CC BY
6
UDC 8r36+811.112.5+811.162.1+811.162.3
Wilken Engelbrecht
Univerzita Palackeho, Czech Republic
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawla II, Poland
Agnieszka Flor-Gorecka
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawla II, Poland
Katerina Krizova
Univerzita Palackeho, Czech Republic
A COMPARISON OF BI-ASPECTUAL VERBS BORROWED FROM
LATIN INTO DUTCH, CZECH AND POLISH
For citation: Engelbrecht W., Flor-Gorecka A., Krizova K. A comparison of bi-aspectual verbs borrowed from Latin into Dutch, Czech and Polish. Scandinavian Philology, 2021, vol. 19, issue 2, pp. 236-254. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu21.2021.202
West Germanic languages such as Dutch have a temporal system, but a typical feature of the Slavonic verb system is aspectuality. Most Slavonic borrowed or newly-formed verbs in the technical sphere are based on Latin, however, a language with a rather strict temporal system. Typically, such verbs are mostly borrowed as imperfec-tive (durative) verbs. This paper examines several such verbs and compares their integration into Dutch, Czech and Polish. Dutch has no morphological forms showing aspectuality. However, aspectuality is present, the difference is there a semantic one, between a dynamic or a static character. In this article, ten potentially bi-aspectual verbs borrowed from Latin are discussed, all of them having in Dutch a dynamic character. In Czech and Polish, such verbs will have after borrowing initially a bi-aspectual character. Depending on frequency of use, the verbs will become integrated by adding aspectual prefixes. This integration is illustrated for both Slavonic languages by sentences from recent press articles. Where in the Czech dictionaries, the majority of the analysed verbs are still described as bi-aspectual, it seems that Polish is much faster at changing Latin borrowed verbs into aspectual pairs. One should be, however, cautious as it is often dependent on which dictionary one consults whether a verb is marked as bi-aspectual or as imperfectivum tantum. Nevertheless, the general tendencies are clear.
Keywords: bi-aspectual verbs, Latin, Dutch, Czech, Polish, comparison.
No time is all at once present: and all time past, is driven on by time to come, and all to come followeth upon the past; and all past to come is created, and flows out of that which is ever present.
St. Augustine, Confessions, XI, 15
1. INTRODUCTION
Every speaker of another language group coming into contact with Slavonic languages has to deal with aspect. In short, most Slavonic verbs come in two main forms, one that accentuates the event (the imperfec-tive form) and one stressing the completion (the perfective form). Conversely, most Germanic languages have a temporal system, in which not the verbs themselves, but rather the tenses, appear in pairs indicating an unfinished (incomplete) or finished (complete) form. It is generally assumed that Proto-Indo-European had aspect, although this theory is not uncontroversial [Lehmann, 1993, p. 176-181; Comrie, 1981, p. 8889] against [Szemerényi, 1990, s. 332-341]. The presence of aspect in Gothic [Streitberg, 1891, s. 177-178) seems to support this, although, for example, the important Czech Anglicist-Netherlandist Bohumil Trnka [Trnka, 1982, p. 205) stated explicitly:
It is very hard for a Slavonic philologist to endorse the theory of the eminent scholar [Streitberg, 1891]. No period of transition in the system of the Germanic verbal system caused by a supposed loss of verbal aspects has been detected either by Streitberg himself, or by any of his followers, in the history of the Germanic languages, and in modern languages of the Germanic stock (even in English which has developed since the 15th and 16th centuries some periphrastic forms comparable, from the semasiological point of view, to the Slavonic imperfective aspect).
In contrast, the latest edition of the Algemene Nederlandse Spraak-kunst, hereafter ANS [Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst, 2021] assumes that Dutch has aspectuality as well, stating in § 30.1:1
1 Aspectualiteit zegt iets over de manier waarop de situatie in de tijd begrensd is en de manier waarop het verloop, de interne temporele geleding ervan, begrepen moet worden. Deze structurering is niet in de situatie zelf aanwezig, maar wordt er door ons aan toegekend door de keuze van de elementen in de zin die de betreffende situatie weergeeft. De aspectualiteit van een zin geeft dus aan hoe het concept dat wij van een
Aspectuality says something about the way in which the situation is delimited in time and the way in which its course, its internal temporal articulation, is to be understood. This structuring is not present in the situation itself, but is assigned to it by us through the choice of the elements in the sentence that represents the situation in question. The aspectuality of a sentence thus indicates how the concept we have of a given situation is structured.
Dutch strong verbs have a present root and a preterit root, which is often seen as a remnant of the aspectual situation of Proto-Germanic. Note that the circa 250 most-used verbs are almost all strong verbs belonging to the primal lexicon of Dutch [Van Loey, 1970, p. 157]. Dutch has, however, no pairing of semantically corresponding verbs that complement each other in aspect. After all, schrijven 'write' and opschrijven 'write down' do not form an aspectual pair, unlike their equivalents psat and napsat 'write' and pisac and napisac 'write' in Czech and Polish, respectively.
An interesting problem is formed by the so-called bi-aspectual verbs, which in Czech and Polish often originate from Latin, whether or not adopted through other languages. Since Latin has been the model for the current temporal system in Dutch, in this paper we subject a selection of these verbs to an investigation, examining in which aspectual class they are included in both Slavonic languages, which means are used to let them function in the aspectual system, and how they behave in the Dutch verb system.
