DOI:10.30842/alp23065737193392431
Sichinava D. V. K opisaniyu kontekstov
plyuskvamperfekta i predbudushchego v Novom Zavete. Acta
Linguistica Petropolitana. 392–431.
In the paper, an analysis of parallel pluperfect and (less
numerous) future anterior contexts in Greek koine, Latin Vulgata,
Early Modern English (KJV), Spanish and Church Slavonic versions of
the New Testament is presented. The forms in question can express
both relative and absolute tense. The pluperfect marks precedence
to a point of reference located in the past, whereas the future
anterior signals precedence to a future reference point. The forms
in question are traditionally referred to as absolute-relative
tenses. However, both are known to yield additional
non-compositional meanings related to the domain of past temporal
frames, (cancelled) resultativity, modality (cf. English had I
come earlier…), and evidentiality. A “form-to-semantics”
approach is chosen to investigate the mechanisms behind the
pluperfect and/or future anterior choice in the languages that have
the forms. A classification of the semantic contexts of their use
in the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation is proposed, the properties of
individual translations / doculects are revealed, and
recommendations for further research are given. The findings
include, among other things: an overlap between the uses of both
forms in irreal contexts (in Early Modern English); ambiguity
between the Future Anterior and Perfect Subjunctive in indefinite
temporal reference contexts (in Latin); the dependence of the
choice of pluperfect forms, as opposed to those of the simple
preterite, on the syntactic context (independent sentences, greater
frequency in when-clauses); and various details of the use of the
pluperfect in individual languages (such as experiential or
“not-yet” uses in Church Slavonic or strict absolute-relative uses
in Spanish). Given that the non-finite strategy extensively used in
biblical versions makes it difficult to pinpoint the mechanism
behind the pluperfect vs. preterite choice, a comparison between
multiple biblical translations into the same language should be
undertaken to complete the research.
Keywords
parallel corpus, pluperfect, future anterior,
biblical text
References
Anderson 1982
L. Anderson. The ‘perfect’ as a
universal and as a language-specific category. P. Hopper (ed.).
Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins, 1982. P. 227–264. DOI: 10.1075/tsl.1.16and.
Barentsen 1986
A. A. Barentsen. The use of the
particle БЫЛО in modern Russian. Dutch Studies in Russian
Linguistics. 1986. Vol. 8. P. 1–68.
Barentsen 2015a
A. Barentsen. Nablyudeniya o
vstrechayemosti plyuskvamperfekta v perevodakh yevangeliy na
slavyanskiye yazyki [Observations of the frequency of pluperfect in
the Slavic translations of Gospels]. L. Popovich, D. Voyvodich, M.
Nomati (eds.). V prostranstve lingvisticheskoy slavistiki.
Sbornik nauchnykh statey. V chest 65-letiya akademika Predraga
Pipera [The cosmos of linguistic Slavistic studies.
Festschrift for Academician Predrag Piper]. Belgrade: University of
Belgrade Press, 2015. P. 135–160.
Barentsen 2015b
A. Barentsen. Vid i plyuskvamperfekt
v slavyanskikh yazykakh [Aspect and pluperfect in Slavic]. M.
Kitajo (ed.). Aspektualnaya semanticheskaya zona: Tipologiya
sistem i stsenarii diakhronicheskogo razvitiya. Sbornik statey V
Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii Komissii po aspektologii
Mezhdunarodnogo komiteta slavistov [Aspectual semantic zone: a
typology of systems and paths of diachronic change. Proceedings of
the 5th International conference of the Aspectological commission
of the International committee of Slavists]. Kyoto: Kyoto Sangyo
University, 2015. P. 14–20.
Bertinetto 1987
P. M. Bertinetto. Why the passé
antérieur should be called passé immédiatement antérieur.
Linguistics. 1987. No. 25. P. 341–360. DOI:
10.1515/ling.1987.25.2.341.
Bybee et al. 1994
J. Bybee, R. Perkins, W. Pagliuca.
The evolution of grammar: tense, aspect and modality in the
languages of the world. Chicago; London: University of Chicago
Press, 1994.
Dahl 1985
Ö. Dahl. Tense and Aspect
Systems. Oxford: Blackwell, 1985.
Dahl 2014
Ö. Dahl. The perfect map:
Investigating the cross-linguistic distribution of TAME categories
in a parallel corpus. B. Szmrecsanyi, B. Wälchli (eds.)
Aggregating dialectology, typology, and register analysis.
Linguistic variation in text and speech. Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter, 2014. P. 268–289. DOI: 10.1515/9783110317558.268.
Dahl, Wälchli 2016
Ö. Dahl, B. Wälchli. Perfects and
iamitives: two gram types in one grammatical space. Letras de
Hoje. 2016. Vol. 51. No. 3. P. 325–348.
Goeringer 1995
K. Goeringer. The Motivation of
Pluperfect Auxiliary Tense in the Primary Chronicle. Russian
Linguistics. 1995. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 319–332. DOI:
10.1007/BF01080602.
Hope 2003
J. Hope. Shakespeare’s
Grammar. London: Bloomsbury, 2003.
Ibragimov 2009
I. I. Ibragimov. Taksis v
drevnegrecheskom yazyke [Taxis in Ancient Greek]. V. S. Khrakovskiy
(ed.). Tipologiya taksisnykh konstruktsiy [Typology of
taxis constructions]. Moscow: Znak, 2009. P. 470–503.
