- Les particules énonciatives
en russe contemporain. (Vol. 1)(1986). Paris: Institut
Slaves. (Call Number PG 2321 P37 1986 v.1)
Table of Contents:
J. Veyrenc "L'agrégat kak i en russe
R. Rathmayr "Les particules ont-elles une
signification propre? Une approche pragmatique de la question"
Ch. Bonnot & I. Fougeron "'Intonation de
non-finalité' dans les énoncés coordonnés
en russe moderne"
D. Paillard & D. Markowicz "Le partage du
savoir ou l'ignorance n'est pas un argument. A propos de la particule
Ch. Bonnot "La particule zhe marqueur de
D. Pillard 'I conjonction et particule. A
propos de dazhe i, i ... tože, takže i, i eščë et eščë i"
- Les particules
en russe contemporain. (Vol. 2)(1986). Paris: Institut
Slaves. (Call Number PG 2321 P37 1986 v.2)
Table of Contents:
S. De Vogue & D. Pillard "Modes de
présence de l'autre"
T. M. Nikolaeva "Le "sémentisme
implicite" des particules"
A. N. Baranov "Interaction de la
sémantique et de la pragmatique dans l'utilisation de la
P. B. Paršin "Structure sémantique de
l'unité linguistique xot' et pragmatique de la concession dans
A. Kreisberg "Les particules jiz, jeszcze,
dopiero en polonais"
Ch. Bonnot "-To particule de rappel et de
D. Pillard "Že ou la sortie impossible"
R. Rathmayr "Les particules russes,
I. Fougeron "L'organisation du message dans la phrase assertive russe"
- Les particules
en russe contemporain. (Vol. 3)(1988). Paris: Institut
Slaves. (Call Number PG 2321 P37 1986 v.3)
Table of Contents:
E. V. Paduceva "La particule že:
sémantique, syntaxe, prosodie"
V. A. Plungian "Signification de la particule
že et jugement de probabilité"
Ch. Bonnot "La particule -to et les verbes
I. Fougeron "A et No. Deux conjonctions
D. Paillard "Précision,
coïncidence, ajustement. A propos de imenno et kak raz"
P. Seriot "Le même ou l'autre. Kak
- Baranov, A. N., Plungian, V.
A., & Rakhilina, E. V. (1993). Putevoditel po diskursivnym
russkogo iazyka. Moskva: Pomovskii i Partnery. (Call Number
PG2434 .B37 1993)
- Beloshapkova, V. A., &
Stepanova, E. B. (1983). Ravnoznachny li razve ineuželi?
Russkaia Rech': Nauchno-Populiarnyi Zhurnal, 5, 57-59.
- Bitextin, A. B. (1994). Chastitsy
-TO, ZHE, VED' i vvodnye konstruktsii tipa KAK IZVESTNO kak
sredstva ukazanija na izvestnost' propozitsional'nogo soderzhanija
predlozhenija slushajuschemu. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Moskovskij gosudarstvennyj universitet, Moskva.
- Bolden, G. (2003). Doing
The use of the Russian particle -to in personal state
inquiries. CLIC: Crossroads of Language, Interaction, and Culture,
sound clips (a separate window will open)
The paper examines interactional functions
of the Russian enclitic particle -to in “howareyou” type inquiries. Drawing on
corpus of recorded telephone conversations and using the methodology
of conversation analysis, this paper argues that by marking a
"howareyou" question with -to, the speaker indicates that the inquiry
late relative to where it should have been appropriately launched. Two
senses are lateness are discussed: one is “structural,” dealing with
conventional ways in which conversation is organized; the other is
which is meant to refer to the speaker’s judgment about the question’s
importance relative to its placement in conversation.
- Bonnot, C. (1986). Emplois de la
-to. In IVe coloque de linguistique russe
21-30). Toulous: Service des Publications U.T.M. (Call Number
PG 2021 C6 1984)
- Bonnot, C. (1990). La
-to et la polémique chachée en russe moderne:
A propos du statut énuonciatif du thème. Revue Des
Slaves, LXII(1-2), 67-75.
- Bonnot, C., & Kodzasov,
S. V. (1998). Semanticheskoe var'irovanie diskursivnykh slov
i ego vliianie na linearizatsiiu i intonirovanie (no primere chastits
zhe i ved'). In K. L. Kiseleva & D. Paiar (Eds.), Diskursivnye
slova russkogo iazyka: Opyt kontekstno-semanticheskogo opisaniia
(pp. 382-443). Moscow: Meta-text. (Call Number PG 2434 D57 1998)
- Borisova, E. G. (1982). Semanticheskij
analiz usilitelnykh chastits russkogo jazyka. Moskva: AKD.
