A Quantitative and Typological Study of Early Slavic Participle Clauses and Their Competition with Finite Temporal Clauses

Core Concepts

Early Slavic participle clauses (conjunct participles and dative absolutes) compete with finite temporal clauses (jegda-clauses) in the expression of temporal relations and discourse organization, with the choice between these constructions being motivated by factors such as information structure, discourse relations, and cross-linguistic typological patterns.

Abstract

This thesis investigates the semantic and pragmatic properties of Early Slavic participle constructions (conjunct participles and dative absolutes) to understand the principles governing their selection over one another and over their main finite competitor, jegda-clauses.
The first part of the thesis uses detailed linguistic annotation on Early Slavic corpora to obtain indirect evidence for the different potential functions of participle clauses and jegda-clauses. It shows that the competition between these constructions occurs at the level of discourse organization, with the main determining factor being the distinction between background and foreground content. Conjunct participles are more typically associated with the foreground constituent of a discourse unit, while dative absolutes and jegda-clauses are more typically associated with the background content.
The second part of the thesis uses massively parallel data, including Old Church Slavonic and other languages, to analyze typological variation in how languages express the semantic space covered by English 'when'. This reveals clear typological correspondences and differences with Early Slavic, which are then used to corroborate and refine observations made on the core semantic-pragmatic properties of participle constructions and jegda-clauses based on the annotated Early Slavic data. The analysis shows that 'null' constructions (such as participles and converbs) consistently cluster in particular regions of the semantic map, indicating that they are not equally viable alternatives to any use of 'when', but carry particular meanings that make them less suitable for some of its functions.

Stats

The year was ending and Zosima came again to the desert.
Immediately one of them ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine and put it on a reed, and offered it to him to drink.
And if you don't have a veil there, then buy one and send it.

Quotes

"And when Mstislav arrived in Pereyaslav, he went to Luchesk, taking his wife with him."
"As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene."

Key Insights Distilled From

A quantitative and typological study of Early Slavic participle clauses and their competition

by Nilo Pedrazz... at arxiv.org 05-06-2024

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2405.01972.pdf

Deeper Inquiries

How do the discourse functions of Early Slavic participle clauses and jegda-clauses compare to those of similar constructions in other language families?

In Early Slavic, participle clauses and jegda-clauses serve specific discourse functions that can be compared to similar constructions in other language families. Participle clauses, such as conjunct participles and dative absolutes, often function as frame-setters, providing background information and setting the stage for the main event in the discourse. They can be anaphoric, presuppositional, and modally independent, contributing to narrative progression. These functions are similar to participial constructions in languages like Ancient Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, where participles are used to establish temporal relations and provide contextual information.
On the other hand, jegda-clauses in Early Slavic, introduced by the temporal subordinator "jegda" (when), serve as finite competitors to participle clauses. They typically introduce new events or actions in the discourse, providing temporal anchoring for the main event. This function is comparable to temporal subordinating conjunctions in other languages, such as English "when," "after," or "while," which establish temporal relationships between events in a narrative.
Overall, the discourse functions of Early Slavic participle clauses and jegda-clauses align with similar constructions in other language families, highlighting the universal need for temporal anchoring, background setting, and narrative progression in discourse organization.

How do the potential cognitive and processing advantages or disadvantages of using 'null' constructions like participles versus overt subordinating conjunctions in discourse organization?

The use of 'null' constructions like participles in discourse organization can offer both cognitive and processing advantages as well as disadvantages.
Advantages:

Efficiency: Participles convey information concisely, reducing the need for additional words or clauses to express the same idea.
Coherence: Participles can help maintain coherence and cohesion in the discourse by linking related events or actions seamlessly.
Variety: Using participles adds variety to sentence structures, making the discourse more engaging and dynamic.
Focus: Participles can highlight specific details or actions, drawing attention to key elements in the narrative.

Disadvantages:

Ambiguity: 'Null' constructions like participles may introduce ambiguity, especially in complex sentences where the relationship between clauses is not explicitly stated.
Complexity: Processing participles requires cognitive effort to infer the intended meaning and temporal relationships, which can be challenging for some readers.
Clarity: Overt subordinating conjunctions provide explicit markers of temporal relations, aiding in the clarity and understanding of the discourse.
Interpretation: The use of participles may require readers to make inferences or assumptions about the connections between clauses, leading to potential misinterpretations.

In summary, while 'null' constructions like participles offer brevity and variety in discourse organization, they may also pose challenges in terms of ambiguity and cognitive processing. Overt subordinating conjunctions provide clarity and explicit temporal markers, facilitating easier comprehension for readers.

In what ways might the competition between participle clauses and finite temporal clauses reflect deeper conceptual distinctions in the representation of time and events across languages?

The competition between participle clauses and finite temporal clauses in discourse organization can reflect deeper conceptual distinctions in the representation of time and events across languages.

Aspectual Differences: Participle clauses often convey aspectual information, such as perfective or imperfective aspects, which can influence the temporal interpretation of events. Languages vary in how they encode aspect, leading to differences in how time is conceptualized and expressed.

Narrative Structure: The choice between participle clauses and finite temporal clauses can reflect differences in narrative structure and storytelling conventions across languages. Some languages may prioritize background information and frame-setting, while others may focus on explicit temporal relations and event sequencing.

Cultural Perspectives: The competition between participle clauses and finite temporal clauses may also be influenced by cultural perspectives on time, events, and storytelling. Languages with a strong oral tradition, for example, may prefer participles for their ability to weave together multiple events in a cohesive narrative.

Grammaticalization: The grammaticalization of participle constructions and temporal clauses in a language's history can shape the competition between these structures. Languages that have developed complex systems of participles may rely more heavily on them for discourse organization.

Overall, the competition between participle clauses and finite temporal clauses reflects not only linguistic differences but also deeper conceptual distinctions in how time and events are conceptualized and represented across languages. These distinctions can be influenced by linguistic, cultural, and historical factors, shaping the discourse strategies employed in each language.