Kagan 2011
O. Kagan. The actual world is
abnormal: on the semantics of the bylo construction in Russian.
Linguistics and Philosophy. 2011. Vol. 34. P. 57–84. DOI:
10.1007/s10988-011-9093-6.
Kashkin 1991
V. B. Kashkin. Funktsionalnaya
tipologiya perfekta [A functional typology of the perfect].
Voronezh: Voronezh State University Press, 1991.
Khaburgayev 1986
G. A. Khaburgayev.
Staroslavyanskiy yazyk [Old Chuch Slavonic]. 2nd ed.
Moscow: Prosveshcheniye, 1986.
Knyazev 2004
Yu. P. Knyazev. Forma i znacheniye
konstruktsiy s chastitsey bylo v russkom yazyke [Form and meaning
of the Russian constructions with bylo particles in Russia]. Yu. D.
Apresyan (ed.). Sokrovennyye smysly. Slovo, tekst, kultura.
Sbornik statey v chest N. D. Arutyunovoy [Hidden meanings.
Word, text, and culture. Festschrift for Nina Arutyunova]. Moscow:
Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury, 2004. P. 296–304.
Kozlov 2015
A. A. Kozlov. Futurum pro habituali v
russkom, mokshanskom i udmurtskom [Futurum pro habituali in
Russian, Moksha and Udmurt]. Tezisy k konferentsii «Tipologiya
morfosintaksicheskikh parametrov» [Abstracts for the Typology
of Morphosyntax parameters conference]. Moscow, October 2015.
Makarova 2020
A. Makarova. Futuralno-khabitualnaya
polisemiya v balkanskikh yazykakh [Polysemy between futures and
habituals in Balkanic languages]. Die Welt der Slaven.
2020. Vol. 65. No. 1. P. 200–213.
Penkova 2019
Ya. A. Penkova.
Modalno-evidentsialnyye strategii predbudushchego: anketirovaniye i
korpusnyye dannyye [Modal and evidential strategies of the future
anterior: questionnaires and corpus data]. Voprosy
Jazykoznanija. 2019. No. 6. P. 7–31. DOI:
10.31857/S0373658X0007544-7.
Petrukhin 2008
P. V. Petrukhin. Diskursivnyye
funktsii drevnerusskogo knizhnogo plyuskvamperfekta (na materiale
Kiyevskoy i Galitsko-Volynskoy letopisey) [Discourse functions of
the Old East Slavic literary form of the pluperfect, exemplified by
Kyiv and Halych-Volyn Chronicles]. V. A. Plungian, V. Yu. Gusev, A.
Yu. Urmanchiyeva (eds.). Issledovaniya po teorii grammatiki.
Vyp. 4: Diskursivnyye kategorii [Issues in grammar theory. Pt.
4: Discourse categories]. Moscow: Indrik, 2008. P. 213–240.
Plungian, van der Auwera 2006
V. Plungian, J. van der Auwera.
Towards a typology of discontinuous past marking. STUF —
Language typology and universals. Vol. 59. No. 4. 2006. P.
317–349. DOI: 10.1524/stuf.2006.59.4.317.
Sitchinava 2013
D. V. Sitchinava. Tipologiya
plyuskvamperfekta. Slavyanskiy plyuskvamperfekt [Atypology
ofthe pluperfect. The Slavic pluperfect]. Moscow: AST, 2013.
Sitchinava 2016
D. V. Sitchinava. Yevropeyskiy
perfekt skvoz prizmu parallelnogo korpusa [The European perfect
through the lens of a parallel corpus]. Acta Linguistica
Petropolitana. 2016. Vol. XII. Pt. 2. P. 85–114.
Sitchinava 2019
D. V. Sichinava. Slavyanskiy
plyuskvamperfekt: prostranstva vozmozhnostey [Slavic pluperfect:
loci of variation]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija. 2019. No. 1. P.
30–57. DOI: 10.31857/S0373658X0003593-1.
Sitchinava 2022
D. V. Sitchinava. Mnogoznachnost
predbudushchego v romanskikh yazykakh v tipologicheskom kontekste
[Future anterior polysemy in Romance within a typological context].
Voprosy Jazykoznanija. 2022. No. 4. P. 48–65. DOI:
10.31857/0373-658X.2022.4.48-65.
Squartini 1999
M. Squartini. On the semantics of
pluperfect: evidences from Germanic and Romance. Linguistic
Typology. 1999. No. 3. P. 51–89. DOI:
10.1515/lity.1999.3.1.51.
Stoynova 2016
N. M. Stoynova. Nefuturalnyye
upotrebleniya form budushchego vremeni [Non-futural uses of the
Future]. Materialy dlya proyekta korpusnogo opisaniya russkoy
grammatiki [Materials for the project of a corpus-based
Russian grammar] (http://rusgram.ru). Ms. Moscow, 2016.
Vostrikova 2010
N. V. Vostrikova. Tipologiya
sredstv vyrazheniya eksperiyentivnogo znacheniya [Typology of
the means of expression of experiential meaning]. PhD thesis.
Moscow: Lomonosov Moscow State University, 2010.
Zalizniak 2004
A. A. Zalizniak.
Drevnenovgorodskiy dialekt [The Old Novgorod Dialect].
Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury, 2004.
