Katrin Schlund | Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (original) (raw)
Papers by Katrin Schlund
Journal of Slavic Linguistics
Abstract:In Russian, agreement with quantified subjects varies between plural (= semantic) and si... more Abstract:In Russian, agreement with quantified subjects varies between plural (= semantic) and singular (= grammatical, default, impersonal) agreement, and there is ample evidence that this variation is governed by semantic and pragmatic factors (such as topicality and animacy of the subject). Although Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian follows stricter normative rules, variation does occur and is motivated similarly to Russian. Polish seems at odds with the paradigm of these languages. First, the grammar of contemporary Polish does not allow for variation in agreement with quantified subjects. Second, semantic agreement is available only with non-virile nouns in paucal numbers, while virile nouns require grammatical agreement (e.g., dwie kobiety przyszłyPL 'two women came' but dwóch mężczyzn przyszłoSG 'two men came'). This paper offers a way to integrate the Polish data into the Russian and Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian picture by drawing on historical and contemporary empirical evidence. Specifically, it offers a short analysis of variation between the nominative and oblique masculine forms of paucal numbers (dwaj vs. dwóch).
The use of more than one script in a speech community typically gives rise to the semiotization o... more The use of more than one script in a speech community typically gives rise to the semiotization of scripts, i.e. to the association of the respective scripts with specific social and/or cultural values (e.g. lykovie 2015a; 2015b; Buneie zo16). The present paper argues that script semiotization is a key notion for understanding the use of different scripts, as well as the often fierce debates accompanying this use, in the three Yugoslav successor states of Croatia, Serbia, and BosniaHerzegovina. Buneies (2016, 2019) model of biscriptality will serve as the theoretical framework for the description of the biscriptal situations attested in the respective countries. Although the semiotic values attached to the different scripts and scriptural varieties are rooted in the longestablished writing traditions of the nationalities inhabiting this part of the Balkan Peninsula, the paper also shows that the current debate is heated by an often selective and biased interpretation of the history ...
Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 2007
Kritikon Litterarum, 2020
Despite the ever growing number of contributions on Russian impersonals, there is no unanimity ab... more Despite the ever growing number of contributions on Russian impersonals, there is no unanimity about what constructions are to be labeled “impersonal”. While generatively inspired contributions tend to exclude infinitive phrases (type cto nam delat’) from the impersonal domain (e.g. Babby 2010), infinitive phrases seem to be part of the very heart of the impersonal domain in the view of others (e.g. Creissels 2007: 23). Similar controversy is observed with regard to numeral phrases or negated existentials yielding “genitive subjects”. One of the reasons why there is no consensus about how to define impersonals even within one language lies in the opposition between formal (subject-centered) and semantic (agent-centered) approaches to impersonality (Siewierska 2008). The paper attempts to combine both lines of reasoning. It suggests that the impersonal domain in Russian is represented by a network of constructions which are all related to one another by the formal marker of impersona...
Russian Linguistics, 2020
Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Advers... more Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Adversity Impersonals or Elemental Constructions, have long been considered a primarily East Slavic phenomenon, with a somewhat marginal status in Polish. More recent research has claimed that these impersonal constructions also occur in other West Slavic languages and even in Slovenian. The present paper refines some of the previous assumptions about morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals in twelve Slavic and two non-Slavic languages by drawing on the results of a parallel corpus study. The analysis of empirical data suggests that it is necessary to identify the Štokavian dialectal continuum as a transitional area with a declining acceptability of morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals from the Northwest (Croatian) to the Southeast (Serbian). Moreover it will be shown that impersonals of this type are not an exclusively Slavic phenomenon.
Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 2018
SummaryDespite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still ... more SummaryDespite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still no unanimity about which constructions actually fall under the label of impersonality. Consensus on how to define impersonals, even within one language, remains elusive in part because of the opposition between formal (subject-centred) and functional (agent-centred) approaches to impersonality, as outlined by Siewierska (2008). The paper attempts to combine both lines of reasoning. It suggests that the impersonal domain in Russian is represented by a network of constructions that are all related to one another by the formal marker of impersonality on the verb (i. e., third person singular neuter) and by semantic and pragmatic characteristics (namely, deviation from prototypical subject properties; Malchukov & Ogawa 2011).
