40 лет Санкт-Петербургской типологической школе
Шрифт:
The «be»-perfective passive is claimed to convey both the meaning of a state resulting from a previous action and that of an action. The main argument for justifying such an analysis comes from a distributional property of the form, founded upon the compatibility of the perfective form with localisation markers. According to Khra-kovskij [1991; 151–154] and Knjazev [1988:350–351], the actional passive is compatible with time adverbials and adverbial phrases which are precise indications of the temporal interval relative to the preceding event and place markers ((10), (11)) whereas the resultative state is compatible with those which mark duration (12) or iterativity.
(10) Navremeto toj bil izpraten ot vujco si<…> da
at time.the he was send.PPP.SG.M of uncle REFL.DAT DA
sledvav Moskva
study.PRES-3SG in Moscow
«At that time, he was sent by his uncle to study in Moscow».
(11) Vsesteny, bojnicy, krysy,<…> v scitannye sekundy byliall walls loop.holes roofs in count.PF.PPP seconds were zapolneny soldatami i kazakami
occupy.PF.PPP soldiers.INSTR and Cossacks.INSTR
«Within a few seconds all the walls, loop-holes, roofs, minaret balconies and even the dome of the mosque had been occupied by soldiers and Cossacks».
(12) Vsego 45 minut by I vkljuce-n teleskop,
in total 45 minutes was switch.on.PF-PPP telescope
a podgotovka
«It was only for 45 minutes that the telescope was switched on, whereas the preparation for the experiment had taken about eight hours».
It is well known that Polish is the only Slavic language which has two auxiliaries to form the periphrastic passive voice: the zosta'c passive which imposes a perfective participle and whose meaning is characterised as «actional», and the «be»-passive, which allows both the perfective participle and the imperfective and which, depending on the context, may take on either a so-called stative meaning or a so-called actional meaning:
(13a) Pok'oj zostal pomalowanyw zeszlym roku/ *dva razy
room became paint.PF.PPP.SG.M in last year/ two times
«The room was painted last year».
(13b) *Pok'oj zostal malowany w zeszlym roku
room became paint.IMPF.PPP.SG.M in last year
(13c) Pok'oj bil pomalowanyw zeszlym roku / dvarazy
room was paint.PF.PPP.SG.M in last year / two times
«The room was only painted last year» / «The room was painted last year twice».
(13d) Pok'oj bil malowany w zeszlym roku
room was paint.IMPF.PPP.SG.M in last year
«The room was painted last year».
Siewierska [1984: 129, 1988: 251] notes that recourse to (13c) implies that the room needs repainting, whereas (13a) does not. If one admits that the passive resultative state determines a property of the patient while at the same time implying a preceding event, and if one takes into account the meaning of zosta'c «to become», one easily understands that such inferences may be made. Zosta'c directly links the resultative state to the event serving to highlight the transitional character of the event and to state that the patient's property has been acquired prior to the act of speaking; the adverbial expression is therefore taken as included in the transitional event, which would explain why the periphrastic construction with zosta'c is incompatible with dva razy «two times», mnogo raz «many times», etc. On the other hand, the «be»-passive with a perfective verb gives priority to the resultative state by only referring to the implied event, leading to ambiguity as to whether the resultative state belongs to the patient (meaning a resultative state) or whether the resultative state only serves to hark back to the event at the origin of the patient's affectation. The adverbial phrase in (13a) is presented as incident to the event, which allows one to understand why iteration is permitted.
The contrast we have just evidenced between these two types of constructions clearly appears in the following two examples, in which the adverbial phrase denoting duration is only allowed in the «be» — passive:
(14a) Pies pzrez cala noc byl uwiazany na la'ncuchu
dog through all night was attach.PF.PPP.SG.M on chain
«All night long the dog was (stayed) attached to a chain».
(14b) Pies zostal uwiazany na la'ncuchu
dog became attach.PF.PPP.SG.M on chain
«The dog was attached to the chain».
(15a) Nieprzyjaciel jest pokonany
enemy is defeatPF.PPP.SG.M
«The enemy happens to be/is defeated».
(15b) Nieprzyjaciel zostal pokonany
enemy became defeatPF.PPP.SG.M
«The enemy was defeated» (lit. became defeated).
Let's go back to examples (13). The comparison between (13c) and (13d) reveals another meaning held by the
The classic Russian example dom postroen , which can be transposed into other Slavic languages (Bulgarian, Polish, Czech or Serbo-Croatian), will allow us to show how the distribution of the participial form is partly governed by the opposition between a stative situation and a dynamic situation and partly by the notion of completion, which is conveyed exclusively by the perfective form:
(16a) Dom postroen iz kirpica
house.NOM built.PF.PPP.SG.M of brick.GEN
«The house is made of brick».
(16b) Dom *(do six por) postroen iz kirpica
house.NOM (until now) built.PF.PPP.SG.M of brick.GEN
Lit.«The house is still built of brick».
(16c) Bol'sinstvo domov do six por postroe-n-o
most house.GEN.PL until.now built.PF-PPP-SG.NEUTER
iz kirpica
of brick.GEN
«Most houses are still made of bricks».
(16d) Dom postroen v proslom godu
house built.PF.PPP.SG.M in past year
«The house was built last year».
In spite of the form postroen «built», which one can consider resultative because of its derivational history, (16a) denotes a permanent state through the specification of a property attributed to the entity (iz kirpica «of brick»). The construction therefore enters into the adjectival paradigm as confirmed by the adverbials of duration test in (16b). To explain the grammaticality of (16b), following Knjazev [1988: 351] advances the argument that adverbials of duration are incompatible with resultatives denoting irreversible states, but that these adverbials may appear with resultatives «under special conditions» as for example in (16c) where the subject would be plural. Let us note however that the grammaticality of (16c) evidences the interesting problem of the interaction between quantification and aspect which deserves more study. The comparison between (16a) and (16d) shows that the occurrence of the temporal expression allows one to retrieve the event which is at the origin of the resultative state: (16b) is the expression of an actional perfect passive [Maslov 1988: 66].
As mentioned earlier on the subject of Polish, the «be» — passive may be constructed with an imperfective participle; if the verb has an imperfective derivative, two constructions are possible:
(17a) Trevata e/ bese okosena *(mnogo pati)
grass.the is/was mow.PF.PPP.SG.F (many times)
(ot studentite)
(by students.the)
«The grass was mowed» (by the students).
(17b) Trevata e/ bese kosena ( mnogo pati)
grass.the is/was mow.IMPF.PPP.SG.F (many times)
(ot studentite)
(by students.the)
«The grass has been mowed» (many times) (by the students).
(17c) Trevata e/bese okosjavana mnogo
grass.the is/was mow.IMPF.PPP.DERIVATE.SG.F many
pati/vsjaka godina (ot studentite)
times/every year (by students.the)
«The grass is/was mowed many times/every year (by the students)».
In (17a) the meaning is clealy that of a resultative state having its origin in a completed event. As opposed to (17a), in (17b) the resultative state has its origins in an interrupted event; the process is thereby highlighted and means «has been mowed (by someone)» or «has been mowed (by someone)»; Maslov terms this «actional passive present» and «actional passive perfect» respectively. However, according to the tense of the auxiliary and the discourse context, the resultative state may be related to past or future situations.