Art#: 2442
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18454/RULB.7.41

Цитировать

Электронная ссылка | Печатная ссылка

Скопируйте отформатированную библиографическую ссылку через буфер обмена или перейдите по одной из ссылок для импорта в Менеджер библиографий.
Gadzhiakhmedov N.E. CATEGORY OF VOICE AND SEMANTIC TYPES OF SITUATIONS IN KUMYK LANGUAGE / N.E. Gadzhiakhmedov, S.A. Aliyeva // Russian Linguistic Bulletin. — 2016. — № 3 (7). — С. 4—9. — URL: http://rulb.org/ru/article/kategoriya-zaloga-i-semanticheskie-tipy-situacij-v-kumykskom-yazyke/ (дата обращения: 25.03.2019. ). doi:10.18454/RULB.7.41
Gadzhiakhmedov N.E. CATEGORY OF VOICE AND SEMANTIC TYPES OF SITUATIONS IN KUMYK LANGUAGE / N.E. Gadzhiakhmedov, S.A. Aliyeva // Russian Linguistic Bulletin. — 2016. — № 3 (7). — С. 4—9. doi:10.18454/RULB.7.41

Импортировать


Гаджиахмедов Н.Э.1, Алиева С.А.2
1Заведующий кафедрой теоретической и прикладной лингвистики, доктор филологических наук, 2Кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры теоретической и прикладной лингвистики, кандидат филологических наук, Дагестанский государственный университет
КАТЕГОРИЯ ЗАЛОГА И СЕМАНТИЧЕСКИЕ ТИПЫ СИТУАЦИЙ В КУМЫКСКОМ ЯЗЫКЕ
Аннотация
В данной статье рассматриваются залоговые преобразования на морфологическом уровне, меняющие семантический потенциал лексемы, что на поверхностном уровне проявляется в изменении синтаксической конструкции, падежном преобразовании членов предложения, а на семантическом уровне в смене их ролей. Исследование проводится на материале глаголов “состояния” и глаголов “действия”. Глаголы первой группы, хотя и разнообразные по оттенкам своего вещественного значения, объединяются общей семантикой: они характеризуют всегда “собственные манифестации субъекта”, и поэтому передают простую ситуацию. Они обладают общей фазовой структурой и всегда манифестируют только медиальную фазу процесса, поэтому они в аспектологической классификации относятся к непредельным глаголам. Глаголы второй группы реализуют смысл “делать так, чтобы наделить объект свойством или оказать на него воздействие способом, мотивированным вещественным значением” и, следовательно, включают в ситуацию большее число участников. Их фазовая структура более сложная, часто трехчастная, она имеет обязательно конечную фазу, поэтому они передают сложную ситуацию, а в аспектуальном плане относятся к предельным глаголам. Выявлены и описаны семантические типы ситуаций репрезентируемых двумя сематическими типами глаголов в кумыкском языке.
Ключевые слова: залог, категория залога, семантические типы ситуаций, функции, кумыкский язык, тюркские языки.
Страницы: 4 - 9

Gadzhiakhmedov N.E.1, Aliyeva S.A.2
1Head of the department of theoretical and applied linguistics, Doctor of Philology, 2Candidate of Philology, associate professor of theoretical and applied linguistics, Candidate of Philology, Dagestan state university
CATEGORY OF VOICE AND SEMANTIC TYPES OF SITUATIONS IN KUMYK LANGUAGE
Abstract
This article discusses voice transformation at the morphological level, which changes the semantic potential of the lexical unit. At the superficial level it manifests itself in the change of syntax, transformation of sentence parts, and at the semantic level in their changing roles. The study is based on “state” verbs and verbs of “action.” The verbs of the first group, although various in terms of shades of their real value, are combined by general semantics: they always characterize “their own manifestations of the subject” and therefore convey a simple situation. They have a common phase structure and always render only the medial phase of the process, thus from the point of view of aspect classification they belong to irregular verbs. The verbs of the second group render the meaning of “to give an object a certain property or impact it in such a way, which is motivated by real value” and therefore they include a greater number of participants of the situation. Their phase structure is more complex, often three-part, it has an obligatory final phase, so they render a difficult situation, and in terms of aspect they belong to terminative verbs. Semantic types of situations have been identified and described as represented by two types of verbs in the Kumyk language.
Keywords: voice, category of voice, semantic types of situations, functions, Kumyk language, Turkic languages.
Pages: 4 - 9
Почта авторов / Author Email: nur1@yandex.ru, nur1@yandex.ru

