Перфект в старославянском: был ли он результативным?

: ?2017 2 Slovne This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Articles
,
, .-; ,
The Perfect in Old Church Slavonic: Was It Resultative?
Vladimir A. Plungian
nstitute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences Moscow, Russia
Anna Yu. Urmanchieva
nstitute for Linguistic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg; nstitute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow Russia
1
, , - , . - ( — ), - , . : - , , , - .
* 14-18-02624 “ ”.
Slovne 2017 2
14 |
: , , - . , , , . , , . , , . : (1) (. 14:8 “ , : ”); (2) - ( ) - ; (3) (‘ - ’).
, ,
Abstract Periphrastic perfect is a notoriously difficult form of Old Church Slavonic (OCS) verbs, because it remains consistently resistant to any coherent semantic de scrip- tion. While the majority of OCS texts are (very literal) translations, readily calquing both lexical and grammatical features of Hellenistic Greek, the OCS perfect is al- most unique in deviating drastically from this common trend. The present paper attempts to tackle the semantic puzzle of OCS perfect by analyzing examples from the Psalterium Sinaiticum, Euchologium Sinaiticum, Codex Suprasliensis, and Codex Marianus. A preliminary look at the examples indicates that one can hardly speak of OCS perfect as a unified grammatical value with one and the same range of uses in all available texts. t would be more profitable to establish the patterns of perfect use for individual documents. Different factors predetermining the choice between competing perfect and aorist forms in different OCS texts are discussed in the paper and illustrated by various examples. t is argued that there is a strong tendency to use Aorist in resultative contexts to refer to individual situations with an exact temporal location, whereas Perfect is predominantly used (i) to convey the interpretation of a previously introduced situation (as in Mk 14:8 ‘She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying’); (ii) o characterize the subject of the predication; and (iii) in existential contexts (‘the situation took place at least once in the past’).
Keywords Old ChurÔ Slavonic, grammatical semantics, perfect
Vladimir A. Plungian, Anna Yu. Urmanchieva
2017 2 Slovne
1. : - ( , l- byti ). - , , , - (., - , [H 1972]), - : 1. , .
: ( [MR- 2013]), , ( , , - ). , , , — . , , , — .
, .
, .
1 , ; 10% ( ). , . . ; . [T 1972; MR 2013; D 2017: 311] (, , , — [R 1963] — ).
Slovne 2017 2
- (i–iv) , - (v–vi).
(i) - : . , “ 2 ” [m 1952: 382].
(ii) , , : , . , , 2–3 . - 2 - . . (. ), , , - , .
(iii) , - : () ; () - , [V 1993] ; () - , ; , .
(iv) - , ; — ? , . :
3 - - : - , [. . .] 9323–26; — : 49326 [. . .] [m 1952: 280].
2017 2 Slovne
| 17
, . , , , - :
( ) - ; , - , , () 2 [V 1993: 90].
, , - - .
(v) , , , . - . . . , - ; , “” - , (. [- 1959: 55–78, 1970: 118–129; hl 1970: 129–150]. , - . , , - [A- J 1974] “The meaning of the fi nite verb forms in the Old Church Slavonic Codex Suprasliensis. A synchronic stu dy”. - , , - , - COEXTENSIVE / NONCOEXTENSIVE EXCLUSIVE / NON- EX CLUSIVE. ( , , ) - CONSEQUENCE [A- J 1974: 67]. - , , .-. ,
2 „Die Werke dieser literarischen Gattung werden als direkte Kommunikation zwischen dem Autor und dem physisch (tatsä chlich oder fiktiv) anwesenden Adressaten verfasst und stilisiert, als unmittelbare Anrede an eine Menschenmenge; darum sind sie dazu prä destiniert, kolloquiale und volkstü mliche, auch lokal begrenzte (mundartliche) Sprachmittel anzunehmen“ [ . — . ., . .].
