Vestnik of Northern (Arctic) Federal University.
Series "Humanitarian and Social Sciences"
ISSN 2227-6564 e-ISSN 2687-1505 DOI:10.37482/2687-1505
Legal and postal addresses of the publisher: office 1336, 17 Naberezhnaya Severnoy Dviny, Arkhangelsk, 163002, Russian Federation, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov
Phone: (818-2) 21-61-21, ext. 18-20 ABOUT JOURNAL |
Section: Philology Download (pdf, 4.3MB )UDC811.11-112:81-24DOI10.17238/issn2227-6564.2019.2.31AuthorsSergey V. MukhinMoscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; prosp. Vernadskogo 76, Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation; e-mail: s.muhin@inno.mgimo.ru AbstractThis article presents a comparative study of the Gothic Participle I and Latin Participium præsentis activi functioning as subjective predicative attribute. Relevance of the research is conditioned by the necessity to reveal the functions of the syntactic system of Indo-European languages at their early stages. Morphological, semantic and functional-syntactic properties of the verbal forms in question were studied in specific contexts featuring the occurrence of the participles in the corresponding Gothic and Latin versions of the Gospel According to Matthew. The research found considerable similarity between the Gothic and Latin participles on the morphological level. The comparison of the corresponding biblical contexts revealed an analogy of the syntactic meanings and functions inherent in both forms. The participles act as attributes or adverbial modifiers and demonstrate certain capacity for establishing all the types of syntactic subordination in a participial phrase. The participial construction itself can feature a large degree of extension and conveys the following meanings: parallel action, manner, temporality, cause, and characteristic of the subject. Moreover, the Gothic Participle I and Latin Participium præsentis activi have similar lexical semantics in the attributive-predicative function. In the analogous contexts, these participles are derived from the verbs falling into three lexico-semantic groups: verbs of motion, verbs of speaking, and verbs of sense perception. In addition, miscellaneous verbs were singled out failing to fit into any of the semantic groups. Although the sentence structure in both texts of the Gospel is extremely similar, in one in three cases the Latin text has no participle, which is explained by the peculiarities of the Latin syntax.KeywordsGospel According to Matthew, Gothic language, Participle I, Latin language, Participium præsentis activi, subjective predicative attributeReferences1. Gukhman M.M. Gotskiy yazyk [The Gothic Language]. Moscow, 2007. 296 p.2. Novikova O.Yu. Status prichastiya v sostave prichastnogo oborota [Status of Participles in Participle Constructions]. Vestnik VGU. Ser.: Lingvistika i mezhkul’turnaya kommunikatsiya, 2012, no. 2, pp. 62–64. 3. Zhulina E.B. Predlozhenie s prichastnoy konstruktsiey nastoyashchego vremeni (Participial Construction with Participle I). Biokognitivnoe osmyslenie [Sentence with a Participial Construction with Participle I. Bio-Cognitive Interpretation]. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2018, no. 5, pt. 1, pp. 102–106. 4. Chapman J. St. Jerome and the Vulgate New Testament. J. Theol. Stud., 1922, vol. XXIV, no. 93, pp. 33–51. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/jts/article-abstract/os-XXIV/93/33/1628917?redirectedFrom=PDF (accessed: 14 June 2018). 5. Roeva K.M. Problemy kategorial’nogo statusa prichastiy [The Problems of the Participle Category Status]. Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Ser.: Filologicheskie nauki, 2007, no. 5, pp. 159–166. 6. Rezunova M.V. O chasterechnoy otnesennosti prichastiy v yazykakh [On Part of Speech Belonging of Participles in Languages]. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2017, no. 5, pt. 3, pp. 133–135. 7. Tronskiy I.M. Istoricheskaya grammatika latinskogo yazyka. Obshcheindoevropeyskoe yazykovoe sostoyanie (voprosy rekonstruktsii) [Historical Grammar of Latin. Common Indo-European Language Status (Reconstruction Issues)]. Moscow, 2001. 576 p. 8. Walvoort H.C. Declension of the Latin Present Participle in Connection with Its Syntactico-Semantic Use. J. Lat. Linguist., 2018, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1–22. 9. Novikova O.Yu. Funktsii prichastiya s pozitsii sovremennykh sintaksicheskikh vozzreniy [The Function of the Participle from the Perspective of the Modern Syntactic Theories]. Vestnik VGU. Ser.: Lingvistika i mezhkul’turnaya kommunikatsiya, 2014, no. 13, pp. 62–64. 10. Mukhin S.V. Sub”ektnoe predikativnoe opredelenie s prichastiem I v gotskom yazyke [Subjective Predicative Attribute with Participle I in Gothic]. Izvestiya YuFU. Ser.: Filologicheskie nauki, 2017, no. 4, pp. 175–183. |
Make a Submission
INDEXED IN:
|