Voice as a grammatical category of the verb is well studied from both formal and a substantive point of view. However, the analysis of this category in a particular language based on the semantic structure of lexical meaning of the verb allows us to discover new facts that are relevant for the grammar of the language, and for  subsequent theoretical generalizations. In modern Turkic studies, as well as in general linguistics, there is no established definition of the voice: there is controversy concerning the content of the concept of “voice”, qualification of the status of this category in the language, its content. The review of a number of points of view of  turkologists is presented in A.Shcherbak's work. He himself is inclined to think that voice “characterizes the action in terms of participation of the subject of the utterance” while the voice paradigm includes traditionally distinguished 5 forms of Turkic voice – real, passive, reflexive, mutually-compatible and causative [18, p. 104].

Below is an attempt to interpret the Turkic voice as a way of modifying the substantive meaning of the verb (= of the displayed situation) by special affixes attached directly to the root (base) of the verb. In this case there is a complex transformation of the indicated semantic component of a lexical unit, and the structure of the situation is modified due to created value of the voice index, which interacts with the initial value of the lexical unit. This results in the change of the nature of relations between the participants of the situation, which is reflected on the syntactic level. However, it should be pointed out that a common semantic identity of the original and the modified lexical units is preserved here, as this change does not lead to the creation of a new concept of the reflected. Such a transformation is similar to the transformation within the modes of action of the verb, when specified, features of the same process are modified (process-component of the meaning of the lexical unit) in phase-temporal relation, while maintaining the semantics of the verb [8, p. 128-139].

A similar opinion about voice transformations in Turkology have been expressed by V. Guzev: [3, p. 53].

Theoretically speaking, we rely on the concept of the voice offered by G. Silnitsky [12, p. 54] and D.Nasilov. Voice is defined “as a grammatical category which shows regular relationship between the elements of valency paradigms of verbal lexical units, correlating with regular changes of these lexical units. In other words, voice ranks fix regular correspondences between certain changes of verbal valency and certain semantic shifts in verb meaning” [12, p. 54]. And although he is focused on the syntactic level of voice transformations representation (voice is a lexical and syntactic category), the fact that this category appears on three language levels – syntactical, morphological and lexical, is important for us and is connected with certain (valency) changes in lexical units and, in the long run, in transformation in the area of structuring of the situation itself with its members, i.e. with modifications of the real component of the lexical meaning of the verbal lexical unit, with is a reflection of the changed properties and relations and their carriers in extralinguistic reality. Hence, there is direct dependence of the voice transformation and the semantic verb class.

The lexical meaning of the verb represents both real value (1), which belongs to the class of “attributes” (1a.) and the nominative, which indicates properties or relations highlighted in reality and assigned to this sign of the language, as well as classifying grammatical ( = part of speech) value (2), the most generalized one and firmly knit by the power of the language system with the first one. It also organizes the content of the “attribute” based on the “process” (2a), but does not exist separately, i.e. it is not independent [8, p. 127-136].