2. ASPECTUALITY
The term aspect in Slavonic languages was first termed видь (vid), i.e. 'point of view', by the Russian grammarian Melety G. Smotrickyj (±1578-1633). For him, this means the morphological relationship between the base form of the verb and its derived forms that can be either inchoate or iterative [Hrbatsch, 1974, p. 116]. The terms aspekt and vid are both used for aspectuality in Slavonic languages, depending on the language. Czech speaks of dokonavy vid (perfect aspect) and nedokonavy vid (imperfect aspect). We give here the definition from the Prirucny mluvnice cestiny (Manual of Czech Grammar) [Karlik, Nekula, Rusinova, 2003, p. 318]2:
bepaalde situatie hebben, gestructureerd is. (All translations in this paper are made by the authors.)
2 Slovesnym videm (aspektem) rozumime ten fakt, ze ceské sloveso existuje ve dvou (az trech) podobach, které maji stejny lexikalni vyznam, ale odlisuji se od sebe vztahem
By the verbal aspect we understand the fact that the Czech verb exists in two (up to three) forms, which have the same lexical meaning, but differ from each other in relation to the completion of the action. The completive verbs (perfective) express the fact that the action has either been completed or that it will be completed (napsal jsem dopis — 'I wrote a letter, naptsu dopis — 'I will write a letter'). Incomplete verbs (imperfective) do not express the fact of the completion of the action: psal jsem dopis — 'I wrote a letter' (it is not clear whether the letter was finished); ptsu dopis — 'I am writing a letter'; budupsat dopis — 'I will write a letter'. It follows from the foregoing that completeness is excluded from the present. Therefore, perfective verbs exist only in the preterit and future.
Polish grammar speaks of aspect dokonany (perfect aspect) and aspect niedokonany (imperfect aspect). Aspect is described in the main grammar Gramatyka Wspolczesnego J§zyka Polskiego (Grammar of the Modern Polish Language, hereafter GWJP) thus [Grzegorczykowa, Las-kowski, Wrobel, 1999, p. 157]3:
Aspect is a non-deictive category used to signal differences in the perspective from which the speaker takes the phrase he is describing. Let us note that in certain contexts the same extra-linguistic situation can be described by means of the forms of the accomplished or the imperfect aspect (...). Although the situations described by the above parallel sentence expressions with perfective and imperfective verbs may be identical, this does not mean that the speaker is giving the same information about the situation in both cases. Depending on the use of the imperfective or the perfective aspect, the speaker's point of view of the described situation changes the way it is presented to the listener.
k zavrsenosti (ukoncenosti) deje. Slovesa dokonava (perfektivni) vyjadruji, ze dej bud' byl ukoncen, nebo ze bude zavrsen (napsal jsem dopis, napisu dopis). Slovesa nedoko-nava (imperfektivni) se k faktu ukonceni deje nevyjadruji: psal jsem dopis (neni jasno, zda byl dopis dopsan); pisu dopis; budu psat dopis. Z receneho plyne, ze se dokonavost vylucuje s pritomnosti. Perfektiva (dokonava slovesa) proto existuji jen v preteritu a futu-ru. (stressing ofthe original text). Compare as well [Short, 2002: 481-482] or the detailed explanation concerning aspect in the online dictionary Czech Ency — Novy encyklope-dicky slovnik cestiny, available at: https://www.czechency.org/slovnik/VID.
3 Aspekt jest kategori^ niedeiktyczn^, sluz^c^ sygnalizowaniu roznic perspektywy, w jakiej mowi^cy ujmuje opisywane przez siebie zdarzenie. Zauwazmy, ze w pewnych kontekstach ta sama sytuacja pozaj^zykowa moze bye opisana za pomoc^ form aspektu dokonanego lub niedokonanego (...). Sytuacje opisywane przez powyzsze paralelne wyra-zenia zdaniowe z czasownikami dokonanymi i niedokonanymi mog^ bye wprawdzie iden-tyczne, co nie znaczy, ze mowi^cy w obu wypadkach podaje t§ sam^ informaj o sytuacji. W zaleznosci od uzycia aspektu niedokonanego lub dokonanego zmienia si§ punkt widze-nia mowi^cego na opisywan^ sytuacj^, uj^cie, w jakim jest ona prezentowana sluchaczowi.
Considering the morphological composition of verbs, the most characteristic exponent of niedokonanosc (imperfectiveness) in Polish is the prefix and in the case of dokonanosc (perfectiveness) the suffix. The most common purely aspectual prefix in all West Slavonic languages is the unified prefix z-/s- [Eazinski, 2020, p. 78]. In order to identify a purely aspectual prefix, one has to make sure that no secondary, non-accomplished suffixal derivative is formed from the accomplished prefixal derivative. A similar approach to Czech prefixes is presented, for example, by Poldauf [Poldauf, 1954]. It is traditionally considered that imperfective verbs are formed via a suffix from the accomplished verbs, e.g. wskazywac from wskazac 'indicate'. Aspectual counterparts can also be suppletive, e.g. brac -wziqc 'take', and there are a few bi-aspectual verbs such as potrafic 'be able' which can be treated as homonyms and combined in 'pairs' like potrafic (imperfective) — potrafic (perfective). Sometimes, aspect is determined by a combination of the two ways mentioned above, e.g. suppletive derivation and prefixation, as in ktasc — potozyc 'lay, the accomplished suffix -nq- and stem replacement as in zamykac — zamknqc 'close', or the suffix -nq- and a sequence of perfective suffixes: nadszarpywac — nadszarpnqc 'jerk;'.