Slovne 2017 2
18 |
, - . . :
1) - ( , ). - (Full Event Period), (-) (-) [. . .] 2) (attitudinal) . , , , - ; - , - [A- J 1974: 139].
, -, , - , -, , - , , -, , , “ - ”, — - , — , - . , -- - . - ( ) , a priori - , ( , - ). - , , . - - .
(vi) , , , . - , , - , ( ).
2017 2 Slovne
| 19
, , , — . - , , . : “ , , - ” [m 1952: 381–382].
. . :
- , , - , - [ÅÆhl 1961: 83].
— “” - — . . (, - , ). , - 2- . . “ - ” [ÇÈÉhl 2003: 221], 3- — “ ” [.: 224]. . :
. . . , , . - . - [. — . ., . .] , - , , - , , , , - , [.: 240].
. . : “, , , . , , - ” [Çkhl 1984: 39].
. . ,
, , , , : , “” - (
Slovne 2017 2
20 |
. , ) - . [. . .] / . . . [ l- k l 2009: 151–152].
, , , . , - , , “” (, - ). , - : - “ ”, ; . (6).
:
(a) , , - , ; , , . . , , , - : (1) is dead (2).
(1’) . . . ( 27:46).
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
(1’’) . . ( 15:34).
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
(2’) ( 9:24). Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth.
2017 2 Slovne
| 21
(2’’) . ( 5:39). Why make ye this ado, and weep? the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth.
(2’’’) . ( 8:52). Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth.
(b) , , . , , - , : - , ( - ). , - [Çkhl 1984], , , , , ,
, , , - - , — [Ç- khl 1984: 32–33] (. [kÑ 2011: 388–394]).
(. , , [D 1998; N, K 2010]). , ; . [!] - . — - [B . 1994: 105], . [D 1985: 135]. , , - , - . , , . , - () “ - ” (“current relevance”). - [MC 1978]; - , ; , - . , -- , [D, H 2000],
Slovne 2017 2
, ; , , - - ( ). , , , - : “ , - ”. - , ; , :
(3) . . . ( 2:10).
And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
(4) . . . . ( 11:17).
And he taught, saying unto them, s it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.
(5) . ( 11:21).
Peter, remembering, said to him, “Rabbi, look! The fi g tree which you cursed has withered away”3.
(6) . . . ( 1:36).
And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
(a) (b) . -, - , - , . -, : , , , ,
3 is withered away.
2017 2 Slovne
| 23
, - , . , — , , . ; , - - , - , - (., , , - , [S 1994; hÉÙh l 2013; 2016]).
, - , , , “” ( , - , . [D 1985: 129]). , - , - . , , , - “ ” . , [kÑ 2016] - , . , , - . - , , - . , , “- ” — ,
Slovne 2017 2
24 |
. , “ - ” - , - : , . - , , , “ ”, - ( , - ), - . — — - .
, 4.
2.
- [MR 2013]. [V 1993], , - . — ; . . , . , - ( ) 2 i- , 2 - :
, — - , - -, . 116 2 [ . — . ., . .] -, 10 — 28 — . , 37 2-
4 : PROIEL (http://foni.uio.no:3000/); PROIEL (http://foni.uio.no:3000/, — [Supr : PROIEL]), PROIEL, [lÉÚhl 1904], — [lÉÚhl 1904: ; : ]; [lÉÚhl 1922], — [G 1882].
2017 2 Slovne
| 25
-, — , 97 [MR 2013: 399]5.
, . . , i- 2-3 2 — , 6. . . : , , . :
2 ; , 2 - , 3 - 2 3 . - , ( 27:22), - , , . . ; : [. . .] s ( 30:9), . . , , - [m 1952: 382].
. . , , 2- i- ( 3 - ) , . . . - , , , :
, ; , - , , , , - 7 [MR 2013: 397].