Lexical unit as a functional unit of the language contains another type of information – it is a certain focus on the association with auxiliary parts of the language and it is oriented towards the system of the language. This type of semantic information can be conventionally called derivational inclination (3) or verbality (3a), because it implies going through possible combinations of a certain lexical unit with derivational indices in a particular language. Auxiliary parts are the carriers of grammatical information, auxiliary grammatical values [8, p. 127-140]. They are additional for lexical ones and are usually expressed through “grammatical ways” [11, p. 253], through affixation and analytical formations in the first place. Semantic orientation, derivative inclination of a lexical unit and corresponding affix are always mutually oriented. Derivational and relational values are “formal values typically attributed to lexical meanings, they naturally accompany individual concrete representations” [10, p. 21-23].

Based on the foregoing, the semantic structure of a lexical meaning of the verb can be represented as follows:

Table 1

1. Substantive meaning

2. Classifying meaning

3. Derivational inclination

1а.   attribute

2а.   process

3а. verbality

 

In Turkic languages voice transformations are presented at the morphological level, morphemes of this category change the semantic potential of a lexical unit which is manifested in the change of syntax, case transformation of the sentence parts at a superficial level and at the semantic level in their changing roles.

Given the functional features of affixes in agglutinative languages and the status of grammatical categories in them, we exclude the original form of the verb (in traditional terminology it is “the main voice”) from the voice paradigm [4], [3, p. 50-53]; then we should talk about 4 voices with special affixes  in Turkic languages.

Let us take two large semantic classes of verbs – “state” verbs and the verbs of “action” without resorting to more detailed division of verbs into semantic subtypes (for example, a detailed classification of the verbs in the works of G.Silnitsky). The verbs of the first group, although various in shades of substantive meaning, are combined by general semantics: they always characterize “their own manifestations of the subject” as they are defined by V. Gak; therefore, they convey a simple situation. They have a common phase structure and always render only the medial phase of the process, thus from the point of view of aspect classification they belong to irregular verbs. The verbs of the second group render the meaning of “to give an object a certain property or impact it in such a way, which is motivated by a real value” and therefore they include a greater number of participants of the situation. Their phase structure is more complex, often three-part, it has an obligatory final phase, so they render a difficult situation, and in terms of aspect they belong to terminative verbs. Most of these verbs are classified as causative by G.Silnitskiy.

Here we provide the general scheme of the real changes in the semantics of these groups of verbs using voice indices in the Kumyk language (we use the indexing of Table 1, all verbs will have a derivational intention, so index “3” is not applicable; Sb — subject, Ob — object, possible index 1, 2, 3, S — state).

Sentence Денгизни толкъунлары гюнню шавласына йыртыллап тура “Sea waves sparkle in the sunshine” represents a simple nonterminative situation.

Table 2

                  йыртыллап тура

1. “sparkle”


 

1а. Sb —S

Simple situation

    2а. …/с/…

 nonterminative

 

Sentence Марьям помидорлар жувду “Mariam washed tomatoes” represents terminative complex causative situation.

Table 3

                            жув-

1. wash

 

1а. Sb— (impact)  —S—Ob —

complex causative situation

2а.    -с/с/с

   terminative

 

Making simple situation a complex causative one can be done through causative affix –т: йыртыллатды “make shine”: Гюнню шавлалары эртенги къарны йыртыллатды.

Table 4

йыртылла-       +           -т-   aff. causative                      =  йыртыллат-

1.“make shine

 (impact)

 

1а. Sb —S —

simple situation

—(Ob ) —S

2а.   -с/с/с

making simple situation a complex causative one

emergence of a terminative phase  = terminative

 

Complex complicated marginal situation with a double causation is implemented only on the foundations of transition: Анасы къызына этиклерин жувдурду “Mother made daughter wash the boots.” There is a complication of the impact phase because of the emergence of new participants.

Table 5

жув-              +                      -дур-  aff. causative  =                жувдур-

1.    “make wash”

—(impact)


 

1а. Sb — (impact) —S — Ob —S

complex causative situation

Sb imp.— +  second causation: new participants

2а. -с/с/с/с


 

complex complicated situation with double causation

complication through an impact phrase = terminative

 

Complex causative situation is simplified through the removal of the participants of the situation. The emphasis is on the result of the process: Мен «Ёлдаш» газетге язылдым “I subscribed to the newspaper “Yoldash.”