An important shift in the understanding of the term aspect is the definition given by the linguist Bernard Comrie (born 1947) in his study Aspect [Comrie, 1981, p. 3]: "Aspect are different ways of viewing the internal temporal constituency of a situation." This view is essential to the use of the term in the ANS. In this paper, the term "aspect" is used in its traditional Slavonic sense — verbs in derivationally linked pairs of which the perfective typically specifies completion of an act and the imperfective expresses the verbal action in general terms [cf. Short, 2002, p. 481; Grzegorczykowa, Laskowski, Wrobel, 1999, p. 161].
3. TEMPORALITY
Comrie [Comrie, 2004, p. 9] defines tense as the "grammaticalised expression of location in time." The ANS (2021, § 2.3.2.1) defines the term werkwoordstijd (verb tense) thus4:
One of the tasks of the verb tenses is to express whether the action mentioned
by the verb is to be situated before, during or after the moment of speech.
4 De werkwoordstijden hebben onder andere tot taak om uit te drukken of de door het werkwoord genoemde werking voor, tijdens of na het spreekmoment te situeren is.
The grammar explains this more concretely in § 2.4.8.15:
The "tenses" can be systematised under different points of view. (...) 1) First of all, in principle, the opposition of "near" versus "far" plays a role. With regard to the verb tenses, this is the opposition "PRESENT" (close to the moment of speech) — "PAST" (not close to, further away from the moment of speech). This opposition is reflected in two tenses: presens (present tense) and imper-fectum (imperfect tense). (...) 2) Next, there is the opposition of "finished" versus "unfinished" with respect to the action expressed by the verb. This opposition is expressed by the terms "COMPLETED" and "UNCOMPLETED". Completed means that the speaker has a certain point in mind while the event of which he speaks as a whole took place or is taking place before that point. Uncompleted means that the event took place or takes place overlapping with that point. (...) 3) The third opposition is between "forward" and "not forward", i.e. that the action expressed by the verb is projected into the future or that it is not. This opposition is expressed by the term "FUTURE", although the opposite concept ("not in the future") is not indicated by a separate term.
The ANS then gives in § 2.6 a scheme in which the described gram-maticalised oppositions have been visualised for all eight verb tenses of the Dutch indicative (Table 1).
A little bit confusing is the fact that most Dutch school grammars mention just the same six tenses that Latin has, leaving out the past-future tenses that were incorporated into the indicative tenses by the linguist Lammert A. te Winkel (1809-1868).These two "extra" tenses are rather used in situations where other Germanic languages express
5 De 'werkwoordstijden' kunnen onder verschillende gezichtspunten gesystema-tiseerd worden. (...) 1) Allereerst speelt in beginsel de tegenstelling 'dichtbij' versus 'veraf' een rol. Met betrekking tot de werkwoordstijden gaat het om de tegenstelling 'tegenwoordig' (dicht bij het spreekmoment) — Verleden' (niet dicht bij, verder verwijderd van het spreekmoment). Deze tegenstelling is terug te vinden in twee tempora: presens en imperfectum. (...) 2) Vervolgens is er de tegenstelling 'afgesloten' versus 'niet afgesloten' ten aanzien van de werking of handeling die door het werk-woord wordt uitgedrukt. Deze tegenstelling is verwoord door de termen 'voltooid' en 'onvoltooid'. Voltooid wil zeggen dat de spreker een bepaald punt in gedachten heeft terwijl het gebeuren waarover hij spreekt in zijn geheel plaatsvond of -vindt voor dat punt. Onvoltooid betekent dat het gebeuren plaatsvond of -vindt overlappend met dat punt. (...) 3) De derde tegenstelling is die tussen 'naar voren toe' en 'niet naar vo-ren toe, dat wil zeggen dat de door het werkwoord uitgedrukte werking of handeling in de toekomst geprojecteerd is of dat zulks niet het geval is. Deze tegenstelling wordt door de term 'toekomend' uitgedrukt, waarbij het tegengestelde begrip ('niet in de toekomst') evenwel niet door een aparte term wordt aangegeven.
Table 1. The eight verb tenses of the Dutch indicative
The features of verb tenses English translation Completed Past Future
presens (o.t.t.) present - - -
imperfectum (o.v.t.) imperfect - + -
perfectum (v.t.t.) perfect + - -
plusquamperfectum (v.v.t.) pluperfect + + -
futurum (o.t.t.t.) future - - +
futurum exactum (v.t.t.t.) future perfect + - +
futurum praeteriti (o.v.t.t.) future in the past - + +
futurum exactum praeteriti (v.v.t.t.) future perfect in the past + + +
a conjunctive mode. The Dutch temporal system may be described as, generally, an absolute tense system, taking the present moment as the deictic centre [cf. Comrie, 2004, p. 36]. That the past-future tenses do not fit into this system is clear by trying to visualise the Dutch tenses in relation to the present moment (Figure)6.
o.v.t. o.t.t. o.t.t.t.
i i i I* i i
v.v.t. v.t.t. v.t.t.t.
Figure. Dutch tenses and time
Traditionally, the uncompleted tenses (onvoltooide tijden) refer to a reference moment in the past (o.v.t.), present (o.t.t.) or future (o.t.t.t.) in relation to the moment of speaking, while the completed tenses (voltooide tijden) refer to an action that was completed at a reference moment in the past (v.v.t.), present (v.t.t.) or future (v.t.t.t.) in relation to the moment of speaking. In the case of the future in the past, the tense refers to a reference moment in the past for which the action had to take place in the (then) fu-
6 We are using here the traditional Dutch abbreviations of the tenses, cf. the schema above. The black dot is the deictic centre.
ture.7 In the case of the future perfect in the past, one needs two past reference points: one moment R1, when the speaker (then) expected something to happen and that should be finished by moment R2 which would be later, but before the moment of speaking (ANS § 2.4.2.8.i example 7).