5 “One might expect that the distribution of the various conjugations would be approximately the same across aorist and perfect, perhaps with a preponderance of the productive class in -; but this is not the case. In the Psalterium Sinaiticum there are 116 instances of second person perfect forms in -, 10 with the verb and 28 with other conjugations. By contrast in the aorist tense there are 36 second person forms in -, 2 with compounds of , but no less than 97 second person forms with verbs of other conjugations” [ . — . ., . .].
6 , 2 2 3 ( ).
7 “The texts contained in the Psalter do not have the quasi-legal formulaic structure of conventional prayers; instead they are poetic meditations on the relationship between
Slovne 2017 2
26 |
, - . (7)–(9) - , i- ( ), - 8:
(7) : : : : ( 118:65–66).
(8) s : : : : ( 118:117–118).
(9) s ( 79:5–8).
, , - ( ) i- , , - . , , - , i- , . , - , i- ( c “- ” — . (11) ) , - . , (10) , — , , :
God and his creation, which shift unpredictably and sometimes abruptly between narrative and appeal, between second and third person reference to the Deity, from past to present or future” [ . — . ., . .].
8 , — , ( , - ) — .
2017 2 Slovne
| 27
(10) : : : : : ( 44:7–8).
:
(11) : : : : : : : : ( 60:2–6).
, - : -, - , ( - ). -, , , “” : - , , . , “ ”, .
, - : , - ? :
1) i- - ( , - );
2) - ( , , - ).
. , -
— :
Slovne 2017 2
28 |
(12) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] ( 73:12–17).
(12) ; ( [5]) — , , , , — - . , ([2], [3], [7], [8] [9]) i-. - , , — , - , , , . , (13), , - :
(13) [1] [2] : [3] [4] [5] : [6] [7] : c : : [8] : ( 79:8–13).
: - , — . - ([5], [6], [7] [8]) i- . , [5], [6] [7], , , “ ” , [8], - , , : — , , - . , - , , . , (12) , ( ), (14) ,
2017 2 Slovne
( , - , ) — , - :
(14) : ( 103:24).
, - : - , , , , . , - , .
, - .
, . , (15) - , , — - , :
(15) - - -: : : ( 23:1–2).
: - ( — - ), - ( , , ), :
(16) : W . s ( 76:14–21).
Slovne 2017 2
30 |
( , - , a- ) “ ”. - : , , . - , , - : , , , - - . , - (), ():
(17) : : : : -- : s : ( 8:5–8).
, (18) ( , ) : , - , , , . , - , - , :
(18) W : [. . .] : . : ( 38:11– 12).
(19) (20) - ( ), - . , , . : , - “ ”, - [N, K 2004: 102]:
2017 2 Slovne
readings lexically entailed resultant state
implicated resultant state
no resultant state
input state continues
AA Resultative1 Existential2
CC Existential
A [MC 1971; K 2002]. B [M 1998]. C [M 1988; K, R 1993; P 2003]. 1 “Target State” perfect readings in [P 1990]. 2 “Resultant State” perfect readings in [P 1990], “permanent state” in [ M 1995].”
, - - “ ”. [I . 2003], - , , “ ” [.: 155], - , [MC 1971]: — — — - . - (.: “ - , - ” [kÑ 2011: 393]). - “ ” (‘ ’), . , (19) (20) - : , — , , “ ” - (, ). (19) — , , (‘ , ’). (20) , ( ) , 9.
9 , :
Slovne 2017 2
32 |
(19) : : : ( 34:21–22).
(20) , - ( , — , , - , , i-, ).
(20) -- w w -- [. . .] ( 88:20–21, 39).
, :
(21) . ( 72:22–24).
(22) - , - ( : ), , - ( ):
(22) : : : s : : : : ( 43:7–10).
, - , : , - , - , “”
, . . . . : “ , . . , , ” [ÉÞßhl 1988: 168]. , . [mÇj 2016] [hÅkhl 2016] .
2017 2 Slovne
| 33
. , , - , , , , - , , . , - (“- ” vs. “ - ” ) - , .
3.