Table 6

                      яз-          +                   -ыл-  aff. passive        =        языл-

1. “subscribe”

  passivisation


 

1а.  (Sb— (impact) -)-S— Ob— —S-

complex causative situation


 

change of relations –removal of participants


 

2а.-/с/-с-

  


 

complex causative situation is simplified (decausation)

emphasis on the final phrase, result of the process


The indicator of the passive is possible with one-position predicates. In this case, Kumyk, like many other languages, selects the coding strategy of the actant by dative: газетге язылма “subscribe to the newspaper”, сувгъа гёмюлме “plunge into the water.” With the help of -ыл- index the so-called decausative is formed — the result of transformation of the original diathesis when the verb loses its agentive valency: эшик ябулду “door is closed”, тююн чечилди “the knot has untied.”

Index of the passive can also serve as a facilitative marker, formally similar to decausative (the verb loses its agentive valency the same way). Facilitative differs from the latter one by its semantic content: it points to a permanent property inherent in any object: Чабакъ къармакъ булан тутула “Fish is caught with a fishing rod.”

Predicate with index —ла + н can render the meaning of a constant attribute that characterizes the subject of the action. As you can see, this type of diathesis transformation is opposed to the previous two: here the verb loses its patient valency. Яшлар уьйлендилер “All children are married.”

In the sentence Ермолов жувуна ва гийине эди (I.Kerimov) “Yermolov washed and dressed” represents complex terminative causative situation. Change of the situation on the level of the participants and their connections is rendered through reflexive.

Table 7

                        жув-                +           -ун-  aff. reflexive             =  жувун-

1.  “wash”

   reversibility


 

1а. Sb — (impact) —S — (Ob)—S

complex causative situation

change of relations  – compression of participants (Ob = Sb)

2а. -с/с/с


 


 

change of the situation on the level of the participants and their relationships

terminative

 

Complex terminative causative situation is presented in the sentence Анасы да, къызы да оьбюшдюлер “Mother and daughter kissed.” Reciprocity renders the change in the situation at the level of the participants and their relations, sometimes the situation multiplies according to the number of participants.

Table 8

             оьп-          +                      -юш-     aff. reciprocity                     =  оьбюш-

“kiss”

compatibility/ mutuality


 

1а. Sb1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

                                                                                               

adding participants (+ sometimes multiplying situation according to the number of participants)

2а -с/с/с (// +  -с/с/с)


 


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections

terminative


Bifunctionality of components comprising multiple subject of elements is revealed in the following – voice can be rephrased as two non-voice structures with interchangeable subject and object: Анасы да, къызы да оьбюшдюлер “Mother and daughter hugged each other” = Анасы къызын оьпдю + Къызы анасын оьпдю “Mother hugged daughter + Daughter hugged mother.“

A special feature of voice in the Turkic languages is their compatibility within the same word forms; compare: causative + passive; reflexive + causative reflexive + reciprocity; causative + reciprocity; + causative + causative; causative + reflexive; reflexive + causative + passive, and so on.

Accretion of the causative affix to reflexive leads to the emergence of new participants of the causative situation: decausative situation becomes causative. Анасы яшын чечиндирди (гийиндирди) “Mother dressed (undressed) a child.” There are two participants in the situation: the child who is passive in this case, and the mother, who is an active participant of the action (one-sided causation).

Table 9

чеч-          +              -ин- aff. reflexive     + -дир- aff. causation         =  чечиндир-

“undress”

reversibility

causation


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

change of relations – participants compression

Sb imp. + second causation: new participants of causation

2а -с/с/с (// + -с/с/с)


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections

terminative

 

A relatively larger number of participants can be represented in the word form passive + causative: илиндир “hook” Сен мени машинни бортуна илиндирсенг, минип болажакъ эдим “If you hooked me by the drill of the machine, I could get into the car.”