- Dolgov, I., & Leinonen,
M. (1988). Upotreblenie chastitsy vot v russkoi razgovornoi rechi. Scando-Slavica,
34, 127-146. (Call Number
- Grenoble, L. A., &
M. (1996). The role of deitics in discourse coherence: French
and Russian vot/von. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(6), 819-838.
Both French and Russian utilize a
binary system of deictic presentatives, most commonly described on the
basis of ±proximal. However, in actual usage, one deictic is
systematically favored over the other and can be seen as unmarked. The
remaining member of the deitic pair is thus marked and less frequent.
However, French and Russian differ in which member of the pair has
been marked: in French the +proximal presentative is marked and in
Russian the -proximal is marked. In both languages, the choice between
the members of the pair is made on the basis of the proximity of the
object presented relative to the deictic center. Moreover, these simple
presentatives have taken on broader discourse functions which separate
their usage from the qualities of the immediate complement and depend
instead on the wider context of the discourse. Not only are these
used to organize and mark the progression of a discourse, but they are
used as active interactions between the speaker and the receiver,
that both are assisting in building the frame of reference of the
and aiding in local cohesion and global coherence of the discourse.
- Grenoble, L. A. (1998). Deixis
and information packaging in Russian discourse. Philadelphia:
Includes a brief discussion of
particles vot, a, nu, -to, and some others.
- Heingartner, N. L. (1996). The
effect of age upon non-indefinite -to
use: A study of the spoken Russian of Moscow women.Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Brown University.
The indefinite particle -to has
received a significant amount of attention in grammatical studies
of Russian. The discourse function played by indefinite -to
is basically singular: it signifies that although the speaker has a
specific referent in mind, s/he does not know many details about the
referent. Although it differs significantly in function
and usage patterns from indefinite -to, the non-indefinite -to (NI-to)
has received very little attention. In colloquial Russian, as in the
literary language, indefinite -to constructions are frequently
However, unlike literary Russian, the colloquial language also shows
regular use of -to in functions outside that of indefiniteness. The
study considers how women employ NI-to constructions and seeks to
correlate this use with speaker age. The data show that NI-to use does
vary in relation to the age of the woman speaking. Younger women tend
NI-to in a few 'set' expressions, while older women most often use the
particle in constructions that are not lexically or phraseologically
conditioned (in other words, in original constructions).
appears that the discourse goals motivating a speaker to use NI-to also
vary depending upon who is speaking and to certain other specifics of
the speech situation. For example, younger women tend to use NI-to in
speech acts with low illocutionary force. They rarely employ the
particle in an attempt to directly influence interlocutor behavior.
Older women, however, often use the particle in speech acts with higher
illocutionary force in direct attempts to elicit a specific response or
from an interlocutor. Such extra-linguistic facts as social status,
authority, solidarity, power and politeness are shown to be relevant to
women's use of NI-to. This study is based upon a speech sampling that
was collected in 1994. The participants range in age from 25 to
66. A combination of empirical data, existing theories, literature, and
information elicited from native speakers of Russian are used in the
formulation and testing of hypotheses.
- Kiseleva, K. L., &
D. (1998). Diskursivnye slova russkogo iazyka: Opyt
opisaniia. Moscow: Meta-text. (Call Number PG 2434 D57 1998)
A collection of articles on the
following discourse words: lish', vsego, vsego lish', vsego-navsego, po
krajnej/men'shej mere, naoborot, opjat', opjat' zhe, opjat'-taki,
snova, vnov', zanovo, eshje raz, taki, vsje zhe, vsje-taki,
vsje ravno, kstati, vprochem, krome togo, da i, kak raz, imenno,
razve, neuzheli, navernoe, navernjaka, avos', nebos', pozhaluj, chto
li, konechno, razumeetsja, estestvenno, zhe, and ved'.
- Krejdlin, G., &
E. V. (1974). Znachenie i sintaksicheskie svojstva sojuza 'a'. Avtomatizacija
obrabotki tekstov, Nauchnaja Texnicheskaja informacija, 2(9),
- Leinonen, M. (1998). The
particle -to of Northern Russian dialects, compared with
Permic languages (Komi Zyryan). Studia Slavica Finlandensia, XV,
- Marshall, T. A. (2002).
Connotations and functions of Russian discourse markers ved', zhe
and -to. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Cornell University.
When analyzing corpora of spoken
Russian, it becomes strikingly evident that ved', zhe, and -to are
discourse markers that occur in high frequency. They perform
a variety of pragmatic functions and bring out semantic nuances
that can influence the discourse by conveying interactional cues,
social connotations, speaker attitudes, and listener reactions.
They also have a syntactic role in helping highlighting the topic
and focus of a sentence, and distinguishing boundaries in sentence
divisions such as syntagmas and "old" and "new" information. With so
many high frequency functions, it is necessary to clarify the category
of discourse markers more precisely and present them early in second
language (L2) acquisition. Research in this area of discourse analysis
has often suggested that discourse markers are lexical items that
qualities that are next to impossible to define systematically. Such
an opinion has given rise to a chain and specialized terminology,
are often left puzzled or confused and hesitate to put them in any
systematic way in grammar books. Since they are not present
consistently in grammar books, teachers rarely ever think to teach
them, and as a result, students are not taught them. This snowball
effect has been a hindrance to L2 learners because all too often
discourse markers are presented late in L2 acquisition or not at all.
This dissertation presents a modified analysis as to
the nature and function of discourse markers. The functions, meaning,
and connotations of discourse markers (like other lexical items) can be
best understood after considering context, intonation, word order, and
stress, all of which help to produce nuances that ultimately affect the
connotations that are brought into the discourse. This research has
focused on demystifying the category of discourse markers by putting
the research within a pedagogical framework that teachers and L2
learners can understand. This research will make a valid contribution
to the study of discourse
analysis in general by fine-tuning the definition of the category of
markers, and more specifically by bridging the gap between linguistic
research and classroom instruction.
- McCoy, S. G. (2001). Colloquial
Russian particles -TO, ZHE, and VED' as set-generating ("kontrastive")
markers: A unifying analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Linguistic theory has thus far
been unable to adequately provide a unifying account of a set
of phenomena described as “emphatic,” “contrastive,” “intensifying,”
inter alia. In this dissertation three colloquial Russian particles of
this type are given a unifying analysis that integrates the theory of
“kontrast” (i.e., the ability of certain linguistic expressions to
generate a set; Vallduví and Vilkuna 1998), cognitive
statuses of referents in discourse (Yokoyama 1986, Gundel, Hedberg,
and Zacharski 1993), information packaging on the clausal level
(Vallduví 1992), and hierarchical organization of discourse
(Büring 2000). Using a variety of colloquial Russian texts as
naturally occurring data, the particles -to, zhe, and ved’ are analyzed
as lexemes which
mark kontrast (“kontrastive markers,” “k-markers”). Each particle is
described with respect to the type of set it generates and the type of
membership within this set, the cognitive status of the referents
marked by it,
the way its instructions are encoded on the clausal level, and its role
in the organization of discourse. Thus, the kontrastive particle -to
marks a set of sets of propositions (equivalently, a set of questions),
referents known to the hearer but not currently activated in the
is an enclitic to a kontrastive element, usually the “link/topic,” and
generates a discourse tree, the branches of which are “sisters”
dominated by the same question under discussion. The kontrastive
particle zhe marks a set of mutually exclusive propositions (which
differ from each other
in the value of at least one kontrastive term), one of which is
in discourse, is an enclitic to the (first phonological word within
kontrastive element it marks, and refers back to either the established
center of discourse or an unresolved question. The kontrastive particle
ved’ marks a set of propositions (which have the illocutionary force of
marks information known to the hearer but not activated, is either a
or an enclitic to the kontrastive element within the clause, and
two propositions in discourse by building a super-question above them.
This analysis can be extended to other discourse markers, semantic
and other contrastive linguistic expressions crosslinguistically.
- McCoy, S. G. (2001). Connecting
information and discourse structure levels through "kontrast:"
Evidence from colloquial Russian particles -TO, ZHE, and VED'.
Paper presented at the ESSLLI Workshop on Information Structure,
Discourse Structure and Discourse Semantics.
The notion of kontrast, or the
ability of certain linguistic expressions to generate a set of
alternatives, originally proposed by Vallduv´õ and Vilkuna
(1998) as a clause-level concept, is re-analyzed here as connecting the
level of information packaging in the clause and the level of discourse
structure in the following way: kontrast is encoded at the clausal
level but has repercussions or discourse structure. This claim
is supported by evidence from the distribution properties of three
colloquial Russian particles TO, ZHE, and VED’ which are analyzed
as unambiguous markers of kontrast. Both the placement of these
particles at the clausal level and their role in discourse are viewed
as consequences of the type of the kontrast set and the cognitive
status of information
marked by each particle.
- McCoy, S. G. (2002).
and discourse properties of colloquial Russian construction of the form
"X-to X, a..." Glossos(3).
Avaliable from the electronic
- Multisilta, T. (1992). Upotreblenie
chastits nu i vot v russkoj razgovornoj rechi kak signalov,
perehod. Helsinki: Tempereen Yliopiston Kirjasto.
- Multisilta, T. (1995).
particles nu and vot in spoken Russian. In B.
S.-K. Tanskanen & R. Hiltunen (Eds.), Organization of
Proceedings from the Turku conference (pp. 381-392). Turku:
University of Turku.
- Nikolaeva, T. M. (1985). Funktsii
chastits v vyskazyvanii na materiale slavianskikh iazykov. Moskva:
Nauka. (Call Number PG171 .N54 1985)
- Paillard, D. (1986). à conjonction et particule. In IVe
coloque de linguistique russe (pp. 257-276). Toulous: Service des
Publications U.T.M. (Call Number PG 2021 C6 1984)
- Parrott, L. A. (1990).
'Argumentative zhe' in discourse. Harvard Studies in Slavic
Linguistics, 1, 83-104.
- Parrott, L. A. (1997). Discourse
organization and inference: The usage of the Russian particles zhe
and ved'. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
This dissertation is a study of
the functions and the position in an utterance of certain
high-frequency discourse particles in Russian--in particular, zhe and
ved'. The framework used is that of the Transactional Discourse Model,
which was proposed in Yokoyama's (1986) study Discourse and Word Order.
The different usages of the (clitic) particle zhe are first delineated
and then an analysis of the 'thematic' function of
zhe is proposed, as compared to that of the particle/conjunction a.
Both Modern Russian data and data from a twelfth-century text, the
'Skazanie o Borise i Glebe', are taken into consideration, and the
factors affecting the position of 'thematic' zhe in an utterance (in
contemporary Russian) are specified. The major area of investigation
concerns the modal usage of zhe, its function as compared to that
of its near-synonym ved' and its position in an utterance. The analysis
of positional variation of modal zhe reveals that the choice of host
is controlled by a combination of prosodic factors (the intonational
realization of the utterance) and functional factors. The functions
of both modal zhe and ved' are analyzed according to their usage in
different illocutionary acts (statements, directives, and
wh-questions). Comparison of the use of zhe and ved' brings to light an
distinction between informational directives and wh-questions, on
the one hand, and metinformational directives and wh-questions, on the
other. In all instances, the usage of the two particles is shown to
on the speaker's assessment of the discourse situation (especially the
speaker's assessment of the contents of the addressee's knowledge
sets). The precise difference in function between the two particles is
specified, and rules are provided to account for the use of zhe, the
use of ved',
and the use of the two particles together in a single utterance.
- Paukkeri, P. (2006). Retsipient v russkom razgovore: o
raspredelenii funkcij mezhdu otvetami da, nu i tak. (Recipient
in Russian conversation:division of tasks between the response words da, nu and tak).
Slavica Helsingiensia 28. Arto Mustajoki & Pekka Pesonen &
Jouko Lindstedt (eds.) University of Helsinki: Department of
and Baltic Languages and Literature. Link
- Rathmayr, R. (1985). Die
Russische Partikeln als Pragmalexeme. Munchen: Verlag. (Call
Number PG2321.R38 1985)
Particles ved', zhe, and -to.
- Rathmayr, R. (1989).
partikeln und ihre deutschen aquivalente glossar. Rusistik, 1,
- Vasilyeva, A. N. (1972). Particles
in colloquial Russian. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Particles ved', zhe, -to, uzh,
(von), nu, -ka, tak, esche, i, da, a, xot' (xotja), li, chto.
- Yokoyama, O. T. (1981). On
sentence coordination in Russian: A functional approach. In R.
A. Hendrik, C. S. Masek & M. F. Miller (Eds.), Papers from the
regional meeting(pp. 431-438). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic
Society. (Call Number P11 C417 v. 17 (1981) Chicago Linguistics Society)
On i, a, and no
- Zaitseva, V. (1995).
and subtext: Coding "referential portraits". Harvard Studies
in Slavic Linguistics, 3, 213-233.
Particles ved', razve, neuzheli
- Zybatow, L. (1990). Was
die Partikeln bedeuten: eine kontrastive Analyse Russisch-Deutsch.
München: O. Sagner. (Call Number PG2321 .Z92 1990)
Particles zhe, ved', taki, uzh,