![Research paper thumbnail of Anredeformen im Serbischen [Forms of address in Serbian]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/88961917/thumbnails/1.jpg)
](Canadian Slavonic Papers, 2019
Die Welt der Slaven, Aug 5, 2020
Zeitschrift für Slawistik
Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Advers... more Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Adversity Impersonals or Elemental Constructions, have long been considered a primarily East Slavic phenomenon, with a somewhat marginal status in Polish. More recent research has claimed that these impersonal constructions also occur in other West Slavic languages and even in Slovenian. The present paper refines some of the previous assumptions about morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals in twelve Slavic and two non-Slavic languages by drawing on the results of a parallel corpus study. The analysis of empirical data
suggests that it is necessary to identify the Štokavian dialectal continuum as a transitional area with a declining acceptability of morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals from the Northwest (Croatian) to the Southeast (Serbian). Moreover it will be shown that impersonals of this type are not an exclusively Slavic phenomenon.
Аннотация. Морфологически нейтральные безличные конструкции с переходными глаголами, часто также называемые ‘Adversity Impersonals’ или ‘стихийные конструкции’, традиционно считаются особенностью в основном восточнославянских языков
и маргинальным явлением в польском языке. Недавние исследования показали, что такого рода безличные конструкции также встречаются в других западнославянских языках и даже в словенском. Внастоящей статье, исходя из анализа данных парал-
лельного корпуса и учитывая двенадцать славянских и два неславянских языка, пересматривается ряд предположений о морфологически нейтральных безличных конструкциях с переходными глаголами. Анализ эмпирических данных указывает на то, что штокавский диалектный континуум следует воспринимать как переходное про-странство, в котором риемлемость безличных конструкций с переходными глаголами снижается с северо-запада (хорватский) на юго-восток (сербский). Кроме того, показывается, что такого рода безличные конструкции не являются исключительно славянским явлением.
Russian Linguistics, 2020
Despite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still no unan... more Despite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still no unanimity about which constructions actually fall under the label of impersonality. Consensus on how to define impersonals, even within one language, remains elusive in part because of the opposition between formal (subject-centred) and functional (agent-centred) approaches to impersonality, as outlined by Siewierska (2008). The paper attempts to combine both lines of reasoning. It suggests that the impersonal domain in Russian is represented by a network of constructions that are all related to one another by the formal marker of impersonality on the verb (i. e., third person singular neuter) and by semantic and pragmatic characteristics (namely, deviation from prototypical subject properties; Malchukov & Ogawa 2011).
Keywords: Russian; impersonal constructions; non-canonical subjects; impersonal form/morphology; subject-like obliques; subject-properties
Published in: Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 63(1), 120-168.
Studies in Language Companion Series, 2013
The article investigates forms of address and request behaviour in Serbian as compared to German.... more The article investigates forms of address and request behaviour in Serbian as compared to German. It is based on an empirical study with authentic speech data and a survey among native speakers of the two languages. While the corpora of authentic speech data document mainly service encounters and other minimal everyday interactions, the survey aims at revealing the judgements and attitudes of native speakers towards different request strategies. The results point towards the well-known distinction between "solidarity cultures" in the East and "distance cultures" in the West. However, such findings must be treated with caution as other factors seem to influence the range of strategies available in the two languages as well.
Journal of Politeness Research, 2014
This paper focuses on the notion of politeness formulae as an analytical category in linguistic p... more This paper focuses on the notion of politeness formulae as an analytical category in linguistic politeness research. It argues that the current theories of linguistic politeness have neglected the notion of politeness formulae, either ignoring the relationship between their semantic, formal and pragmatic characteristics or disputing their existence altogether, claiming that the emergence of polite meanings is restricted to singular and concrete contexts. It will be shown, however, that a non-contextual approach to linguistic politeness makes it possible to describe politeness formulae systematically on a pragmatic, semantic, and even formal level. The approach is based on the common ground of all politeness phenomena, namely their function of establishing, maintaining or negotiating relations of social distance.