Table 10

ил-          +                    -ин- aff. reflexive     + -дир- aff. causation         =  илиндир-

“hook”

passivisation

causation


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

change of relations – participants compression

Sb imp. + second causation: new participants of causation

2а -с/с/с (// + -с/с/с)


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections

terminative

 

Accretion of the causative affix —дыр to reciprocity leads to a different complex situation: there are more participants than in the previous situation and all participants are involved in the implementation of the verbal action (mutual causation). Анасын да‚ яшын да мен тангала бавда гёрюшдюрежекмен “Tomorrow  I organize a meeting of mother and child in the garden.”

Table 11

 гёр-          +                      -юш-     aff. reciprocity      + -дюр-               =  гёрюшдюр-

“make meet”

compatibility/mutuality

causation


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

                                                                                                

adding participants (+ sometimes multiplying situation according to the number of participants)

Sb imp. + second causation: new participants of causation

2а. -с/с/с (// +  -с/с/с)


 


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections

terminative

 

Basics of the verbs that have inducing affixes (both transitive and intransitive) can take secondary inducing affixation and by that form verbs with even more advanced semantic relations at the level of participants in the situation. At the same time verb forms also acquire the ability to be combined with the complement in the dative case, which is the actual performer of the action, indicated by the original basis [5, p. 24]. Мен Вовагъа анасына кагъыз яздыртажакъман (M.Yagiyaev) “I will make Vova write a letter to his mother.”

Table 12

 яз             +              -дыр- aff. causative       + -т- aff. causative        =  яздырт-

«write»

impact

causation


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

                                                                                          

Sb imp.— +  second causation: new participants

Sb imp.— +  third causation: new participants

2а -с/с/с (// +  -с/с/с)


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections (double causation)

terminative

 

Basics of verbs that have inducing affixes (both transitive and intransitive) can take secondary affixation of the passive. This results in the removal of the participants of the situation. Бизин ёлугъув радиодан билдирилди “Our meeting was reported on the radio.”

Table 13

     бил           +            -дир- aff. causation     +    ил- aff. reflexive      =     билдирил-

“know”

impact

passivisation


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

Sb imp.— +  second causation: new participants


 

change of relations – participants compression


 

2а -с/с/с (// +  -с/с/с)


 


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections

terminative

 

Basics of the verbs with inducing affixes (both transitive and intransitive) can consistently increase inducing affixes (no more than three, and in some cases four affixes) to the same verbal basis [15, p. 104], [2, p. 93] and thereby form verbs with even more advanced semantic relations at the level of the participants of the situation: they are used to express actions, not committed by a second, third, and sometimes fourth person who is reached by the first person through the second and third person, for example, яздыртдыр- “force someone to force the third person and the third person forces the fourth one to write.” At that verb forms also acquire the ability to be combined with the object in the dative, which is the actual performer of an action, indicated by the original foundation.

Table 14

яз     +   -дыр- aff. causation + -т- aff. causation  + -дыр  aff. causation = яздыртдыр-

“write”

impact

impact

impact


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation


 

Sb imp.— +  second causation: new participants

Sb imp.— +  third causation: new participants

Sb imp.— +  fourth causation: new participants

2а -с/с/с (// +  -с/с/с)


 

change of situation at the level of participants and their connections

terminative

 

Accretion to the reflexive of the causation affix in the Kumyk language leads to the emergence of new participants of the causative situation: decausative situation becomes causative. Such causative can take a secondary affixation of the passive. This results in the removal of the participants of the situation.