- : , , — . : - , , “ ” , “” . , , 10. :
(23) . . . . . . . . () [G 1882: 6].
, - , - . , ( ), , - , ,
10 , . , ( ) .
Slovne 2017 2
34 |
. , , ( ‘ ’), ( ‘ ’), .
, - - , , - :
(24) . . . . . . . . [G 1882: 8].
: ( ), — , ( ). , , , , , , , , — . , : ( ) , ( . ).
, : - , . : , , , - , . , . - , - ,
2017 2 Slovne
| 35
. - : - , — , , , . - “ ”, . , ( ) , . - ; - ( , , ), — “” (- ), , , - , , - :
(25) , ( ) [G 1882: 52–53].
(26) , ( ) [G- 1882: 53–54].
(27) ( ) [G 1882: 56–57].
Slovne 2017 2
, - , , - , , , “” 11, , . , , - / , , , , , , , (28)–(29) :
(28) ( () ) [G- 1882: 62].
(29) ( ) [G- 1882: 64].
(25)–(27) (28)–(29) , . - , - , (30):
(30)
11 , , “ ” , , “ ” (., ). : , .
2017 2 Slovne
| 37
[G- 1882: 51–52].
, - : - , . , - , - , . :
(31) . [G 1882: 13].
(31) - , : , ( ), , ( - ). - - ( ) . — , “ ”. , / , - . , , , , , .
, - , : - . , - . , - , , ,
Slovne 2017 2
38 |
. - ? - : - , (32) (33):
(32) <> <> [G 1882: 159].
(33) <> <> <> <> <> . <><> <><> <><> (<> ) [G 1882: 186].
“- ” . - , , - :
(34) <> w <> <> <> <> . <> [] <><> <><> <> <> (<> ) [G 1882: 186–187].
: , ( (35) (33)):
(35) <><> <> <><> <> (<> w) [G 1882: 169].
(36) <> <><> . <>
2017 2 Slovne
| 39
<> (<> ) [G 1882: 122–123].
, (31). , (37) (38) : ( (37) — ‘ , ’, (38) — ‘ , ’):
(37) w [G 1882: 106–107].
(38) [] [G 1882: 106].
, - : - ( , ). (31), , (37) (38), - . , - : : “- ”, , - , - .
4.
. -, - — . , , ,
Slovne 2017 2
40 |
, . -, - , [V 1993: 166]. , , - , . , 3 . - , - .
, “” - : , ( ) . , , . - , 2 , , - . - , - . , (39) , :
(39) . . · . . [Supr 1: 65–70].
- , (, ). (40) - :
(40) · . . . . . . [Supr 1: 37–45].
(41) ( , ):
2017 2 Slovne
| 41
(41) . . ·. . . . . [Supr 2: 258–266].
(42) , — , , , — :
(42) · · · · · · · · · · ·[Supr 11: 219–230].
(43) : — ( - , , ), ‘ ’ ( ), - , — , , :
(43) . . . . . . [Supr 7: 563–571].
, ( / , ~ , / , - / .) - . - , : - , - , , .
Slovne 2017 2

, - :
(44) . . . [Supr 7: 764–766].
(45) [ lÉÚ - hl 1904: 374; 32: 26–27].
(46) · [Supr 25: 273].
(47) · · [Supr 23: 378–380].
(48) · · · [Supr 23: 202].
- : , , / - . ( , , ) “” () - (, , , - ). - , - , . . ( ) - . , - , - .
, - , , . (48) , (49)–(50):
(49) . . . . [. . .] . . · [Supr 5: 221–233].
2017 2 Slovne
| 43
(50) [ . , . . , , :] · [Supr 5: 454–455].
- — - ( - , )12. - , , , — :
(51) . [lÉÚ - hl 1904: 373; 32: 21–25].
(52) . . [lÉÚhl 1904: 469; 40: 25–30].
(53) . .
13 [Supr 5: 386–388].