On the contrary, both Czech and Polish have just three tenses, past tense in both aspects, present tense, and a periphrastic future tense in the imperfective aspect, and the future tense in the perfect aspect expressed by present-time forms of the perfective verb [Short, 2002, p. 481; Rothstein, 2002, p. 710-711].
4. THE CASE OF BI-ASPECTUAL VERBS
All of the languages mentioned have borrowed many words over time, including verbs from other languages. Most borrowed verbs are in the technical, medical and legal spheres, often originating from Latin or Greek. Foreign verbs with a Latin or Greek base are relatively frequent in Dutch; the most recent edition of the official orthographic list [Het Groene Boekje. Woordenlijst Nederlandse Taal, 2015] has some 850 verbs of this type. All of them are weak verbs with the ending -eren.
From the Czech and the Polish point of view, bi-aspectual verbs are often — but not exclusively — of foreign origin. According to the Czech view, they can signalise both aspects in their original form. Lubos Vesely [Vesely, 2010, p. 112] gives the example of the form analyzujeme that may signify provedeme analyzu 'we will analyse' as well as provâdîme analyzu 'we analyse/are analysing'. Verbs which are frequently used have a tendency to become integrated into the customary aspectual system by adding an aspectual prefix that forms the lacking aspectual counterpart, in our case the perfective one. Vesely [Vesely, 2010, p. 121] and Janecka and Navratova [Janecka, Navratova, 2020, p. 232] give the example of realizovat that forms the counterpart zrealizovat with the aspectual prefix z-. As François Esvan [Esvan, 2007, p. 35] shows, this is the usual process in all Slavonic languages, but it takes time before such verbs are so integrated that they receive a clear aspectual counterpart. Such an aspectual counterpart is formed in the same way as in the case of other verbs, e.g. in Polish zainteresowac is formed from interesowac.
7 Note that this "past future" can be past, as well as future seen from the moment of speaking (ANS § 2.4.2.8.i example 5).
Table 2. Percentage appearance of aspectual verbs in Polish according to tazinski
Pairs Prefixed Imperfective without prefix 2509 — 8 % Perfective with prefix 2509 — 8 %
Suffixed Imperfective with a paradigmatic and suppletive formant 6582 — 22 % Perfective with a paradigmatic and suppletive formant 6582 — 22 %
Imperfective without suffix paired with perfective verb with suffix-nq-930 — 3 % Perfective with suffix-n^-930 — 3 %
Paired verbs (totals) 20,042 — 66 %
Imperfective paired 10,021 — 33 % Perfective paired 10,021 — 33 %
Bi-aspectual verbs 179 — 0.5 % (included with perfective and imperfective verbs)
Non-paired verbs Imperfectiva tantum 4180 — 13.5 % Perfectiva tantum 6459 — 21.5 %
Total of non-paired verbs 10639 — 35 %
Total of all verbs 30186 — 100 %
Imperfective 10,431 — 47 % Perfective 16,480 — 53 %
In Czech and Polish, such borrowed verbs generally lack the typical aspectual pair and are, at least initially, bi-aspectual, as is the case mostly in Czech and for many Polish borrowings. Interestingly, such verbs are often automatically classified as imperfective. In Polish, such verbs may end up even as imperfectivum tantum. Marek tazinski [tazinski, 2020, p. 44, table 2, p. 45], in his recent study on the aspect of Polish verbs Wyktady o Aspekcie Polskiego Czasownika (Lectures on Polish Verbal Aspect), classified just 179 verbs as bi-aspectual, i.e. some half a percent out of the total of some 30,860 verbs in the Stownik Gramatyczny J^zyka Polskiego (Grammatical Dictionary of the Polish Verb, hereafter SGJP). tazinski [tazinski, 2020, p. 80] remarks that the Czech Slovnik spisovneho jazyka ceskeho (Dictionary of the Written Czech Language, 1960-1971, hereafter SSJC) has some 800 bi-aspectual verbs. Of the 138 bi-aspectual verbs mentioned by Waclaw Cockiewicz [Cockiewicz, 2007, p. 17], just 12 (8.7 %) are originally Polish, all of the others are originally Latin — whether im-
mediately borrowed or through other languages. All Polish verbs that we analyse here have the suffix -owac, corresponding to the Dutch ending -eren. Zygmunt Saloni [Saloni, 2007, p. 105] remarks that they are conjugated according to the paradigm generally used for Polish verbs borrowed from foreign languages or newly formed (some 25 % of all verbs), such aslogowac, kserowac or monitorowac. In their Strukturalny Slownik As-pektowy Czasownikow Polskich [Cockiewicz, Matlak, 1995], Cockiewicz and Matlak identified, of the total number of some 12,000 Polish verbs, 205 imperfectiva tantum and 241 perfectiva tantum, altogether 3.7 % of all the verbs. Tazinski structures them thus (Table 2):
From the list of the verbs in Cockiewicz [Cockiewicz, 2007] and the list we made up according to Het Groene Boekje, we chose ten verbs of this type, considering mainly the examples mentioned by Cockiewicz in his paper. The verbs of foreign origin analysed here are: argumenteren 'to argument, censureren 'to censor, exporteren 'to export, integreren 'to integrate', motiveren 'to motivate', normaliseren 'to normalise, promoveren 'to promote, rapporteren 'to report, respecteren 'to respect' and simuleren 'to simulate'. We will characterise these Dutch borrowed verbs from the point of aspectuality and look at whether their Czech and Polish equivalents are bi-aspectual or not, as well as how they have been (or are on the way to being) integrated into the Czech and Polish aspectual system.
