ON THE PROBLEM OF THE DOUBLET PHENOMENON OF THE INFINITIVE AND THE SUPINE IN CONTEMPORARY ROMANIAN
https://doi.org/10.24833/2410-2423-2018-2-14-5-13
Abstract
This paper focuses on the common syntactic usage of the Infinitive and the Supine in the contemporary Romanian language. These two non-finite verbal forms continue to represent an extremely debated issue, because of their unusual diachronic change – in the process of the evolution of Romanian the long Infinitive has been nominalized while the verbal Noun (nominal Supine), on the contrary, has developed gradually into the verbal Supine. As a result of this process in the Romanian language have appeared and coexist two non-finite verbal forms which are often used in the same syntactic positions. Most studies regarding the problems of the Infinitive and the Supine were dedicated to the competition of these forms with the Conjunctive, but the goal of this paper is to research the syntactic behavior of these two forms and the relationship within this pair. The comparative analysis of the common syntactic positions of the Infinitive and the Supine and of their distribution within every syntactic position allowed us to draw the conclusion that the Infinitive and the Supine have a rich set of common syntactic functions, but there is no complete functional similarity between them. Each form demonstrates its own list of semanticgrammatical characteristics, different valence, compatibility and stylistic selectivity that determines its syntactic behavior.
About the Author
Anna S. Kabanova
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
76, Prospect Vernadskogo, Moscow, 119454
Anna S. Kabanova – PhD, Senior Lecturer of Department of Languages of Central and South-Eastern European Countries, MGIMO University (Moscow, Russia). Spheres of research and professional interest: Romanian grammar, comparative grammar of the Romance languages, syntax and literary translation.
References
1. Gabinskii M. A. Vozniknovenie infinitiva kak vtorichnyi balkanskii iazykovoi protsess. [The Emergence of the infinitive as a secondary Balkan language process]. Leningrad: Nauka [Science], 1967, p. 279.
2. Kabanova A. S. Nelichnye formy glagola v sovremennom rumynskom iazyke: kompleksnyi analiz: avtoreferat dis. kand. filol. nauk [The non-finite verbal forms in the contemporary Romanian language: complex analisys. Doct. Diss] Moscow: MGIMOUniversitet [MGIMO-University] 2012. p.18.
3. Lukht L.I. Sravnitel’no-sopostavitel’naia grammatika romanskikh iazykov. Rumynskii iazyk. [Comparative grammar of the Romance languages. The Romanian language]. Moscow: Nauka [Science], 1970. p. 218.
4. Referovskaia E. A. Istoki analitizma romanskikh iazykov [The origins of analytism of the Romance languages]. Moscow: LKI, 2007, p. 152.
5. Sveshnikova T. N. Nekotorye nabliudeniia nad sintaksisom priglagol’nogo i prisubstantivnogo infinitiva v balkanskikh iazykakh. Slavianskoe i balkanskoe iazykoznanie. Iazyk v etnokul’turnom aspekte. [Some observations over the verbal and the nominal syntactic constructions with the infinitive in the Balkan languages. Slavic and Balkan linguistics. Language in ethnocultural aspect]. Moscow, 1984. pp. 69-79.
6. Sveshnikova T. N. Osnovnye tipy konstruktsii s otglagol’nym imenem v balkanskikh iazykakh. [The main types of verbal noun constructions in the Balkan languages]. Sov. slavianovedenie. [Soviet Slavic studies] no. 2, 1979. pp. 80-94.
7. Tariverdieva M.A. Nelichnye formy latinskogo glagola i modal’nost’. [The non-finite verbal forms of the Latin verb and modality].// Colloquia Classica et Indogermanica – IV. Trudy ILI RAN [Proc. ILI RSA]– V. IV. P. 1. S.-Petersburg, 2008. p. 261-274.
8. Caragiu-Marioțeanu M. Moduri nepersonale. Studii și cercetări lingvistice, XIII, 1, 1962. P. 24-44.
9. Dragomirescu A. Observații despre supinul nominal și relația cu infinitivul nominal în texte din secolul al XVI-lea. Lucrările celui de-al cincilea Simpozion Internațional de Lingvistică, Bucureşti: Editura Univers Enciclopedic Gold, 2015. P. 252-263.
10. Dragomirescu A. Particularități sintactice ale limbii române în context romanic. Supinul, Bucureşti: Editura Muzeului Național al Literaturii Române, 2013. P. 294.
11. Eliade M. Pe strada mântuleasa. Madrid: Caiete inorogului, 1968. P. 127.
12. Eminescu M. Cezara. Proză literară. București: Editura pentru literatura. 1964. P. 398.
13. Eminescu M, Criticilor mei. Poezii antume. Pitești: Editura Paralela 45, 2006. P. 237.
14. Eminescu M, Sărmanul Dionis. Proză literară. București: Editura pentru literatura. 1964. P. 398.
15. Gheție I. Istoria limbii române literare, București, 1978. P. 267.
16. http://www.mediafax.ro
17. https://www.profit.ro
18. Iliescu Adrian-Paul. Introducere în politologie. București, 2002. P. 176.
19. Iordan I. Limba română contemporană, Bucureşti: Min. învățămîntului, 1956. P. 830.
20. Rebreanu L. Ciuleandra.Chișinău: Ed. Cartier, 2007. P. 136.
21. Rosetti, Al. Istoria limbii române, vol. I, ediţia a treia, revăzută şi adăugită, Bucureşti: Editura Ştiinţifică. 1960. P. 228.
22. Sandfeld-Jensen, Kristian. Der Schwund des Infinitivs in Rumänischen und in den Balkansprachen. Jahresbericht des Instituts für rumänische Sprache, IX, 1902. P. 75-77.
23. Teodorovici L. D. Circul nostru vă prezintă. Iași: Polirom, 2007. P.215.
24. Vîlceanu R. A. Scurtă privire asupra infinitivului în limba română actuală. Analele Universității de Vest din Timișoara. Seria științe filologice, LI-LII, Editura Universităţii de Vest din Timişoara, 2013-2014. P. 19-27.
Review
For citations:
Kabanova A.S. ON THE PROBLEM OF THE DOUBLET PHENOMENON OF THE INFINITIVE AND THE SUPINE IN CONTEMPORARY ROMANIAN. Linguistics & Polyglot Studies. 2018;2(14):5-13. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/2410-2423-2018-2-14-5-13
Views:
576
Email this article 