ПРЯМАЯ И КОСВЕННАЯ ДИАТЕЗА МЕНТАЛЬНОГО ГЛАГОЛА

Subject-Predicate inversion
and its cognitive sources
Elena PADUCHEVA, Moscow
SCLA, Prague, 15-17.10.2009
0. Subject-Predicate Inversion
In Russian, moving a word or a constituent
from the end of a sentence to its beginning
usually triggers off the inversion of the word
order in the remaining Subject-Predicate
combination.
Examples



(0.1) а. Высокая шапка была надвинута на глаза;
b. На глаза была надвинута высокая шапка.
(0.2) а. Реферативный журнал помогает
специалисту сэкономить время;
b. Сэкономить время помогает специалисту
реферативный журнал.
(0.3) а. Вода делает в пустыне подлинные чудеса;
b. Подлинные чудеса делает в пустыне вода.
LA-structure
The word order is to be regarded as inseparable
from prosody, i.e. from the placement of phrasal
accent and its type (raising or falling). Hence
the notion of linear-intonational, or linearaccentual structure of a sentence (“linejnoakcentnaja structura”), LA-structure (see
Падучева 1985/2008, Янко 2001). LA-structure
contains both types of information, i.e. both word
order and phrasal accents.
Example
If we change the word order in sentence (0.4a) we can
get sentence (0.4b) with a different word order but
with practically the same meaning, because the
word речь, which changes its place, preserves its
accent:
(0.4) a. О чем / | идет речь \ ?
b. О чем / | речь \ идет?
Slash / denotes the raising tone, back slash \
represents the falling tone; the vertical line | shows
the border between the LA-structure components.
1. LA-structure and its
transformations

The LA-structure is the signifiant for the
Theme-Rheme-structure (= Topic-Focus
Articulation = communicative structure =
information structure) of a sentence.
Semantic relationships between a- and bsentences in examples (0.1) – (0.3) can be
accounted for by shifts, which are applied to
their LA-structures (about LA-shifts see
Ковтунова 1976, Падучева 1985/2008: 108119, Янко 2001, Циммерлинг 2007).
The following two shifts are in the scope
of attention:



1) expressive preposition, i.e. fronting of a
constituent preserving the falling phrasal accent
customary for the end of a sentence, as in (0.3а);
2) thematic preposition, i.e. fronting of a
constituent with a change of the intonation contour:
the fronted constituent loses its rhematic falling
accent and acquires the thematic raising one, as in
(0.1b), (0.2b).
Both movements tend to be accompanied by
Subject-Predicate inversion.
On Locative inversion in English see
Levin & Rappaport Hovav 1995: 218-277
In Russian, SP-inversion is not limited to
fronting of a locative constituent: various
types of constituents display the same kind
of behavior. The subject itself can be
fronted. In this case inversion concerns
some other parts of the sentence, e.g.,
object and predicate (Ковтунова 1976: 173175).
(1.1) а. Ивана охватила ярость \
b. Ярость \ охватила Ивана
Some assumptions important for
what follows
I. A sentence can be presented on a lexico-syntactic level
as a lineary ordered set of word forms provided with a
dependency tree. This representation is sufficient to
build a constituent structure of the sentence, see
Гладкий 1973. What is called the word order is,
basically, the order of constituents.
II. A sentence with a given lexico-syntactic structure has a
basic (initial, neutral) LA-structure corresponding to it.
All the rest LA-structures of the sentence can be looked
upon as derived from the initial LA-structure with the help
of LA-shifts, each shift contributing to the informational
structure of the sentence.
2. Expressive preposition
Only those sentences are taken into consideration in
which the Rheme consists of a verb and its
dependent NP or PP, which is the rhematic center
of the Rheme (Падучева 1985/2008: 112), or the
accent bearer (in terms of Янко 2001, where this
notion is thoroughly examined). For example, in
(2.1a) пахнет махоркой is the Rheme, махоркой is
the accent bearer:
(2.1) а. Этот мешок пахнет махоркой \
b. Махоркой \ пахнет этот мешок _
Other examples of expressive preposition:




