Russian Linguistics

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 193–211 | Cite as

Semantic defocusing: semantically motivated syntax of Russian SJA constructions

  • Hyug AhnEmail author


This paper aims to investigate the prototypical function of SJA and to classify SJA constructions in Russian. These so-called reflexive constructions express a ‘semantic defocus’, not intransitivity. By defocusing on a participant a different construal of a situation is shown. This different construal often leads the focus towards the action of the verb. Semantic defocusing is the prototype of SJA constructions in Russian. SJA constructions have diverse meanings and the categorization of these meanings shows the relationships among the SJA constructions. There are a number of elements that play a role in the realization of these diverse meanings, such as verbal aspects, the lexical meaning of a verb, etc. However, the subcategories of SJA constructions are related and the concept of semantic defocus plays an important role in the network of SJA constructions.


Semantic Network Lexical Meaning Accusative Case Perfective Aspect Instrumental Case 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Семантический дефокус: семантически мотивированный синтаксис конструкций c -СЯ в русском языке


Настоящая статья исследует прототипическую функцию -СЯ и классифицирует конструкции с -СЯ в русском языке. Так называемые «возвратные» конструкции выражают не непереходность, а «семантический дефокус». Дефокусировка одного из участников показывает различия в конструировании ситуации. А эти различия часто приводят к фокусировке на действии, обозначаемом данным глаголом. Поэтому семантический дефокус функционирует как прототип конструкций с -СЯ в русском языке. Конструкции с -СЯ выражают разнообразные значения; классификация этих значений выявляет семантические отношения между конструкциями. Элементами, оказывающими влияние на реализацию этих значений, являются глагольный вид, лексическое значение данного глагола и др. Субкатегории конструкций с -СЯ связаны между собой, и понятие семантического дефокуса играет важную роль в сети конструкций с -СЯ.