5. CZECH AND POLISH EQUIVALENTS OF THE SELECTED VERBS
The Czech and Polish equivalents of the selected potentially bi-as-pectual verbs are:
• Czech8: argumentovat, cenzurovat, exportovat, integrovat, motivovat, normalizovat, promovat, raportovat,9 respektovat and simulovat;
• Polish: argumentowac, cenzurowac, eksportowac, integrowac, motywowac, normalizowac, promowac, raportowac, respektowac and symulowac [Cockiewicz, 2007, p. 17].
8 We used the online accessible dictionaries Akademicky slovnik cizich slov (Academic Dictionary of Foreign Words, hereafter ASCS), Slovnik spisovne cestiny (Dictionary of Written Czech, hereafter SSC), available at: https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz, and SSJC.
9 In Czech, the verb raportovat is considered to be archaic — see the explanation in the dictionaries ASCS and SSJC, available at: https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?slo-vo=raportovat.
6. THE SELECTED GROUP IN DUTCH
According to the ANS (§ 30.3.2.1), for the aspectuality of Dutch verbs it is important whether they have a dynamic or a static character, i.e. whether the verb represents an activity or process in which there is a certain development in time, or that eventual objects and adverbial clauses have no influence on the aspectual information. In the first case, for static verbs, it depends on circumstances such as objects and adverbials whether the verb has a terminative or a durative (the equivalent of Slavonic imperfective) aspect, and in the second case the aspect is considered to be terminative — the equivalent of the Slavonic perfective [cf. Flor-Gorecka, 2016, p. 10-15].
None of the selected verbs in our group has a real static character, as all represent activities. They can be mostly used as terminative as well, if the verb can have a direct object. Here we give some examples based on Delpher.10
• Kinderen leren argumenteren en hun mening aanscherpen. (NRC 11-10-2003; durative) (Children learn to argue and to sharpen their opinion).
• Een probleem is als auteurs hun eigen boeken zijn gaan censureren (Het Parool, 14-04-1995, terminative) (A problem is when authors started to censor their own books).
• In de eerste elf maanden van 1994 exporteerden Nederlandse bedri-jven volgens het CBS voor 7 miljard gulden naar Japan (De Volksk-rant, 22-03-1995, durative) (In the first eleven months of 1994, according to CBS, Dutch enterprises exported 7 billion guilders worth of goods to Japan).
• De landelijke overheid vond het tijd dat Molukkers integreerden met Nederlanders (Trouw, 09-10-1995, durative) (The national authorities believed that it was time to integrate the Moluccans with the Dutch).
• Het zal werkelozen niet snel motiveren om voor minder dan het minimumloon te werken (Algemeen Dagblad, 28-02-1995, durative) (This wouldn't motivate unemployed persons to work for less than the minimumwage).
• Baars wil die concurrentieverhoudingen weer normaliseren door het leerlingwezen goedkoper te maken (De Volkskrant, 25-03-1995, ter-
10 Available at: www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/.
minative) (Baars would like to normalise the competitive situation by making apprenticeships cheaper).
• ... waarna Lankohr de terug gelegde bal van Simons met een gave voetbeweging tot doelpunt promoveerde (Trouw, 25-11-1995, ter-minative) (. where upon Lankohr converted Simon's returned ball into a goal with a cool footmovement).
• Nu rapporteren de vier krijgsmachtdelen alle vier direct aan de minister, op onderscheiden niveaus (Algemeen Dagblad, 29-08-1995, durative) (Now, all four branches of the armed forces report directly to the minister, at different levels).
• Zo'n publiek bestel respecteert de geschiedenis (Trouw, 28-12-1995, durative) (Such a public system respects history).
• We hebben een calamiteit in Italie gesimuleerd (De Volkskrant, 0605-1995, terminative) (We simulated a disaster in Italy).
• Just one verb from this selection seems to have only a durative aspect, argumenteren. Its perfective counterpart can be formed by adding the prefix be-: Iedere student zal zijn voorkeur achteraf met overtuig-ing beargumenteren (De Volkskrant, 11-01-1995 — Each student will argue their preference afterwards with conviction). This prefix has, in Dutch, a similar function to z-/s- in the Slavonic languages, with the difference that it slightly changes the meaning of the verb.
7. THE SELECTED GROUP IN CZECH
Of the selected group, the verbs cenzurovat 'to censor, exportovat 'to export', integrovat 'to integrate, motivovat 'to motivate', normalizovat 'to normalise' and promovat 'to promote' are, in Czech, bi-aspectual according to the standard dictionaries. The remaining four verbs argumentovat 'to argument', raportovat 'to report, respektovat 'to respect' and simulovat 'to simulate' are considered to be imperfective tantum.11
The Czech synchronic written corpus SYN version 812 shows a tendency concerning all of the aforementioned bi-aspectual verbs to inte-
11 In the forthcoming Academic Dictionary of Contemporary Czech, however, the verb cenzurovat is characterised only as imperfective — see: https://slovnikcestiny.cz/ heslo/cenzurovat/0/10501
12 SYN version 8 is the most extensive synchronic written corpus of contemporary Czech, with a word count of 4.5 billion words. The dominant component is journalism; for more details see: https://wiki.korpus.cz/doku.php/en:cnk:syn:verze8
grate themselves into the Czech aspectual system by adding a perfective prefix — see Table 3. For perfect forms, in addition to the typically perfect prefix z-,13 the prefixes vy-, za-, na-, od- are documented as well. It should be mentioned, however, that the relative frequency of prefixed verbs functioning as perfective forms was significantly lower than the relative frequency of the base forms in the SYN corpus version 8 (see Table 3).