Journal of Slavic Linguistics
Abstract:In Russian, agreement with quantified subjects varies between plural (= semantic) and si... more Abstract:In Russian, agreement with quantified subjects varies between plural (= semantic) and singular (= grammatical, default, impersonal) agreement, and there is ample evidence that this variation is governed by semantic and pragmatic factors (such as topicality and animacy of the subject). Although Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian follows stricter normative rules, variation does occur and is motivated similarly to Russian. Polish seems at odds with the paradigm of these languages. First, the grammar of contemporary Polish does not allow for variation in agreement with quantified subjects. Second, semantic agreement is available only with non-virile nouns in paucal numbers, while virile nouns require grammatical agreement (e.g., dwie kobiety przyszłyPL 'two women came' but dwóch mężczyzn przyszłoSG 'two men came'). This paper offers a way to integrate the Polish data into the Russian and Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian picture by drawing on historical and contemporary empirical evidence. Specifically, it offers a short analysis of variation between the nominative and oblique masculine forms of paucal numbers (dwaj vs. dwóch).
The use of more than one script in a speech community typically gives rise to the semiotization o... more The use of more than one script in a speech community typically gives rise to the semiotization of scripts, i.e. to the association of the respective scripts with specific social and/or cultural values (e.g. lykovie 2015a; 2015b; Buneie zo16). The present paper argues that script semiotization is a key notion for understanding the use of different scripts, as well as the often fierce debates accompanying this use, in the three Yugoslav successor states of Croatia, Serbia, and BosniaHerzegovina. Buneies (2016, 2019) model of biscriptality will serve as the theoretical framework for the description of the biscriptal situations attested in the respective countries. Although the semiotic values attached to the different scripts and scriptural varieties are rooted in the longestablished writing traditions of the nationalities inhabiting this part of the Balkan Peninsula, the paper also shows that the current debate is heated by an often selective and biased interpretation of the history ...
Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 2007
Kritikon Litterarum, 2020
Despite the ever growing number of contributions on Russian impersonals, there is no unanimity ab... more Despite the ever growing number of contributions on Russian impersonals, there is no unanimity about what constructions are to be labeled “impersonal”. While generatively inspired contributions tend to exclude infinitive phrases (type cto nam delat’) from the impersonal domain (e.g. Babby 2010), infinitive phrases seem to be part of the very heart of the impersonal domain in the view of others (e.g. Creissels 2007: 23). Similar controversy is observed with regard to numeral phrases or negated existentials yielding “genitive subjects”. One of the reasons why there is no consensus about how to define impersonals even within one language lies in the opposition between formal (subject-centered) and semantic (agent-centered) approaches to impersonality (Siewierska 2008). The paper attempts to combine both lines of reasoning. It suggests that the impersonal domain in Russian is represented by a network of constructions which are all related to one another by the formal marker of impersona...
Russian Linguistics, 2020
Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Advers... more Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Adversity Impersonals or Elemental Constructions, have long been considered a primarily East Slavic phenomenon, with a somewhat marginal status in Polish. More recent research has claimed that these impersonal constructions also occur in other West Slavic languages and even in Slovenian. The present paper refines some of the previous assumptions about morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals in twelve Slavic and two non-Slavic languages by drawing on the results of a parallel corpus study. The analysis of empirical data suggests that it is necessary to identify the Štokavian dialectal continuum as a transitional area with a declining acceptability of morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals from the Northwest (Croatian) to the Southeast (Serbian). Moreover it will be shown that impersonals of this type are not an exclusively Slavic phenomenon.
Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 2018
SummaryDespite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still ... more SummaryDespite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still no unanimity about which constructions actually fall under the label of impersonality. Consensus on how to define impersonals, even within one language, remains elusive in part because of the opposition between formal (subject-centred) and functional (agent-centred) approaches to impersonality, as outlined by Siewierska (2008). The paper attempts to combine both lines of reasoning. It suggests that the impersonal domain in Russian is represented by a network of constructions that are all related to one another by the formal marker of impersonality on the verb (i. e., third person singular neuter) and by semantic and pragmatic characteristics (namely, deviation from prototypical subject properties; Malchukov & Ogawa 2011).