(2.2) а. Ребенок требует любви и заботы \
b. Любви и заботы \ требует ребенок
(2.3) а. Споры были жаркие \
b. Жаркие \ были споры
(2.4) а. Комната наполнилась запахом осени \
b. Запахом осени \ наполнилась комната
(2.5) а. Этот вопрос вставал передо мною не
однажды \
b. Не однажды \ вставал передо мною этот
вопрос
SP-inversion in transitive sentences
The main bulk of sentences that undergo
fronting accompanied by SP-inversion are
intransitive. In a transitive sentence SPinversion is also possible (Циммерлинг
2007), but it is much less obligatory:
 (2.6) а. Золушка мыла посуду на кухне \
b. На кухне \ мыла посуду Золушка_
с. На кухне \ Золушка мыла посуду_
 The semantic effect of the expressive
preposition escapes strict definition.

3. Thematic preposition

Thematic preposition consists in that the
constituent which in its “previous” final
position carried the rhematic falling tone not
only changes its place (now occupying the
initial position in the sentence) but also
acquires the thematic, i.e. raising accent.

The LA-structure changes significantly, and so does the
TR-structure.
Examples.






(3.1) а. Мой брат / | живет в Казани \
b. В Казани / | живет мой брат \
(3.2) а. Утки / | плавают в пруду \
b. В пруду / | плавают утки \
(3.3) а. Коля / | пришел на рассвете \
b. На рассвете / | пришел Коля \
(3.4) а. Собака / | укусила мальчика \
b. Мальчика / | укусила собака \
(3.5) а. Профессор Иванов / | посетил
лабораторию Завадовского\
б. Лабораторию Завадовского / | посетил
профессор Иванов \ .
(3.6) а. Объект / | выражается аккузативом \
b. Аккузативом / | выражается объект \
In the examples (3.1)–(3.6)


In the a-sentences the subject phrase (“gruppa
podlezhashchego”) is the Theme, the predicate
phrase (“gruppa skazuemogo”) is the Rheme; the
Rheme is divisible into a verb and an NP, PP or
Adjective phrase – the accent bearer.
In the b-sentences the accent bearer of the asentence becomes the Theme, while the remnants
of the sentence, namely, the subject and what is left
of the initial Rheme constitute the new Rheme.
The syntactic type of the fronted
constituent is irrelevant:


The syntactic type of the fronted constituent
varies: it can be a Locative, a Time adverbial,
a Direct object, an Instrumental object, an
Adjective phrase, etc.
Subject-Predicate inversion in (3.1) – (3.6) is
almost obligatory.
SP-inversion is strictly obligatory in
interrogative sentences and in relative clauses.
In (3.7), (3.8) SP-inversion is triggered by
grammatically determined movement of the
constituent from its natural final position to the
beginning of the sentence or clause.


(3.7) а. Речь идет о зарплате \
b. О чем идет речь \ ? [interrogative sentence]
с. *О чем речь идет \ ?
(3.8) а. Собака укусила мальчика;
b. Это мальчик, которого укусила собака \
[relative clause]
с. *Это мальчик, которого собака укусила \
A similar kind of inversion takes place
in subjectless sentences



(3.9) а. Не удалось / подобрать для нее
подходящего партнера \
b. Подходящего партнера / подобрать для
нее не удалось \
(3.10) а. Нельзя / пускать туда детей \
b. Детей / | туда пускать нельзя \
(3.11) а. На немецком языке / | говорят в
Австрии \
b. В Австрии / | говорят на немецком
языке \ (example from Sgall, Hajičova 1977)
Semantic contribution of the
thematic preposition, example I

(3.6) а. Объект / | выражается аккузативом \
b. Аккузативом / | выражается объект \

The final position of an NP provides it with
definiteness; hence what is called exhaustive list
interpretation: sentence (3.6a) means that the
object (in the language in question) can be
expressed only by the Accusative; i.e. that there are,
e.g., no genitive objects in that language. While
(3.6b) means that the Accusative marks only the
direct object NPs (so that the language has, e.g., no
accusativus tempori).
Semantic contribution of the
thematic preposition, example II