Table 3. Frequency of aspectual forms of borrowed verbs in Czech
Verb Relative frequency in SYN version 8 (ipm14) Perfective aspectual counterpart Relative frequency in SYN version 8 (ipm)
cenzurovat 0.65 zcenzurovat 0.07
exportovat 2.71 vyexportovat 0.05
integrovat 4.16 zaintegrovat 0.03
zintegrovat 0.01
motivovat 17.33 namotivovat 0.58
zmotivovat 0.01
normalizovat 0.5 znormalizovat 0.08
promovat 0.96 odpromovat 0.1
With regard to the imperfective verbs argumentovat and simulovat, the use of perfect forms created by prefixation was recorded (Table 4):
Table 4. Frequency of argumentovat and simulovat and their aspectual counterparts
Verb Relative frequency in SYN version 8 (ipm) Perfective aspectual counterpart Relative frequency in SYN version 8 (ipm)
argumentovat 15.5 vyargumentovat 0.1
zargumentovat 0.01
simulovat 3.13 nasimulovat 0.32
13 Cf. Kolarova, 2013, p. 271.
14 The abbreviation ipm stands for "instances per million".
For only two of the imperfective verbs of the verbs analysed — ra-portovat and respektovat — has the existence of perfect forms not been demonstrated. These two imperfective verbs do not form an aspectual pair with another verb in contemporary Czech, and may be considered to be imperfectiva tantum.
8. THE SELECTED GROUP IN POLISH
In Polish, all of the verbs selected are noted in Cockiewicz' dictionary as bi-aspectual. Saloni, however, notes only promowac and eksportowac as bi-aspectual. The WSJPWD confirms Saloni's interpretation, but notes promowac as imperfective. The rather unclear situation of these verbs in Polish may be illustrated by the following sentences:
• Ale jednego nam nie zabrano — naszych umystów i zdolnosci, ar-gumentowali na przyktad sygnatariusze wspomnianej wczesniej deklaracji. 'But one thing was not taken away from us — our minds and abilities, the signatories of the aforementioned declaration argued, for example' [Bendyk Edwin, Zatruta Studnia: Rzecz o Wtadzy i Wolnosci, 2002 — imperfective]. Saloni has no perfective counterpart.
• Wtadze koscielne badaty i cenzurowaly „Dzienniczek". 'The Church authorities investigated and censored "Dzienniczek" ' [Polityka no. 2243, 29-04-2000 — imperfective]. Saloni mentions ocenzurowac as the perfective counterpart.
• Kiedys Walim eksportowal wyroby z lnu nawet do Australii i Japonii. 'Walim exported linen products even to Australia and Japan' [Gazeta Wyborcza, 03-11-1993 — imperfective]. Saloni gives wyeksportowac as the perfective counterpart.
• Maty Antos integrowal si§ z góralami, biegat za owcami, tygodniami nie myt si§ i nie czytat, postugiwat si§ wytqcznie gwarq, tak zepo pow-rocie na Mazowsze musiat na nowo uczyc si§ j^zyka literackiego. 'Little Antos integrated himself with the highlanders, ran after sheep, did not wash or read for weeks, and spoke only the local dialect, so that after his return to Mazovia he had to learn the literary language anew' [Tygodnik Podhalanski no. 3, 2000 — imperfective]. Saloni gives zintegrowac as the perfective counterpart.
• Do wszystkiego musz§ si§ — moze nie zmuszac — ale bardzo silnie motywowac. 'I have to motivate myself to do everything — maybe
not force myself — but very strongly' [CKM no. 11, 2000 — imperfective]. Saloni gives umotywowac as the perfective counterpart, but, depending on the context, zmotywowac may be used as a perfective counterpart as well.
• Nie mozna bowiem standaryzowac i normalizowac jakiegos testu na probie studentow, a potem stosowac go nie tylko do studentow, czy przede wszystkim do nie-studentow. 'It is not possible to standardise and normalise a test based on a sample of students and then apply it not only to students, or especially to non-students' [Jerzy Brzezinski, Metodologia badan psychologicznych, 1996 — imperfective]. Saloni gives znormalizowac as the perfective counterpart.
• Nie promowal swoich poglqdow, nie przekonywal nas, ze to on ma racj§, a nie my — dodaje Jerzy (...). 'He did not promote his views, he did not convince us that he was right and not us," adds Jerzy' [Urbanek Mariusz, Kisielewscy: Jan August, Zygmunt, Stefan, Wacek, 2006 — noted as imperfective]. Saloni has no perfective counterpart.
• Co wi^cej, wszyscy ci ubezpieczyciele raportowali, ze ich przypis skladki zwi^kszyl si§ w porownaniu z minionym rokiem. 'Moreover, all of these insurers reported that their written premiums had increased, compared to the previous year' [Artur Makowiecki, Gazeta Ubezpieczeniowa, 17-03-2009 — imperfective]. Saloni gives zaraportowac as the perfective counterpart.
• Kodyfikacja Chlodwiga respektowala t§ zasad§ z jednym, znamien-nym wyjqtkiem. 'Chlodwig's codification respected this principle, with one notable exception' [Karol Modzelewski, Barbarzynska Europa, 2004]. Saloni has no perfective counterpart.
• Rzeczywiscie wyglqdala nie najlepiej. Oczywiscie symulowala. 'She really did not look good. She was obviously pretending [= simulating]' [Piotr Krawczyk, Plamka swiatla, 1997 — imperfective]. Saloni mentions its perfective counterpart as zasymulowac.