Canadian Slavonic Papers, 2019
Die Welt der Slaven, Aug 5, 2020
Zeitschrift für Slawistik
Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Advers... more Morphologically unmarked transitive (or accusative) impersonals, often also referred to as Adversity Impersonals or Elemental Constructions, have long been considered a primarily East Slavic phenomenon, with a somewhat marginal status in Polish. More recent research has claimed that these impersonal constructions also occur in other West Slavic languages and even in Slovenian. The present paper refines some of the previous assumptions about morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals in twelve Slavic and two non-Slavic languages by drawing on the results of a parallel corpus study. The analysis of empirical data
suggests that it is necessary to identify the Štokavian dialectal continuum as a transitional area with a declining acceptability of morphologically unmarked transitive impersonals from the Northwest (Croatian) to the Southeast (Serbian). Moreover it will be shown that impersonals of this type are not an exclusively Slavic phenomenon.
Аннотация. Морфологически нейтральные безличные конструкции с переходными глаголами, часто также называемые ‘Adversity Impersonals’ или ‘стихийные конструкции’, традиционно считаются особенностью в основном восточнославянских языков
и маргинальным явлением в польском языке. Недавние исследования показали, что такого рода безличные конструкции также встречаются в других западнославянских языках и даже в словенском. Внастоящей статье, исходя из анализа данных парал-
лельного корпуса и учитывая двенадцать славянских и два неславянских языка, пересматривается ряд предположений о морфологически нейтральных безличных конструкциях с переходными глаголами. Анализ эмпирических данных указывает на то, что штокавский диалектный континуум следует воспринимать как переходное про-странство, в котором риемлемость безличных конструкций с переходными глаголами снижается с северо-запада (хорватский) на юго-восток (сербский). Кроме того, показывается, что такого рода безличные конструкции не являются исключительно славянским явлением.
Russian Linguistics, 2020
Despite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still no unan... more Despite the ever-growing number of studies about impersonal constructions, there is still no unanimity about which constructions actually fall under the label of impersonality. Consensus on how to define impersonals, even within one language, remains elusive in part because of the opposition between formal (subject-centred) and functional (agent-centred) approaches to impersonality, as outlined by Siewierska (2008). The paper attempts to combine both lines of reasoning. It suggests that the impersonal domain in Russian is represented by a network of constructions that are all related to one another by the formal marker of impersonality on the verb (i. e., third person singular neuter) and by semantic and pragmatic characteristics (namely, deviation from prototypical subject properties; Malchukov & Ogawa 2011).
Keywords: Russian; impersonal constructions; non-canonical subjects; impersonal form/morphology; subject-like obliques; subject-properties
Published in: Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 63(1), 120-168.
Studies in Language Companion Series, 2013
The article investigates forms of address and request behaviour in Serbian as compared to German.... more The article investigates forms of address and request behaviour in Serbian as compared to German. It is based on an empirical study with authentic speech data and a survey among native speakers of the two languages. While the corpora of authentic speech data document mainly service encounters and other minimal everyday interactions, the survey aims at revealing the judgements and attitudes of native speakers towards different request strategies. The results point towards the well-known distinction between "solidarity cultures" in the East and "distance cultures" in the West. However, such findings must be treated with caution as other factors seem to influence the range of strategies available in the two languages as well.
Journal of Politeness Research, 2014
This paper focuses on the notion of politeness formulae as an analytical category in linguistic p... more This paper focuses on the notion of politeness formulae as an analytical category in linguistic politeness research. It argues that the current theories of linguistic politeness have neglected the notion of politeness formulae, either ignoring the relationship between their semantic, formal and pragmatic characteristics or disputing their existence altogether, claiming that the emergence of polite meanings is restricted to singular and concrete contexts. It will be shown, however, that a non-contextual approach to linguistic politeness makes it possible to describe politeness formulae systematically on a pragmatic, semantic, and even formal level. The approach is based on the common ground of all politeness phenomena, namely their function of establishing, maintaining or negotiating relations of social distance.
It is usually assumed that agreement with numeral phrases in Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian depend... more It is usually assumed that agreement with numeral phrases in Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian depends on a simple grammatical rule stating that numeral phrases ≥ 5 receive grammatical (also: morphological, impersonal, default) agreement (that is, in the third person singular neuter). Based on empirical data, the paper argues that this is not always the case, but that semantic and pragmatic factors play a role in agreement resolution as well.