Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East

One of the features of the oral Russian speech of bilingual speakers of the indigenous languages of Russia is the omission/the overuse of the “reflexive” affix -sja (a “middle voice” marker with a wide range of uses including reflexive, reciprocal, anticausative, passive, and some others). We discus...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Languages
Main Authors: Irina Khomchenkova, Polina Pleshak, Natalia Stoynova
Format: Text
Language:English
Published: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039
_version_ 1821503991597498368
author Irina Khomchenkova
Polina Pleshak
Natalia Stoynova
author_facet Irina Khomchenkova
Polina Pleshak
Natalia Stoynova
author_sort Irina Khomchenkova
collection MDPI Open Access Publishing
container_issue 2
container_start_page 39
container_title Languages
container_volume 4
description One of the features of the oral Russian speech of bilingual speakers of the indigenous languages of Russia is the omission/the overuse of the “reflexive” affix -sja (a “middle voice” marker with a wide range of uses including reflexive, reciprocal, anticausative, passive, and some others). We discuss the data on the nonstandard use of -sja in the Russian speech of bilingual speakers of two language groups that differ both from Russian and from each other in this grammatical domain: Samoyedic (Forest Enets, Nganasan, and Nenets) and Tungusic (Nanai and Ulch). The data come from the corpus of contact-influenced Russian speech, which is being created by our team. We show that the mismatches in standard and nonstandard usage cannot be explained by direct structural copying from the donor language (indigenous) to the recipient one (the local variety of Russian). Nor is there a consistent system which differs from standard Russian since there are many more usages that follow the rules of standard Russian. The influence of the indigenous languages explains some overuses and omissions; the others can be explained by other factors, e.g., difficulties in the acquisition of verb pairs with non-transparent semantic or syntactic relations.
format Text
genre Enets
nenets
Nganasan*
samoyed*
Tungusic languages
Siberia
genre_facet Enets
nenets
Nganasan*
samoyed*
Tungusic languages
Siberia
id ftmdpi:oai:mdpi.com:/2226-471X/4/2/39/
institution Open Polar
language English
op_collection_id ftmdpi
op_doi https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039
op_relation https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039
op_rights https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
op_source Languages; Volume 4; Issue 2; Pages: 39
publishDate 2019
publisher Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
record_format openpolar
spelling ftmdpi:oai:mdpi.com:/2226-471X/4/2/39/ 2025-01-16T21:44:01+00:00 Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East Irina Khomchenkova Polina Pleshak Natalia Stoynova 2019-06-17 application/pdf https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039 EN eng Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Languages; Volume 4; Issue 2; Pages: 39 bilingualism language contact pattern borrowing Russian Samoyedic languages Tungusic languages reflexive valency changing middle voice Text 2019 ftmdpi https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039 2023-07-31T22:21:52Z One of the features of the oral Russian speech of bilingual speakers of the indigenous languages of Russia is the omission/the overuse of the “reflexive” affix -sja (a “middle voice” marker with a wide range of uses including reflexive, reciprocal, anticausative, passive, and some others). We discuss the data on the nonstandard use of -sja in the Russian speech of bilingual speakers of two language groups that differ both from Russian and from each other in this grammatical domain: Samoyedic (Forest Enets, Nganasan, and Nenets) and Tungusic (Nanai and Ulch). The data come from the corpus of contact-influenced Russian speech, which is being created by our team. We show that the mismatches in standard and nonstandard usage cannot be explained by direct structural copying from the donor language (indigenous) to the recipient one (the local variety of Russian). Nor is there a consistent system which differs from standard Russian since there are many more usages that follow the rules of standard Russian. The influence of the indigenous languages explains some overuses and omissions; the others can be explained by other factors, e.g., difficulties in the acquisition of verb pairs with non-transparent semantic or syntactic relations. Text Enets nenets Nganasan* samoyed* Tungusic languages Siberia MDPI Open Access Publishing Languages 4 2 39
spellingShingle bilingualism
language contact
pattern borrowing
Russian
Samoyedic languages
Tungusic languages
reflexive
valency changing
middle voice
Irina Khomchenkova
Polina Pleshak
Natalia Stoynova
Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East
title Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East
title_full Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East
title_fullStr Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East
title_full_unstemmed Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East
title_short Nonstandard Use of the “Reflexive” Affix -sja in Russian Speech of Bilingual Speakers of Northern Siberia and the Russian Far East
title_sort nonstandard use of the “reflexive” affix -sja in russian speech of bilingual speakers of northern siberia and the russian far east
topic bilingualism
language contact
pattern borrowing
Russian
Samoyedic languages
Tungusic languages
reflexive
valency changing
middle voice
topic_facet bilingualism
language contact
pattern borrowing
Russian
Samoyedic languages
Tungusic languages
reflexive
valency changing
middle voice
url https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4020039