Another example of the same kind is (3.11), a
famous example from Sgall, Hajičova 1977:

(3.11) а. На немецком языке / | говорят в Австрии \
b. В Австрии / | говорят на немецком языке \

Definitely, (3.11b) is true, while (3.11a) is false. The
meaning difference between a- and b-sentences in
(3.11) rests upon the fact that the NP in the rhematic
position expresses identification. Sentence (3.11b)
identifies the language spoken in Austria (and is
true), while (3.11a) identifies the country that speaks
German (and is false).
4. Cognitive motivation of SP-inversion

In the frame of the syntactic approach to SPinversion the goal has been to find co-occurrence
restrictions on SP-inversion. For example, in Levin
& Rappaport Hovav 1995 the task was to find lexical
and syntactic limitations on SP-inversion conditioned
by fronting of a locative phrase. My goal is to find
cognitive sources of SP-inversion that
accompanies fronting of the rhematic constituent:
what is it motivated by? For Russian, with its wide
freedom of fronting and inversion, the overall picture
is clearer than for languages with strict word order
limitations, such as English.
Integrated Rheme


In an ordinary Russian sentence, with a prepositive
subject, the subject NP is the Theme, the predicate is the
Rheme, and the sentence has a two-component LAstructure, see (3.1). Thematic preposition of the
Rhematic center creates a new Theme. And by default
the old subject and the remnants of the old predicate VP
unite into one integrated Rheme. In this way a sentence
with a fronted constituent acquires a new binary (i.e. twocomponent) LA-structure:
(3.1) а. Мой брат / | живет в Казани \
b. В Казани / | живет мой брат \
Integration of the two previously disconnected sentence
parts is achieved with the help of the SP-inversion.

The Nominative NP in the constituent-initial
position contributes to disintegration of the newly
born rhematic constituent, while SP-inversion,
i.e. transferring of the Nominative NP into the
final position, provides integration. In fact, it
contributes to formation of a new Rheme as a
united, i.e. integrated constituent.
Subject NP in the constituent-initial
position contributes to communicative
disintegration of the constituent

The final position of the subject NP
contributes to communicative integration of
the rhematic constituent, while the subject NP
in the constituent-initial position contributes to
disintegration.
Нерасчлененные высказывания
(Ковтунова 1976: 47)


The notion of integrated Rheme
(“neraschlenennaja rema”) is well known
when applied to the sentence as a whole. In
(4.1) a change of the word order (and accent)
transfers a two-component TR-structure of a
sentence into a TR-structure consisting of
one integrated Rheme:
(4.1) а. Весна наступила = [Весна]T [наступила]R
b. Наступила весна = [Наступила весна]R.
SP-inversion as an integrative device
The integrative device which is at work on the level of a
sentence in example (4.1b) is used on the level of a
constituent of a sentence in examples (3.1b) – (3.6b).
When the New Theme is already chosen, there are two
possibilities for the remaining part of the sentence (i.e.
the Old Theme + the remnants of the Old Rheme) – it
can either be integrated into one rhematic TR-structure
component or disintegrated into Theme and Rheme. In
this second case we get a three-component TRstructure.
Example

(4.2) а. Хозяин дома / | открыл нам дверь \
b. Дверь / | открыл нам хозяин дома \
c. Дверь / | хозяин дома нам открыл \

Sentence (4.2b), with SP-inversion,
exemplifies the familiar two-component LAstructure, the same as in (3.1b)–(3.6b).
Meanwhile (4.2c), with the non-inverted word
order, has a different LA-structure – and a
different meaning.
LA-structure and TR-structure
TR-structures of (4.2b) and (4.2с) are represented as
(#4.2b) and (#4.2с):