- , :
(54) . . [Supr 5: 589–593].
4.2. ,
, - , - . , . - — . ,
12 , . .
13 : 40 , , , , , .
Slovne 2017 2
44 |
, ( ).
4.2.1.
- , , . (55) (56):
(55) · [Supr 25: 643–647].
(56) . . · . . [Supr 1: 65–69].
(55) (56) (‘ , ’), , ( ). ; , , , - . (55) (56), (57) (58) :
(57) – . – , [lÉÚhl 1904: 515; 46: 24–29].
(58) · · · · · · · [Supr 19: 153–160].
(59):
(59) · · · · · · · · · · ·
2017 2 Slovne
| 45
· · [Supr 8: 114–128].
(55) (56): - , . - : (55) (56) - , , . (55) (56) - : - . (59), , , - , ( ·). c. , - , - . - , . , , , , . ( ), - , : . , .
4.2.2.
; (60) , ; “ ” :
(60) · · · · · · · · · · · · · [Supr 21: 284–297].
2- - . : , . , . . : “ , , , ? , - ?”:
Slovne 2017 2
46 |
(61) . . . [Supr 3: 777–779].
- . , (62) , , :
(62) . . . [. . .] . . . . [Supr 3: 447–459].
(63) : , 14, :
(63) . . . [ 1904: 475; 41: 19–25].
, (64) - , . , : , , . , ‘ ’ ( ‘ ’), - ‘ ’ ( - ‘ ’):
(64) [ . . . [. . .] . .
14 , , -.
2017 2 Slovne
. · [Supr 2: 150–154].
, (65): , , :
(65) — . — . — , [lÉÚhl 1904: 515; 46: 19–29].
, - :
(66) · · · · [Supr 19: 110–114].
(67) . . . . . · . . · [Supr 3: 424–434].
(66) (67) , ( (66) , “ . ” (67)), - : (66) (67) . , (65) , , - , .
4.3.
, - . - , . ,
Slovne 2017 2
. . - , , , , , :
(68) . . . . . . . . [. . .]. . . . . . . [Supr 6: 409–428].
(69) . . . . [. . .] . . . . [. . .] . . . . [Supr 6: 504–527].
(70) . . . [ lÉÚ hl 1904: 487; 43: 23–29].
, - , - : (71) (72) , , - ; (71) — , :
(71) . . . . . . . , . . . . ,
2017 2 Slovne
| 49
. , [lÉÚhl 1904: 473; 41: 4–25].
(72) , , , , , , , , , [lÉÚhl 1904: 480; 42: 19–28].
5.
, , , - 15. - ; , - . (73) (74):
(73) . . . . . . ( 14:6–8).
(74) . ( 12:26).
- , (75), (76):
(75) . . . ( 9:34).
(76) . . ( 16:25).
,
15 , , , , ( 21:16) — 8:3.
Slovne 2017 2
50 |
, . - (77)–(85):
(77) . . . ( 23:35).
(78) . . . ( 21:16, — 12:3, 5, 19:4, 21:42, 22:31, 2:25, 12:10, 26, 6:3).
(79) . . ( 6:46).
(80) . . ( 7:46).
(81) . . . ( 24:20–21).
(82) . . ( 8:57).
(83) . . ( 13:26).
(84) . . . ( 6:26).
(85) . . . . . . . ( 8:39–40).
6.
• ; , , - : , ; , , . , ( - ) — - , . . .
• - .
2017 2 Slovne
| 51
• , . , - , - . , , - (, ), - , , - — , .
• , , , , , , .
• , , (. 32). , , - , - - .
: , (. [ 1959]). , , , - , , , (, , , - ) . - , , - .
, ; , , - a priori - . , ( - , , ), - .
Slovne 2017 2
52 |
, — , - ( ‘’, ‘’, ‘’), - , - , , - .

ÉÞßhl 1988 ÉÞßhl . ., : . . , , 1988.
1959 . ., , , 1959.
——— 1970 . ., . , , 1970.
m 1952 m ., , , 1952.
ÇÈÉhl 2003 ÇÈÉhl ., “ ”, , 5 (1), 2003, 215–242.
hÉÙhl 2013 hÉÙhl . ., “ ”, in: : 9–12 2013 ., .-, 2013, 58–63.
——— 2016 hÉÙhl . ., “, , , : ?”, in: [mÇj . 2016: 39–66].
hl 1970 hl ., , , , 1970.
hÅkhl 2016 hÅkhl . ., “ ”, , 1, 2016, 51–75.
ÅÆhl 1961 ÅÆhl . ., , , 1961.
mÇj 2016 mÇj . ., “ ”, in: [mÇj . 2016: 315–378].
mÇj . 2016 mÇj . ., kÑ . ., ãähl Ç. ., ., , 7: (= Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. , 12/2), .-, 2016.
Çkhl 1984 Çkhl . ., , , 1984.
2017 2 Slovne
| 53
kÑ 2011 kÑ . ., : , , 2011.
——— 2016 kÑ . ., “ : ”, in: [mÇj . 2016: 7–36].
lÉÚhl 1904 lÉÚhl . ., , 1 (= , 2/1), .-, 1904.
——— 1922 lÉÚhl . ., . XI ., , 1922.
lkl 2009 lkl . ., “« » ( )”, , 2 (18), 2009, 144–174.
A- J 1974 A- J T. H., The Meaning of the Finite Verb Forms in the Old Church Slavonic Codex Suprasliensis. A Synchronic Study, The Hague, 1974.
B . 1994 B J. L., P R., P W., The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World, Chicago, 1994.
D 1985 D Ö., Tense and Aspect Systems, Oxford, 1985.
D, H 2000 D Ö., H E., “Current Relevance and Event Reference,” in: , ed., Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Berlin, 2000, 385–402.
D 1998 D I., “On the Resultative Character of Present Perfect Sentences,” Journal of Pragmatics, 29/3, 1998, 597–613.
D 2017 D B., Language Contact in Europe: The Periphrastic Perfect through History, Cambridge, 2017.
G 1882 G L., Euchologium. Glagolski spomenik manastira Sinai brda, U Zagrebu, 1882.
H 1972 H C., “Das Neue Testament in altkirchenslavischer Sprache,” in: K. A, ed., Die alten Übersetzungen des Neuen Testaments, die Kirchenväterzitate und Lektionare, Berlin, 1972, 403–435.
I . 2003 I S., A E., I R., “Observations about the Forms and the Meaning of the Perfect,” in: A. A, M. R, A. S, eds., Perfect Explorations, Berlin, 2003, 153–204.
K, R 1993 K H., R U., From Discourse to Logic, 1–2, Dordrecht, 1993.
K 2002 K P., “Event Structure and the Perfect,” in: D. I. B ., eds, The Construction of Meaning, Stanford, 2002.
Slovne 2017 2
54 |
MR 2013 MR C. M., “The Competing Use of Perfect and Aorist Tenses in Old Church Slavonic,” Slava. asopis pro slovanskou fi lologii, 82/4, 2013, 387–407.
MC 1971 MC J. D., “Tense and Time Reference in English,” in: C. F, T. L, eds., Studies in Linguistic Semantics, New York, 1971, 96–113.
MC 1978 MC R. W., The English Perfect: Tense-choice and Pragmatic Inferences. Amsterdam, 1978.
M 1998 M L. A., Aspectual Grammar and Past-time Reference, London, New York, 1998.
M 1988 M A., “Aspects of English Aspect: On the Interaction of Perfect, Progressive, and Durational Phrases,” Linguistics and Philosophy, 11, 1988, 203–254.
N, K 2004 N A., K J.-P., “What Is a Perfect State?” in: B. S, V. C, A. K, A. R, eds., WCCFL 23 Proceedings, Sommerville, 2004, 101–113.