  1. Ahn, H. (2006a). Additional information introduced by SJA in Russian. Glossos, 7 (
  2. Ahn, H. (2006b). The semantics of SJA in Russian: focus on the action. PhD dissertation. Chapel Hill. Google Scholar
  3. Ahn, H. (2009). The semantics of intensiveness in the SJA circumfix in Russian. Slavic and East European Journal, 53(4), 623–637. Google Scholar
  4. Boguslavskij, A. S. (1962). Obrazovanija tipa belet’sja i otymennye glagoly. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1, 77–80. Google Scholar
  5. Cook, W. A. (1972). A set of postulates for case grammar analysis. Languages and Linguistics. Working Papers, 4, 35–49. Google Scholar
  6. Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge. Google Scholar
  7. Dušková, L. (1972). On some functional and stylistic aspects of the passive voice in present-day English. Philologica Pragensia, 14(1), 117–143. Google Scholar
  8. Evgen’eva, A. P. (Ed.) (1981). Slovar’ russkogo jazyka. Vols. 1–4. Moskva. Google Scholar
  9. Fillmore, C. J. (1975). An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. In C. Cogen et al. (Eds.), Berkeley Linguistics Society: Proceedings of the annual meeting, 1 (pp. 123–131). Berkeley. Google Scholar
  10. Fillmore, C. J. (1977). The case for case reopened. In P. Cole & J. M. Saddock (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 8: Grammatical relations (pp. 59–81). New York. Google Scholar
  11. Galkina-Fedoruk, E. M. (1958). Bezličnye predloženija v sovremennom russkom jazyke. Moskva. Google Scholar
  12. Geniušienė, E. (1987). The typology of reflexives (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology, 2). Berlin. Google Scholar
  13. Gerritsen, N. (1990). Russian reflexive verbs. In search of unity and diversity (Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics, 15). Amsterdam. Google Scholar
  14. Givón, T. (1979). On understanding grammar. New York. Google Scholar
  15. Isačenko, A. V. (1960). Grammatičeskij stroj russkogo jazyka v sopostavlenii s slovackim. Morfologija. Vol. 2. Bratislava. Google Scholar
  16. Israeli, A. (1997). Semantics and pragmatics of the ‘reflexive’ verbs in Russian (Slavistische Beiträge, 349). München. Google Scholar
  17. Ivanov, V. V. (1983). Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka. Moskva. Google Scholar
  18. Janda, L. A. (1993). A geography of case semantics. The Czech dative and the Russian instrumental (Cognitive Linguistics Research, 4). Berlin, New York. Google Scholar
  19. Janda, L. A., & Clancy, S. J. (2002). The case book for Russian. Bloomington. Google Scholar
  20. Janko-Trinickaja, N. A. (1962). Vozvratnye glagoly v sovremennom russkom jazyke. Moskva. Google Scholar
  21. Kemmer, S. (1993). The middle voice (Typological Studies in Language, 23). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. Google Scholar
  22. Krauthamer, H. (1981). The prediction of passive occurrence. Linguistics, 19(3/4), 307–324. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago. Google Scholar
  24. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago. Google Scholar
  25. Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason. A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago. Google Scholar
  26. Leinonen, M. (1985). Impersonal sentences in Finnish and Russian: syntactic and semantic properties (Slavica Helsingiensia, 3). Helsinki. Google Scholar
  27. Perel’muter, I. A. (1984). Indoevropejskij medij i refleksiv (Opyt funkcional’nogo analiza). Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1, 3–13. Google Scholar
  28. Scatton, E. A. (1993). Bulgarian. In B. Comrie & G. G. Corbett (Eds.), The Slavonic languages (pp. 188–248). London, New York. Google Scholar
  29. Schenker, A. M. (1986). On the reflexive verbs in Russian. International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics, 33, 27–41. Google Scholar
  30. Short, D. (1993). Czech. In B. Comrie & G. G. Corbett (Eds.), The Slavonic languages (pp. 455–532). London, New York. Google Scholar
  31. Siewierska, A. (1988). The passive in Slavic. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), Passive and voice (Typological Studies in Language, 16) (pp. 243–289). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. Google Scholar
  32. Svartvik, J. (1966). On voice in the English verb (Janua linguarum. Studia memoriae Nicolai van Wijk dedicata. Series practica, 58). The Hague. Google Scholar
  33. Švedova, N. J. et al. (1980). Russkaja grammatika. Vol. I. Moskva. Google Scholar
  34. Townsend, C. E. (1990). A description of spoken Prague Czech. Columbus. Google Scholar
  35. Ušakov, D. N. (2000). Tolkovyj slovar’ russkogo jazyka. Moskva. Google Scholar
  36. Veyrenc, J. (1980). Études sur le verbe russe (Bibliothèque Russe de l’Institut d’Études Slaves, 56). Paris. Google Scholar
  37. Vinogradov, V. V. (1972). Russkij jazyk (grammatičeskoe učenie o slove). Moskva. Google Scholar
  38. Xrakovskij, V. S. (1991). Passivnye konstrukcii. In A. V. Bondarko (Ed.), Teorija funkcional’noj grammatiki. Personal’nost’. Zalogovost’ (pp. 141–180). Sankt-Peterburg. Google Scholar
  39. Zamudio-Fuentes, L. M. et al. (2011). Local quality method for the iris image pattern. In C. San Martin & S.-W. Kim (Eds.), Progress in pattern recognition, image analysis, computer vision, and applications. Proceedings of the 16th Iberoamerican Congress, CIARP 2011, Pucón, Chile, November 15–18, 2011 (pp. 79–88). Berlin, Heidelberg. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zelenov, A. N. (1963). Vozvratnye glagoly stradatel’nogo zaloga v sovremennom russkom literaturnom jazyke. Avtoreferat dis. kand. fil. nauk. Leningrad. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hankuk University of Foreign StudiesLanguage Research InstituteSeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations