The object sentences with the subjunctors ČTO ‘that’ and KAK ‘how’ in contemporary Russian under a partial comparison with their German equivalents

Aleksander Kiklewicz

University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn

Michail L. Kotin

University of Zielona Góra


Abstract

The subject of the study are the object clauses with the complementizers ČTO ‘that’ and KAK ‘how’ in modern Russian, with a partial comparison to their German counterparts. The study concerns the alternations of syntactic actants, implemented in the form of a dependent clause. The authors focus on one type of such semantically conditioned alternations. For this purpose, the authors compare alternative syntactic forms of sentential actants with the Russian complementizers ČTO | KAK and the German equivalents DASS | WIE. The analysis shows that each type of sentential actant allows for different valency classes, and there are also differences between the studied languages: German and Russian.


Keywords:

syntax, complementizer, compound sentence, sentential actant, valence, periphrastic class, government pattern, syntactic alternations


Apresjan, J. D. (1999), Semantičeskaja motivacija nesemantičeskich svojstv leksem, [in:] Tošović, B. (Hrsg.), Die grammatischen Korrelationen. Graz, 81-96.   Google Scholar

Apresjan, J. D. (2014), Ob aktivnom slovare russkogo jazyka, [in:] Apresjan, J. D. (ed.), Aktivnyj slovar’ russkogo jazyka. T. A-B. Moskva, 5-36.   Google Scholar

Arutjunova, N. D. (1988), Tipy jazykovych značenij. Ocenka. Sobytie. Fakt. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Boye, K. (2012), Epistemic meaning. A cross-linguistic and functional-cognitive study. Berlin.   Google Scholar

Boye, K. | Kehayov, P. (eds.) (2016), Complementizer Semantics in European Languages. Berlin | Boston.   Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1973), Sprache und Geist [Originaltitel: Language and Mind]. Frankfurt a.M.   Google Scholar

Clement, D. (1971), Satzeinbettungen nach Verben der Sinneswahrnehmung, [in:] Wunderlich, D. (Hrsg.), Probleme und Fortschritte der Transformationsgrammatik. München, 245-265.   Google Scholar

Corcoran, J. (2009), Sentence, Proposition, Judgment, Statement, and Fact: Speaking about the Written English Used in Logic, [in:] Carnielli, W. A. | Coniglio, M. | Loffredo D’Ottaviano, I. (eds.), The Many Sides of Logic. London, 71-103.   Google Scholar

Dik, S. (1997), The Theory of Functional Grammar. Berlin | New York.   Google Scholar

Dobaczewski, A. (2002), Zjawiska percepcji wzrokowej. Studium semantyczne. Warszawa.   Google Scholar

Dymarskij, M. J. (2008), Funkcionirovanie sootnositel’nych slov v iż’’jasnitel’nych konstrukc¬jach, [in:] Il’enko, S. G. (ed.), Složnopodčinennoe predloženie v leksikografičeskom aspekte. Sankt-Peterburg, 84-117.   Google Scholar

Frey, W. (2003), Syntactic conditions on adjunct classes, [in:] Lang, E. | Maienborn, C. | Fabri¬cius-Hansen, C. (eds.), Modifying Adjuncts. Berlin | Boston, 163-209.   Google Scholar

Fujinawa, Y. (2008), Valenzalternation bei infiniter Komplementation und damit vergleichbare Phänomene, [in:] Mikołajczyk, B. | Kotin, M. L. (Hrsg.), Terra grammatica. Ideen – Metoden – Modelle. Festschrift für Józef Darski zum 65. Geburtstag. Frankfurt a.M., 101-116.   Google Scholar

Grimshaw, J. (1979), Complement selection and the lexicon, [in:] Linguistic Inquiry 10 (2), 279-326.   Google Scholar

Guillaume, G. (1975), Le problème de l’article et sa solution dans la langue française. Réédition avec préface de Roch Valin. Paris | Québec.   Google Scholar

Hansen, B. | Letuchiy, A. | Błaszczyk, I. (2016), Complementizers in Slavonic (Russian, Polish, and Bulgarian), [in:] Boye, K. | Kehayov, P. (eds.), Complementizer Semantics in European Languages. Berlin, 175-223.   Google Scholar

Ivin, A. A. | Pereverzev, V. N. | Petrov, V. V. (Hrsg.) (1994), Logičeskij slovar’. Defort. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Karolak, S. (1984), Składnia wyrażeń predykatywnych, [w:] Topolińska, Z. (red.), Gramatyka współczesnego języka polskiego. Składnia. Warszawa, 11-212.   Google Scholar

Karolak, S. (2002), Podstawowe struktury składniowe języka polskiego. Warszawa.   Google Scholar

Kiklewicz, A. (2021), Bessojuznyj sentencial’nyj aktant v svete ėksplikativnogo sintaksisa, [in:]. Slavia 90 (2), 220-239.   Google Scholar

Kiklewicz, A. (2022a), Iz’’jasnitel’nyj sojuz KAK v russkom – JAK v pol’skom: semantika i soče¬taemost’, [in:] Russkij jazyk v naučnom osveščenii 1, 77-112.   Google Scholar

Kiklewicz, A. (2022b), O pewnym typie rozszczepienia argumentu propozycjonalnego, [w:] Biuletyn PTJ LXXVIII, 113-133.   Google Scholar

Kiklewicz, A. | Korytkowska, M. (2010), Podstawowe struktury zdaniowe współczesnych języków słowiańskich: białoruski, bułgarski, polski. Olsztyn.   Google Scholar

Knoob, S. L. (2017), Animacy, agency and causality in Korean voice and diathesis. A cognitive-se¬miotic usage-based perspective. London.   Google Scholar

Korytkowska, M. | Małdżiewa, W. (2002), Od zdania złożonego do zdania pojedynczego (nomi¬nalizacja argumentu propozycjonalnego w języku polskim i bułgarskim). Toruń.   Google Scholar

Kotin, M. L. (2015), Plötzlich sehe ich einen Wolf! Über die Verwendung des historischen Präsens als eine Temporalität-Aspektualität-Schnittstelle, [in:] Kwartalnik Neofilologiczny LXII (1), 3-16.   Google Scholar

Kotin, M. L. (2018), Jazyk i vremja. Očerk teorii jazykovych izmenenij. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Kotin, M. L. (2019), (Coverte) Modalität und Kontrollwechsel, [in:] Studia Germanica Gedanen¬sia 41, 84-93.   Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. (1977), Linguistic Gestalts, [in:] Papers from the Thirtieth Regional Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society 13, 236-287.   Google Scholar

Lee, S. | Ziegler, D. (2006), Analysing a semantic corpus study across English dialects: Searching for paradigmatic parallels, [in:] Willson, A. A. | Archer, D. | Rayson, P. (eds.), Corpus linguistics around the world. Amsterdam | New York, 121-139.   Google Scholar

Lehmann, C. (2024), Morphologie und Syntax. Online-resource, [in:] https://www.christianlehmann. eu/ling/lg_system/grammar/morph_syn/index.html?https://www.christianlehmann.eu/ling/ lg_system/grammar/morph_syn/valenz.php.   Google Scholar

Leiss, E. (1992), Die Verbalkategorien des Deutschen. Ein Beitrag zur Theorie des sprachlichen Kategorisierung. Berlin | New York.   Google Scholar

Leiss, E. (2000), Artikel und Aspekt. Die grammatischen Muster von Definitheit. Berlin | New York.   Google Scholar

Letučij, A. B. (2021), Russkij jazyk o situacijach. Konstrukcii s sentencial’nymi aktantami v russkom jazyke. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Maksimov, L. J. (2011), Mnogomernaja klassifikacija složnopodčinennych predloženij (na materiale sovremennogo russkogo jazyka). Stavropol’ | Pjatigorsk.   Google Scholar

Mel’čuk, I. A. (1984), Vvedenie, [in:] Mel’čuk, I. A. | Žolkovskij, A. K. (eds.), Tolkovo-kombina¬tornyj slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo jazyka. Opyt semantiko-sintaksičeskogo opisanija russkoj leksyki. Vena, 69-102.   Google Scholar

Mel’čuk, I. A. (1999), Opyt teorii lingvističeskich modelej „smysl – tekst”. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Mel’čuk, I. A. (2012), Jazyk: ot smysla k tekstu. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Padučeva, E. V. (1991), Predikatnye imena v leksikografičeskom aspekte, [in:] NTI 2 (5), 21-31.   Google Scholar

Padučeva, E. V. (2004), Dinamičeskie modeli v semantike leksyki. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Peirce, C. S. (1982-1993), Writings. A Chronological Edition. Vol. 1-5 (1857-1886). Bloomington.   Google Scholar

Sannikov, V. Z. (2010), Čeredovanija v sintaksise (k probleme al’ternatologii), [in:] Apresjan, J. D. (ed.), Teoretičeskie problemy russkogo sintaksisa. Vzaimodejstvie grammatiki i slovarja. Moskva, 43-58.   Google Scholar

Serdobol’skaja, N. V. (2017), Bessojuznye aktantnye predloženija s glagolom dumat’ v russkom jazyke, [in:] Voprosy jazykoznanija 5, 7-35.   Google Scholar

Spencer, A. (2003), Periphrastic paradigms in Bulgarian, [in:] Junghanns, U. | Szucsich, L. (eds.), Syntactic structures and morphological information. Berlin, 249-282.   Google Scholar

Spencer, A. (2006), Periphrasis, [in:] Brown, K. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam | Boston | Heidelberg etc., 287-294.   Google Scholar

Švedova, N. J. (2005), Russkij jazyk. Izbrannye raboty. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Szumska, D. (2006), Przymiotnik jako przyłączone wyrażenie predykatywne. Kraków.   Google Scholar

Umbach, C. | Hinterwimmer, S. | Gust, H. (2022), German wie-complements. Manners, methods and events in progress, [in:] Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 40, 307-343.   Google Scholar

Vater, H. (1976.), Wie-Sätze, [in:] Braunmüller, K. | Kürschner, W. (Hrsg.), Grammatik: Akten des 10. Linguistischen Kollegs. Bd. 2. Tübingen, 209-222.   Google Scholar

Vendler, Z. (1964.), Nominalizations. Philadelphia. [Transformations and Discourse Analysis Papers 55.]   Google Scholar

Weirich, P. (2010), Utility and framing, [in:] Synthese 176 (1), 83-103.   Google Scholar

Zaliznjak, A. А. (2006), Mnogoznačnost’ v jazyke i sposoby ee predstavlenija. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Zel’dovič, G. М. (2012), Pragmatika grammatiki. Moskva.   Google Scholar

Zemb, J.-M. (1978), Vergleichende Grammatik Französisch-Deutsch. Teil 1: Comparaison de deux systèmes. Mannheim | Wien | Zürich.   Google Scholar

Download


Published
2026-07-16

Cited by

Kiklewicz, A., & Kotin, M. L. (2026). The object sentences with the subjunctors ČTO ‘that’ and KAK ‘how’ in contemporary Russian under a partial comparison with their German equivalents. Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski, 12(1), 181–207. https://doi.org/10.31648/pw.6532

Aleksander Kiklewicz 
University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn
Michail L. Kotin 
University of Zielona Góra





Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>