N, K 2010 N A., K J.-P., “What Is a Perfect State?” Language, 86/3, 2010, 611–646.
P 1990 P T., Events in the Semantics of English, Cambridge, 1990.
P 2003 P P., “The (Temporal) Semantics and (Modal) Pragmatics of the Perfect,” Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, 2003, 459–510.
R 1963 R R., Das syntaktische System der altslavischen Partizipien und sein Verhältnis zum Griechischen, Berlin, 1963.
S 1994 S S. A., “The Grammaticalization of an Anterior in Progress: Evidence from a Peninsular Dialect,” Studies in Language, 18/1, 1994, 71–111.
M 1995 M A. G. B., Representing Time in Natural Language: The Dynamic Interpretation of Tense and Aspect, Cambridge, 1995.
T 1972 T K., Perfekt und Konditional im Altkirchenslavischen, Wiesbaden, 1972.
V 1993 V R., Altkirchenslavische (altbulgarische) Syntax, 2: Die innere Satzstruktur (= Monumenta linguae slavicae, 34 (27,2)), Freiburg i. Br., 1993.
References Amse-de Jong T. H., The Meaning of the Finite
Verb Forms in the Old Church Slavonic Codex Sup ras- li ensis. A Synchronic Study, The Hague, 1974.
Arutyunova N. D., Tipy iazykovykh znachenii: Otsenka. Sobytie. Fakt, Moscow, 1988.
Bunina I. K., Sistema vremen staroslavianskogo glagola, Moscow, 1959.
Bunina I. K., Istoriia glagolnykh vremen v bolgar- skom iazyke. Vremena indikativa, Moscow, 1970.
Bybee J. L., Perkins R., Pagliuca W., The Evo lu- tion of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World, Chicago, 1994.
Dahl Ö., Tense and Aspect Systems, Oxford, 1985.
2017 2 Slovne
| 55
Dahl Ö., Hedin E., “Current Relevance and Event Reference,” in: eidem, ed., Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Berlin, 2000, 385–402.
Depraetere I., “On the Resultative Character of Present Perfect Sentences,” Journal of Pragmatics, 29/3, 1998, 597–613.
Deyanova M., Istoriia na slozhnite minali vremena v blgarski, srbokhrvatski i slovenski ezik, Sofi a, 1970.
Drinka B., Language Contact in Europe: The Pe- ri phrastic Perfect through History, Cambridge, 2017.
Gasparov B., “Nabliudeniia nad upotrebleniem per fekta v drevnetserkovnoslavianskikh tekstakh,” Russian Language and Linguistic Theory (Russk yazyk v nauchnom osveshchenii), 5 (1), 2003, 215–242.
Gorbova E. V., “Problemy ispanskogo perfekta,” in: Glagolnye i imennye kategorii v sisteme funk- tsionalnoi grammatiki, St. Petersburg, 2013, 58–63.
Gorbova E. V., “Perfect of Result, Experiential Per fect, Perfect of Persistent Situation, Perfect of Recent Past: Hat Determines the Meaning of the Per fect?” in: Acta Linguistica Petropolitana, 12/2, St. Petersburg, 2016, 39–66.
Hannick Ch., “Das Neue Testament in alt kirchen slavischer Sprache,” in: K. Aland, ed., Die alten Übersetzungen des Neuen Testaments, die Kirchen- väterzitate und Lektionare, Berlin, 1972, 403–435.
Iatridou S., Anagnostopoulou E., Izvorski R., “Observations about the Forms and the Meaning of the Perfect,” in: A. Alexiadou, M. Rathert, A. von Stechov, eds., Perfect Explorations, Berlin, 2003, 153–204.
Kamp H., Reyle U., From Discourse to Logic, 1–2, Dordrecht, 1993.
Kiparsky P., “Event Structure and the Perfect,” in: D. I. Beaver et al., eds, The Construction of Meaning, Stanford, 2002.