(#4.2b) Дверь открыл нам хозяин дома =
[Дверь]Т [открыл нам хозяин дома]R
(#4.2с) Дверь хозяин дома нам открыл =
[Дверь]T1 [хозяин дома]Т2 [нам открыл]R
T1 and T2 in (#4.2c) are, correspondingly, Theme 1, and
Theme 2. The NP дверь, Theme 1, becomes the focus
of contrast; hence the implication that something else
(e.g., the window) remained closed, which is absent in
(#4.2b). See Падучева 1985: 118 on contrastive
Theme and Янко 2001 on contrast in general.
Other devices contributing to the
integrity of the Rheme

SP-inversion is only one of the set of devices that
contribute to the integrity of the Rheme. In (4.3), (4.4) it
is negation or some other rhematizing particle that
provides a non-thematic fragment of the sentence with
rhematic integrity.

(4.3) а. Ваня / | не обладал даром предвидения \
b. Даром предвидения / | Ваня не обладал \

(4.4) а. Валя / | даже не посмотрела на ребенка \
b. На ребенка / | Валя даже не посмотрела \
Fronting of non-rhematic constituents

SP-inversion doesn’t take place if a nonrhematic constituent is fronted:

(4.5) а. Иван видел \ Марию _
b. Марию / | Иван видел \

What is left after fronting of the final NP in
(4.5) is a constituent with an accent on the
final word, i.e. a well formed Rheme.
Context dependent LA-structures



Slightly simplifying the issue we can assume that a
sentence with the basic LA-structure is contextually
independent. It answers a question “What has
happened?” or “What is going on?”. While a
sentence with the thematic preposition requires a
special context – it may be a narrative context or a
context of discourse. Example.
(4.6) а. Коля / | подарил Васе попугая \
b. Попугая / | подарил Васе Коля \
Sentence (4.6a) is context independent, while (4.6b)
may presuppose a question “Where has Vasja taken
the parrot from?”.
Example



Sentence (4.7) («Наука и жизнь», 2009, №2, p. 9),
could have been an answer to a question “What was
Bakunin’s attitude towards the French revolution of
1848?”.
(4.7) а. Французскую революцию 1848 года / |
Бакунин горячо приветствовал \ .
In fact, the LA-structure of this sentence is
substantiated by its narrative context. Preposition of
the direct object is due to the fact that the previous
text concerned Bakunin’s attitude towards Polish
rebellion of 1830 («… я горячо желаю торжества
польскому восстанию») .
Theme of the text

The unambiguously thematic position of the
subject Бакунин is explained by the fact that
the article as a whole is devoted to Bakunin,
so the subject Бакунин can occupy no other
position but a thematic one. Otherwise the
SP-inversion generating integrative Rheme
would have been more than natural:

(4.7) b. Французскую революцию 1848 года / |
горячо приветствовал Бакунин \
Conclusion

SP-inversion which accompanies, obligatorily or
optionally, the fronting of a rhematic constituent in a
Russian sentence remained a riddle of the Russian
word order regularities for decades. The following
explanation for this inversion is suggested. SubjectPredicate inversion is a device that makes it possible
to overcome the communicative disintegration (i.e.
potential Theme-Rheme divisibility) of a sentence
fragment in which the Subject phrase precedes the
Predicate phrase.
References







Гладкий 1973 – Гладкий А. В. Формальные грамматики и языки.
М.: Наука, 1973
Ковтунова 1976 – Ковтунова И.И. Современный русский язык:
Порядок слов и актуальное членение предложения. М., 1976.
Падучева 1985/2008 – Падучева Е. В. Высказывание и его
соотнесенность с действительностью. М.: Наука, 1985; 5-th
edition – Moscow: URSS, 2008.
Циммерлинг 2007 – Циммерлинг А.В. Локативная инверсия в
языках со свободным порядком слов // Труды международной
конференции Диалог 2007, 242-249.
Янко 2001 – Янко Т. Е. Коммуникативные стратегии русской
речи. М.: Языки славянской культуры, 2001.
Янко 2008 – Янко Т. Е. Интонационные стратегии русской речи в
сопоставительном аспекте. М.: Языки славянских культур, 2008
Levin & Rappaport Hovav 1995 – Levin B., Rappaport Hovav M.
Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995.
Спасибо за внимание!