Alexander B Letuchiy
Biographic Data
| ID | 8914806 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Alexander B Letuchiy |
| GIVEN NAMES | Alexander B |
| FAMILY NAME | Letuchiy |
| SIGNATURE | LETUCHIY A B |
| AFFILIATIONS | HSE University; Vinogradov Russian Language Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 4 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 4 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2020 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2024 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
William Croft’s approach to constructions in comparison with the system of constructions in the Russian Constructicon
In this article, we discuss the approach to description of constructions adopted in William Croft’s monograph “Morphosyntax. Constructions of the World’s languages” (2022) and compare it to the approach to description and classification that is used in the Russian Constructicon. We conclude that Croft’s system and the Russian Constructicon show several substantial differences. First, Croft’s approach is based on the notion of Comparative Concepts…
Russian colloquial complement clauses with čto
The article addresses Russian colloquial constructions with the complemtizer čto, such as Ty skaži, čto ja že ne znal ‘Say that you didn’t know it (lit. ‘that “I didn’t know that”’) or On načal izvinjat’sja, čto on ne xotel ‘He began to apologize that he didn’t mean that’. These constructions are mainly described in respect of person: namely, of indexical shift, meaning that person is marked as in direct, rather than indirect speech. However, it …
The Russian pronoun TAM as a marker of anaphora to an argument
The present article addresses a special use of the Russian locative pronoun tam: the use represented in examples like ‘I talked to her — no understanding of the situation there’. In those contexts, tam refers to a participant (usually animate), rather than a location. After a brief sketch of other uses, I describe the rules and restrictions on the ‘argument’ use of tam. Then, I analyze the role of this use in the Russian pronoun system and relati…
A Problem of Selecting a Verb Stem for Prefixation
The article focuses on the choice of verbal stem (perfective vs. imperfective) for prefixation. Although some tendencies have been described in existing work (for instance, the fact that lexical prefixes very often choose the perfective stem, while this is not true for supralexical prefixes), I show that many cases of stem choice cannot be explained by the opposition of lexical vs. supralexical prefixes. For instance, the verb prygat’ / prygnut’ …
No prominent works on this page.
A Problem of Selecting a Verb Stem for Prefixation
The article focuses on the choice of verbal stem (perfective vs. imperfective) for prefixation. Although some tendencies have been described in existing work (for instance, the fact that lexical prefixes very often choose the perfective stem, while this is not true for supralexical prefixes), I show that many cases of stem choice cannot be explained by the opposition of lexical vs. supralexical prefixes. For instance, the verb prygat’ / prygnut’ …
The Russian pronoun TAM as a marker of anaphora to an argument
The present article addresses a special use of the Russian locative pronoun tam: the use represented in examples like ‘I talked to her — no understanding of the situation there’. In those contexts, tam refers to a participant (usually animate), rather than a location. After a brief sketch of other uses, I describe the rules and restrictions on the ‘argument’ use of tam. Then, I analyze the role of this use in the Russian pronoun system and relati…
Russian colloquial complement clauses with čto
The article addresses Russian colloquial constructions with the complemtizer čto, such as Ty skaži, čto ja že ne znal ‘Say that you didn’t know it (lit. ‘that “I didn’t know that”’) or On načal izvinjat’sja, čto on ne xotel ‘He began to apologize that he didn’t mean that’. These constructions are mainly described in respect of person: namely, of indexical shift, meaning that person is marked as in direct, rather than indirect speech. However, it …
William Croft’s approach to constructions in comparison with the system of constructions in the Russian Constructicon
In this article, we discuss the approach to description of constructions adopted in William Croft’s monograph “Morphosyntax. Constructions of the World’s languages” (2022) and compare it to the approach to description and classification that is used in the Russian Constructicon. We conclude that Croft’s system and the Russian Constructicon show several substantial differences. First, Croft’s approach is based on the notion of Comparative Concepts…
Linguistics (4 works) · Philosophy (4 works) · Computer Science (2 works) · Cultural, Linguistic, Economic Studies (2 works) · Discourse Analysis and Cultural Communication (2 works) · Language, Communication, and Linguistic Studies (2 works) · Lexicography and Language Studies (2 works) · Mathematics (2 works) · Psychology (2 works) · Artificial Intelligence (1 work)