Kozlov A. A., “Moksha Mordvin Resultative and the Diachrony of Resultative Constructions,” Voprosy Jazykoznan a, 1, 2016, 51–75.
Kuznetsov P. S., Ocherki po morfologii praslavian- skogo iazyka, Moscow, 1961.
MacRobert C. M., “The Competing Use of Per- fect and Aorist Tenses in Old Church Slavonic,” Slava. asopis pro slovanskou fi lologii, 82/4, 2013, 387–407.
Maisak T., “The Perfect and the Aorist in the Nizh Dialect of Udi,” in: Acta Linguistica Petropolitana, 12/2, St. Petersburg, 2016, 315–378.
Maslov Yu. S., Ocherki po aspektologii, Leningrad, 1984.
McCawley J. D., “Tense and Time Reference in English,” in: Ch. Fillmore, T. Langendoen, eds.,
Studies in Linguistic Semantics, New York, 1971, 96–113.
McCoard R. W., The English Perfect: Tense-choice and Pragmatic Inferences. Amsterdam, 1978.
Michaelis L. A., Aspectual Grammar and Past- time Reference, London, New York, 1998.
Mittwoch A., “Aspects of English Aspect: On the Interaction of Perfect, Progressive, and Durational Phrases,” Linguistics and Philosophy, 11, 1988, 203– 254.
Nishiyama A., Koenig J.-P., “What Is a Perfect State?” in: B. Schmeister, V. Chand, A. Kelleher, A. Rodriguez, eds., WCCFL 23 Proceedings, Som- merville, 2004, 101–113.
Nishiyama A., Koenig J.-P., “What Is a Perfect State?” Language, 86/3, 2010, 611–646.
Parsons T., Events in the Semantics of English, Cambridge, 1990.
Plungian V. A., Vvedenie v grammaticheskuiu se- man tiku: grammaticheskie znacheniia i grammati che- skie sistemy iazykov mira, Moscow, 2011.
Plungian V. A., Towards the Typology of the Per fect in the World’s Languages: Introduction,” in: Acta Linguistica Petropolitana, 12/2, St. Petersburg, 2016, 7–36.
Portner P., “The (Temporal) Semantics and (Mo dal) Pragmatics of the Perfect,” Linguistics and Phil o sophy, 26, 2003, 459–510.
Rika R., Das syntaktische System der alt slavischen Partizipien und sein Verhältnis zum Grie chi- schen, Berlin, 1963.
Schwenter S. A., “The Grammaticalization of an Anterior in Progress: Evidence from a Peninsular Dia lect,” Studies in Language, 18/1, 1994, 71–111.
Severyanov S. N., Sinaiskaia psaltyr. Gla go li che- skii pamiatnik XI v., Petrograd, 1922.
Sheveleva M. N., “‘Soglasovanie vremen’ v iazyke drevnerusskikh letopisei (k voprosu o formirovanii otnositel’nogo upotrebleniia vremen i kosvennoi rechi v russkom iazyke),” Russian Language and Lin- guistic Theory (Russk yazyk v nauchnom osve shche- nii), 2, 2009, 144–174.
ter Meulen A. G. B., Representing Time in Natural Language: The Dynamic Interpretation of Tense and Aspect, Cambridge, 1995.
Trost K., Perfekt und Konditional im Alt kir chen- slavischen, Wiesbaden, 1972.
Vaillant A., Rukovodstvo po staroslavianskomu iazyku, Moscow, 1952.
Veerka R., Altkirchenslavische (altbulgarische) Syntax, 2: Die innere Satzstruktur (= Monumenta linguae slavicae, 34 (27,2)), Freiburg i. Br., 1993.
Acknowledgements
Slovne 2017 2
, , . , 125009 , . ., . 1, . 1 /Russia [email protected]
, . . , 199004 .-, , . 9 /Russia [email protected]
Received October 22, 2016

Documents

Перфект в старославянском: был ли он результативным?