The approximation of the meaning of the prefix and the lexical meaning of the stem is the most important criterion for the choice of the prefix for the correct accomplished equivalent: napisac for pisac 'write, ogolicsi§ for golicsi§ 'shave' and przeczytac for czytac 'read'. The emergence of such a prefixal aspectual pair is usually preceded by the stage of an aspectual triad functioning with secondary imperfectives, such as napisywac, przeczytywac or ogalac. This stage may be omit-
ted, as is visible especially in recent borrowings such as referowac, faksowac, mailowac, forwardowac, backupowac. In Polish, such verbs usually take a prefix which matches the meaning of the stem, often the most frequent and semantically least-loaded prefix: z-ls-ls-: zamailowac as in zatelefonowac, przeforwardowac as in przeslac, zbackupowac as in skopiowac [Lazinski, 2020, p. 73]. This prefix gives rise to the corresponding perfective verbs, such as zinterpretowac or zorganizowac [Lazinski, 2020, p. 79].
9. CONCLUSIONS
In the Czech dictionaries, the majority of the analysed verbs are described as bi-aspectual, a smaller part of them are imperfective. In both languages, the interpretation of a verb as bi-aspectual or as an imperfec-tivum tantum is often dependent on which dictionary one consults [cf. Lazinski, 2020, p. 78], who remarks that the group has no clear outline). Thus, e.g. integrovat is bi-aspectual according to the Akademicky slovnik cizich slov (Academic Dictionary of Foreign Words) and the Slovnik spi-sovne cestiny (Dictionary of Written Czech), but imperfectivum tantum in the SSJC. Similarly, motywowac is seen as bi-aspectual by Cockiewicz [Cockiewicz, 2007, p. 17], but the Wielki Slownik J^zyka Polskiego (The Great Dictionary of the Polish Language) edited by Witold Do-roszewski15 marks it only as ndk (imperfective), whilst its counterpart umotywowac is perfective.
The discussion above shows that derivations from Latin (whether or not via other languages) in Czech and Polish are primarily considered to be imperfective. This corresponds with the basically durative aspect in Dutch for the selected group, as most of them are verbs representing an activity. In Polish, such verbs usually stay bi-aspectual for just a short while. In a later phase, they are interpreted as imperfective and, mostly with the prefix z- or s-, a perfective counterpart is formed. Thus, the bi-aspectuality, being an irregularity in the Polish system, is changed into a regular aspectual pair. In Czech, a similar tendency is visible, but the integration of foreign verbs through bi-aspectuality via their interpretation as imperfective only, and the final formation of aspectual pairs by adding a standard aspectual prefix, seems to be slower. Moreover, this tendency does not apply equally and without exception to all verbs.
15 Available at: http://doroszewski.pwn.pl/haslo/motywowac/ Скандинавская филология. 2021. Т. 19. Вып. 2 251
REFERENCES
Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst, 3rd ed. (online only), started May 2021. Available at: https://e-ans.ivdnt.org/ (accessed: 30.08.2021).
Cockiewicz W., Matlak A. Strukturalny Stownik Aspektowy Czasownikow Polskich. Krakow: Uniwersytet Jagiellonski, 1995. 121 s.
Cockiewicz W. 'Na Peryferiach Aspektu'. LingVaria, 2, 2007, no. 4. P. 9-25.
Comrie B. Aspect. An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981 (corrected reprint of the 1973 edition).
Comrie B. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004 (8th printing of the 1985 edition).
Esvan F. Vidovä morfologie ceskeho slovesa. Praha: Nakladatelstvi Lidove noviny. 2007. 344 s.
Flor-Gorecka A. Aspekt i Consecutio Temporum w J^zykach Polskim i Niderlan-dzkim. Roczniki Humanistyczne, 64, 2016, no. 6. P. 7-13.
Grzegorczykowa R., Laskowski R., Wrobel H. Gramatyka Wspotczesnego Jfzyka Polskiego. Morfologia. 3rd ed., rev. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 1999. 634 s.
Het Groene Boekje. WoordenlijstNederlandse Taal. Utrecht: Van Dale & Den Haag: Taalunie, 2015. 1207 s.
Hrbatsch O. Meletij Smotrickyj, Hrammatiki Slavenskija Pravilnoe Syntagma. Jevje 1619. Kirchenslavische Grammatik (Erstausgabe). Specimina Philologiae Sla-vonicae, 4. Frankfurt/Main: Kubon & Sagner, 1974. 302 s.
Janecka M., Navratova M. K vyvojovym tendencim vybranych obouvidovych sloves v cestine. Casopis pro modernt filologii, 102, 2020, no. 2. S. 21-272.
Karlik P., Nekula M., Rusinova Z. Prirucnt mluvnice cestiny. 2nd ed. Praha: Nakladatelstvi Lidove noviny, 2003. 799 s.
Kolarova I. Tvoreni sloves: prefixalni derivaty. In: (ed.) F. Sticha, Akademickä gramatika spisovne cestiny. Praha: Academia, 2013. S. 241-271.
Kren M. et al. Corpus SYN, version 8 from 12. 12. 2019. Praha: Üstav Ceskeho narodniho korpusu FF UK, 2019. Available at: http://www.korpus.cz (accessed: 30.08.2021).
Lehmann W. P. Theoretical Bases of Indo-European Linguistics. London & New York: Routledge, 1993. 340 p.
Lazinski M. Wyktady o Aspektu Polskiego Czasownika. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2020. 315 s.
