared during this four-decade stretch, with a special focus on the profound reaction to Nabokov. Our aim is to go beyond the concept of tvorcheskaia preemstvennost’ (creative continuity), which allows for broad observations, for example, about the “Gogolian” or “Chekhovian” atmosphere of a given work. Seeing how much material was creatively redeployed, we will consider what contemporary readers need to know about ur-texts (or pre-texts) – beyond what can be found on a quick internet search – in order to appreciate works bearing the influence of past writers. Finally, we ask whether the term “Great Russian Literature” still refers to an inherited literary culture appreciated far beyond Russia’s borders, or whether now, in the 2020s, it is more closely associated with the aggressive nationalism emanating from Moscow.

Poljarnyj vestnik

Russian converb constructions corresponding to Swedish purposive för att ‘in order to’ + infinitive constructions

On not starting with a blank page: Russian classics as a palimpsest for writers 1980-2020