Table 15

жый  + -ыш- aff. reflexive  + -дыр- aff. causation + -ыл aff. passive =  жыйышдырыл-

“collect”

compatibility

impact

passivisation


 

1а. Sb 1,2,3.. — (impact) -S —  Ob1.2 … —S-

complex causative situation

mutuality

Sb imp.— +  second causation: new participants

removal of participants (decausation)

2а -с/с/с (// +  -с/с/с)

change of relations at the level of participants and their connections (decausation)


 

 

Taking into account these considerations, it is possible to discuss the grammatical status of voice in the Turkic languages. Since at the actual voice derivation the lexicographical interpretation of the lexical unit is preserved (typical notes in Turkic dictionaries: induc. from …, revers. / compat. from …), then such a transformation can be considered as shaping a verb, like shaping the modes of verbal action, but it, like the latter one, is located in the border area (vibration area), as it may affect the denotative, word-formation and categorical grammar layers in language semantics [9, p. 104-112].

Список литературы / References:
  1. Бондарко А.В. Теория морфологических категорий. - Л., 1976.
  2. Геляева А.И. Словоизменительная и словообразовательная функции залоговых аф-фиксов в карачаево-балкарском языке. –Нальчик 1999.
  3. Гузев В.Г. Очерки по теории тюркского словоизменения: Глагол. - Л., 1990.
  4. Гузев В.Г., Насилов Д.М. Словоизменительные категории в тюркских языках и по-нятие “грамматическая категория” // Советская тюркология. Баку, 1981, № 3. - С. 33-34.
  5. Иванов С.Н. Курс турецкой грамматики. Ч.2. Грамматические категории глагола. Учебное пособие. –Л.: Изд-во ЛГУ‚ 1977.
  6. Кацнельсон С.Д. Типология языка и речевое мышление. - Л., 1972.
  7. ЛЭС - Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. - М., 1990.
  8. Насилов Д.М. К соотношению "лексическое значение глагола – залог": проблемы тюркского залога // Язык. Глагол. Предложение / К 70-летию Г.Г. Сильницкого. Смоленск, 2000. - С. 127-140
  9. Насилов Д.М. Проблемы тюркской аспектологии: Акциональность. - Л., 1989.
  10. Поливанов Е.Д. Введение в языкознание для востоковедных вузов. - Л., 1928.
  11. Реформатский А.А. Введение в языковедение. - М., 1967.
  12. Сильницкий Г.Г. Глагольная валентность и залог // Типология пассивных кон-струкций: Диатезы и залоги. - Л., 1974б.
  13. Сильницкий Г.Г. Семантические и валентностные классы английских каузативных глаголов / Автореф. дис. ... докт. филол. наук. - Л., 1974а.
  14. Сильницкий Г.Г. Структура глагольного значения и результатив // Типология ре-зультативных конструкций: Результатив, статив, пассив, перфект. - Л., 1983. - С. 54-65.
  15. Хангишиев Ж.М. Къумукъ тил. –Магьачкъала, 1995.
  16. Храковский В.С. Диатеза и референтность: К вопросу о соотношении активных, пассивных, рефлексивных и реципрокных конструкций // Теория языкознания. Русистика. Арабистика. - СПб., 1999. - С. 67-101.
  17. Храковский В.С. Пассивные конструкции // Теория языкознания. Русистика. Ара-бистика. - СПб., 1999. - С. 15-50.
  18. Щербак А.М. Очерки по сравнительной морфологии тюркских языков: Глагол. - Л., 1981.