Narodowy Korpus Jfzyka Polskiego. Available at: http://www.nkjp.uni.lodz.pl/ (accessed: 30.08.2021).
Nübler N., Biskup, P. & Kresin, S. Vid [Aspect]. In: Petr Karlik, Marek Nekula & Jana Pleskalova (eds), Czech Ency — Novy encyklopedicky slovntk cestiny. 2017. Available at: https://www.czechency.org/slovnik/VID (accessed: 30.08.2021).
Poldauf I. Spojovani s predponami pri tvoreni dokonavych sloves v cestine, Slovo a slovesnost, 15, 1954. P. 49-65.
Rothstein R. A. Polish. In: B. Comrie, G. G. Corbett (eds), The Slavonic Languages.
London; New York: Routledge, 2002. P. 686-758. Saloni Z. Czasownik Polski. Odmiana. Slownik. Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna, 2007. 259 s.
Short D. Czech. In: B. Comrie, G. G. Corbett (eds), The Slavonic Languages. London; New York: Routledge, 2002. P. 455-532. Streitberg W. Perfective und Imperfective Actionsart im Germanischen. Beiträge
zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, 15, 1891. S. 70-177. Szemerenyi O. Einführung in die Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft. 4th ed., rev.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1990. 395 s. Trnka B. Selected Papers in Structural Linguistics. Contributions to English and General Linguistics written in the years 1928-1978. Ed. Vilem Fried. Janua Linguarum Series Maior, 88. Berlin; New York; Amsterdam: Mouton Publishers, 1982. 392 s.
Van Loey A. Schönfelds Historische Grammatica van het Nederlands: Klankleer,
Vormleer, Woordvorming. Zutphen: W. J. Thieme, 1970. 372 s. Vesely L. Ke slovesnemu vidu v cestine. Nase fee, 93, 2010, no. 3. P. 113-124. Wielki Slownik Jfzyka Polskiego. 2018. Available at: www.wsjp.pl (accessed: 30.08.2021).
Вилкен Энгельбрехт
Университет Палацкого, Чехия
Католический университет Люблина имени Иоанна Павла II, Польша Агнешка Флор-Горецка
Католический университет Люблина имени Иоанна Павла II, Польша
Катержина Кржижова
Университет Палацкого, Чехия
СРАВНЕНИЕ ДВУХАСПЕКТНЫХ ГЛАГОЛОВ, ЗАИМСТВОВАННЫХ ИЗ ЛАТИНСКОГО ЯЗЫКА В ГОЛЛАНДСКИЙ, ЧЕШСКИЙ И ПОЛЬСКИЙ ЯЗЫКИ
Для цитирования: Engelbrecht W., Flor-Gorecka A., Kfizovä K. A comparison of bi-aspectual verbs borrowed from Latin into Dutch, Czech and Polish // Скандинавская филология. 2021. Т. 19. Вып. 2. С. 236-254. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu21.2021.202
Западногерманские языки, такие как нидерландский, имеют темпоральную систему, но типичной чертой славянской глагольной системы является аспек-туальность. Большинство славянских заимствованных или новообразованных глаголов в технической сфере основаны на латыни — языке с довольно строгой временной системой. Как правило, такие глаголы заимствуются в основном в имперфективной (длительной) форме. В данной работе рассматриваются несколько таких глаголов и сравнивается их интеграция в голландский, чешский и польский языки. В голландском языке нет морфологических форм, демонстрирующих аспектуальность. Тем не менее аспектуальность присутствует, но разли-
чие выражается семантически и имеет динамический или статический характер. В данной статье рассматриваются десять потенциально двухаспектных глаголов, заимствованных из латинского языка, все они имеют в голландском языке динамический характер. В чешском и польском языках такие глаголы после заимствования изначально будут иметь двухаспектный характер. В зависимости от частоты употребления, глаголы интегрируются при помощи добавления аспек-туальных префиксов. Эта интеграция для обоих славянских языков иллюстрируется предложениями из недавних статей в прессе. Если в чешских словарях большинство анализируемых глаголов все еще описываются как двухаспектные, то польский язык, похоже, гораздо быстрее превращает латинские заимствованные глаголы в аспектуальные пары. Однако следует проявлять осторожность, так как часто от словаря зависит, будет ли глагол помечен как двухаспектный или как imperfectivum tantum. Тем не менее общие тенденции очевидны.
Ключевые слова: двухаспектные глаголы, латинский язык, голландский язык, чешский язык, польский язык, сравнение.
Wilken Engelbrecht
Full Professor of Dutch and of Literary Theory, Katedra neerlandistiky FF, Univerzita Palackeho v Olomouci, 512/10, Krizkovskeho, Olomouc, 771 80, Czech Republic E-mail: wilken.engelbrecht@upol.cz
Instytut J^zykoznawstwa WNH, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawla II, 14, al. Raclawickie (CN-006), Lublin, 20-950, Poland E-mail: wilken.engelbrecht@kul.pl
Agnieszka Flor-Gorecka
Senior Lecturer of Dutch Language,
Instytut J^zykoznawstwa WNH, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawla II, 14, al. Raclawickie (CN-006), Lublin, 20-950, Poland E-mail: agnieszka.flor-gorecka@kul.pl
Katerina Krizova
Senior Lecturer of Dutch Linguistics,
Katedra nederlandistiky FF, Univerzita Palackeho v Olomouci, 512/10, Krizkovskeho, Olomouc, 771 80, Czech Republic E-mail: katerina.krizova@upol.cz
Received: August 30, 2021 Accepted: October 8, 2021