Список литературы на английском / References in English:
  1. Bondarko A.V. Teorija morfologicheskih kategorij [Theory of morphological categories]. - L., 1976. [In Russian]
  2. Geljaeva A.I. Slovoizmenitel’naja i slovoobrazovatel’naja funkcii zalogovyh affiksov v karachaevo-balkarskom jazyke [Inflectional and word-formation functions of mortgage affixes in Karachaevo-Balkar language]. –Nal’chik 1999. [In Russian]
  3. Guzev V.G. Ocherki po teorii tjurkskogo slovoizmenenija: Glagol [Studies of the theory of Turkic word change: Verb]. - L., 1990. [In Russian]
  4. Guzev V.G., Nasilov D.M. Slovoizmenitel’nye kategorii v tjurkskih jazykah i ponjatie “grammaticheskaja kategorija” [Inflectional categories in Turkic languages and the concept "grammatical category"] // Sovetskaja tjurkologija [Soviet turkology]. Baku, 1981, № 3. - P. 33-34. [In Russian]
  5. Ivanov S.N. Kurs tureckoj grammatiki. Ch.2. Grammaticheskie kategorii glagola [Course of the Turkish grammar. P.2. Grammatical categories of a verb.]. Education guidance. –L.: Izd-vo LGU‚ 1977. [In Russian]
  6. Kacnelson S.D. Tipologija jazyka i rechevoe myshlenie [Typology of language and speech thinking]. - L., 1972. [In Russian]
  7. LES - Lingvisticheskij jenciklopedicheskij slovar’ [LED - Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary]. - M., 1990. [In Russian]
  8. Nasilov D.M. K sootnosheniju "leksicheskoe znachenie glagola – zalog": problemy tjurkskogo zaloga [On relation "lexical meaning of a verb – voice": problems of Turkic voice] // Jazyk. Glagol. Predlozhenie / K 70-letiju G.G. Sil’nickogo [Language. Verb. Sentence / On G.G. Silnitsky’s 70 anniversary]. Smolensk, 2000. - P. 127-140. [In Russian]
  9. Nasilov D.M. Problemy tjurkskoj aspektologii: Akcional’nost’ [Problems of Turkic aspectology: Aсtionality]. - L., 1989. [In Russian]
  10. Polivanov E.D. Vvedenie v jazykoznanie dlja vostokovednyh vuzov [Introduction to linguistics for the orientalist higher education institutions]. - L., 1928. [In Russian]
  11. Reformatskij A.A. Vvedenie v jazykovedenie [Introduction to linguistics]. - M., 1967. [In Russian]
  12. Silnickij G.G. Glagol’naja valentnost’ i zalog [Verbal valency and voice] // Tipologija passivnyh konstrukcij: Diatezy i zalogi [Typology of passive constructions: Diathesis and voices]. - L., 1974b. [In Russian]
  13. Silnickij G.G. Semanticheskie i valentnostnye klassy anglijskih kauzativnyh glagolov [Semantic and valency classes of English causal verbs] / Abstract of the thesis of the Doctor of Philology. - L., 1974a. [In Russian]
  14. Silnickij G.G. Struktura glagol’nogo znachenija i rezul’tativ [Structure of verbal value and resultative] // Tipologija rezul’tativnyh konstrukcij: Rezul’tativ, stativ, passiv, perfekt [Typology of resultative constructions: Resultative, stative, passive, perfect]. - L., 1983. - P. 54-65. [In Russian]
  15. Hangishiev Zh.M. Kumuk til [Kumyk]. – Makhachkala, 1995. [In Russian]
  16. Hrakovskij V.S. Diateza i referentnost’: K voprosu o sootnoshenii aktivnyh, passivnyh, refleksivnyh i reciproknyh konstrukcij [Diathesis and reference: To a question of relation between active, passive, reflexive and reciprocus constructions] // Teorija jazykoznanija. Rusistika. Arabistika [Theory of linguistics. Russian philology. Arabic studies.]. - SPb., 1999. - P. 67-101. [In Russian]
  17. Hrakovskij V.S. Passivnye konstrukcii [Passive constructions] // Teorija jazykoznanija. Rusistika. Arabistika [Theory of linguistics. Russian philology. Arabic studies.]. - SPb., 1999. - P. 15-50. [In Russian]
  18. Shherbak A.M. Ocherki po sravnitel’noj morfologii tjurkskih jazykov: Glagol [Studies of comparative morphology of Turkic languages: Verb]. - L., 1981. [In Russian]

Лицензия Creative Commons - Creative Common Licence
Это произведение доступно по – This material is available under Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная