Arguments 245

[289]E ytuj yt jcnfdfkjcm dhtvtyb yf ct,z. He kept having no time left for himself.

Experiential predicates are similar to existential predicates. Experiential predicates, usually not verbs, report an experience or state or emotion localized in a domain, which is named in an oblique (dative) case. Another argument, expressed by a prepositional phrase or the genitive, states the focal point of the experience or emotion. The domain is referentially independent and is a natural antecedent for reflexive pronouns in the focal argument.

[290]Tve cnfkj {ytkjdrj cnslyj uhecnyj ,jkmyj} pf { ytuj ct,z} b pf

{ tuj cdj/} ckf,jcnm.

It became {uncomfortable shameful sad painful} to him on account of himself and his weakness.

[291]:fkrj ,skj cdjtuj nhelf.

He was sorry on account of his effort.

[292]Tve cnfkj uflrj yf cfvjuj ct,z.

To him it became disgusting with respect to himself.

With experiential predicates, the reflexive is used regularly, without essential force.

4.7.5 Unattached reflexives

Especially in existential constructions, cdj´q often acquires the overtone of something that is appropriate, or characteristic, or uniquely one’s own (as in [280--83] above). In this sense, cdj´q can modify the subject of intransitives that are vaguely existential ([293--95]):

[293]Vt;le ybvb ecnfyjdbkfcm cdjz, jcj,fz, cdzpm, yt nfrfz, rfr c lheubvb. Between them there arose their own, special, bond, not like that with others.

[294]Pfujdjhbn ;t cdjz rhjdm.

One’s own blood will speak out [≈ Blood is thicker than water].

[295]Gjlevfnm, b vs ,skb rjulf-nj ,tpecst, ntgthm djn cdjz udfhlbz gjlhjckf. And just to think, we were once whiskerless, and now our own regiment has sprouted up.

A related sense of cdj´q is the sense of ‘one’s own kind’. In this sense cdj´q can even be used as the subject of transitive verbs:

[296]D celm,t ;t Vbnzubyf z yt cjvytdfkcz. Ktn xthtp gznm-itcnm j,zpfntkmyj kb,j cdjb pfht;en, kb,j hfccnhtkz/n gj cele.

I had no doubts about Mitiagin’s eventual fate. Five or six years down the line, either his own kind will slit his throat or they’ll condemn him to a firing squad.

[297]Celm,e j,dbytyyjuj htifkb cdjb ;t cjcke;bdws.

The fate of an accused person was decided by his own fellow workers.

246A Reference Grammar of Russian

Here cdj´q creates a contrast of self with others. It is in this sense that cdj´q is used in idioms with no obvious antecedent: gé,kbrf cdjz´ ‘it’s our kind of audience’; cdj∫ k÷lb ‘they are our own people’ ≈ ‘we’re among friends’.

Ct,z´ is occasionally used without any explicit antecedent, in the sense of ‘whosoever might be under discussion’:

[298]Эnj jgfcyjcnm, rjnjhfz dctulf dktxtn pf cj,jq nz;rbt gjcktlcndbz lkz ct,z b lkz lheub[.

That is a danger such as always brings with it serious consequences for oneself and for others.

Used in this way, cdj´q and ct,z´ have gone considerably beyond reflexives that only blindly identify the referent of one argument as the same as the subject.

4.7.6 Special predicate--argument relations: direct objects

It is generally true that in Russian, unlike in English, objects do not antecede reflexive pronouns. Nevertheless, the direct object can antecede a reflexive if the predicate records that the argument changes over a domain, where the domain includes the pronoun site.71 The domain can be: the source of emotional equilibrium (эnj dsdjlbkj tuj bp ct,z ‘that took him out of himself, upset him’; xe;bt k/lb jndktrfkb tuj jn ct,z ‘people distracted him from himself ’); the goal of emotional equilibrium (dktxtn tuj r ct,t ‘that drags him towards himself’; ghtljcnfdbd njdfhbof cfvjve ct,t ‘turning him over to himself, to his own devices’); or the domain of reciprocal interaction (Z ,sk cgjcj,ty chfdybdfnm rkjeyjd vt;le cj,jq ‘I knew enough to be able to compare clowns among themselves’; Jabwths gjbkb ifvgfycrbv j,tpmzye b cj,fr b cnhfdkbdfkb b[ vt;le cj,jq ‘The officers got a monkey and some dogs drunk and set them fighting amongst themselves’; rfr cdzpfnm vt;le cj,jq k/ltq ‘how to bind people amongst themselves’).

In these constructions, the pronoun could hardly refer to anyone other than the object. That is not so with pfobn∫nm/pfoboƒnm ‘defend’ -- the danger could come from anyone. This verb uses the reflexive pronoun if the source of danger happens to be the object who needs protection:

[299]Gfgf Rfhkj, hfpevttncz, pfoboftn yfc<j> jn cfvb[ ct,z<j> . Papa Carlo, clearly, is protecting us<j> from ourselves<j> .

A possessive adjective is usually not reflexive in reference to the direct object:

[300]Jyf pfoboftn tuj<j> jn {tuj<j> ?cdjb[<j> } lheptq! She is protecting him<j> from his<j> friends.

71 Timberlake 1996.

Arguments 247

[301]{hbcn/<j> c ldevz ljxehrfvb jcnfdbkb d tt<j> [fnt. They left Khristia<j> with her two daughters in her<j> hut.

[302]Vs ghjdjlbkb Ctht;e<j> lj tuj<j> rjvyfns. We accompanied Serezha<j> to his<j> room.

Nevertheless cdj´q can be used to express the special sense of characteristic possession ([303]) or a distributive relationship (in [304], of sailors and ships):

[303]Vj;yj kb jcnfdbnm {bqevff<j> ,tp cdjtuj<j> inf,f? Could one really leave Hijumaa<j> without its<j> own staff ?

[304]Yfxfkmcndj ntgthm ,tcgjrjbkjcm kbim j, jlyjv -- crjhtt hfpdtcnb gmzys[<j> gj cdjbv<j> celfv.

The authorities were worried about just one thing -- how to return the drunken sailors<j> to their<j> own ships.

4.7.7 Special predicate--argument relations: passives

Subjects of passive participles can antecede reflexives: ghbextyyfz r эnjve cdjbv cnfhsv [jpzbyjv, j,tpmzyf dsrbyekf dgthtl b ddth[ kfge ‘trained by its former master, the monkey thrust its paw out and up’. Locative arguments, which are defined independently, use non-reflexives: ajnjuhfabz, ult ,skf cyznf dcz tt ctvmz d b[ rhjitxyjv bvtybb ‘a photograph, where her whole family was taken on their modest estate’.

The agents of passives, whether overtly named in the instrumental case or implicit, can antecede reflexives: cvsck, rjnjhsq ,eltn jnrhsn <jujv cfvjve ct,t njkmrj d ltym celf ‘a meaning that will be revealed by God to himself only on Judgment Day’; d jlyjv bp gbctv, flhtcjdfyys[ cdjtve lheue, jntw ujdjhbn

‘in a letter addressed to his friend, father says’. Arguments that are defined independently use non-reflexive pronouns: ghtlvtnjd, ghbdtptyys[ jnwjv bp tuj gentitcndbq gj hfpysv cnhfyfv ‘objects, brought back by father from his trips through various countries’.

4.7.8 Autonomous domains: event argument phrases

Event nominals (often derived from verbs) or abstract qualities (often derived from adjectives) can have their own arguments. A subject analog can antecede a reflexive:

[305]F tckb dcgjvybnm j tuj cgfhnfycrjq cehjdjcnb r ct,t, r cdjtve lfhjdfyb/, If one just thinks of his Spartan rigor with respect to himself, to his talent,

[306]gjybvfybt bv cdjtq jib,rb understanding by him of his mistake

Ct,z´ can be used with arguments of nouns which do no more than hint at events: pfgbcm j ct,t ‘a note about oneself ’, (tt) cdj,jlf yfl cj,jq ‘(her)

248A Reference Grammar of Russian

freedom over herself’. Possessive adjectives are non-reflexive if there is no special (contrastive, characteristic, distributive) sense of reference: hfccrfp njdfhbof j tuj dcnhtxt c bpdtcnysv kbnthfnjhjv ‘the story of a comrade about his meeting with a famous writer’. Often, the possessor is not named, but can be inferred: z dbltk, rfre/ ,jkm ljcnfdkztn tve cjpthwfybt cdjb[ cnfhs[ rfhnby ‘I saw what pain was afforded to him by the contemplation of his old pictures’.

Event nominals, then, constitute an autonomous domain for reflexives. But since event nominals are used as arguments of a finite predicate, the subject (indexed <i>) is also a potential antecedent for pronouns in event nominals. Both reflexive and anaphoric pronouns can be used in reference to the subject:

[307]Jy<i> yfltzkcz dszcybnm jnyjitybt r {tuj<i> cdjbv<i> } ckjdfv <h/[fyjdf. He was hoping to get a clear sense of Briukhanov’s relationship to his words.

[308]Gtnhjd<i> , jnvtnbd dybvfybt r {ytve<i> ct,t<i> } Cnfkbyf, cnfk clth;fyytt. Petrov, noticing Stalin’s attention to him(self), became more reserved.

A noun that is the head of an argument phrase can antecede a reflexive if it can be construed as the implicit subject of an event or a state: chtlb hfdys[ ct,t k/ltq ‘among people [who are] equal to each other’; yfhjl, ujhlsq cdjbvb gj,tlfvb ‘a people proud of its victories’, yfcnjzobt fhnbcns cdjtuj ltkf ‘true artists of their (own) work’; yfcnfdybr cdjb[ gjlxbytyys[ ‘a trainer of his (own) subordinates’; ghjhjr d cdjtq hjlbyt ‘a prophet in his (own) land’.

4.7.9 Autonomous domains: non-finite verbs

Non-finite forms of verbs -- adjectival participles, adverbial participles (lttghbxfcnbz), and infinitives -- though they lack an explicit subject argument, can be understood as having an implicit subject, which can antecede reflexive pronouns ([309]):72

[309]Ltdbwf<i> , dct tot rjkjnbdifz ct,z<i> gj uhelb, gjgsnfkfcm dshdfnmcz. The girl<i> , still striking herself<i> on her breast, tried to break free.

[310]Gjkexbd gtxfkmye/ dtcnm j tuj<j> lheut, Atljh<i> [jlbk pfvryensq. After getting the sad news about his friend, Fedor went around depressed.

By complementarity, a non-reflexive pronoun would have to refer to another individual; the friend in [310] cannot be Fedor’s.

Infinitive clauses for the most part behave as autonomous domains which obey complementarity of reference (with exceptions discussed below). In “subjectcontrolled infinitives” -- infinitives dependent on such main verbs as [jn†nm ‘want’, cnfhƒnmcz ‘try’, ghtlgjxbnƒnm ‘prefer’ -- the subject of the finite predicate

72 On the context of pronouns and infinitives, see Yokoyama 1975, Timberlake 1979.

Arguments 249

is the implicit subject of the infinitive: the person who wants (tries, prefers) is the person who performs the desired (attempted, preferred) activity. Such constructions obey complementarity of reference, as if they were a finite domain. Thus a reflexive in Vjz vfnm<i> htibkf dpznm tt<j> r ct,t<i | j | k>, r cdjtq<i | j | k> ctvmt ‘My mother<i> decided to take her<j> to herself<i | j | k>, into her own<i | j | k> family’ refers to the implicit subject of the infinitive and the matrix subject, while the non-reflexive pronouns in Jyf<i> yt cybpjikf hfccghfibdfnm tt<j> j ytq< i | j | k>, j tt< i | j | k> ;bpyb ‘She<i> did not condescend to question her<j> about her< i | j | k>, about her< i | j | k> life’ cannot refer to the subject.

Infinitives can be used independently (first clause of [311]) or subordinated to modal predicates (second clause of [311]). The dative argument in the matrix clause supplies the implicit subject of the infinitive and the potential antecedent for reflexives. For the most part such constructions obey the constraint of complementarity:

[311]:bpym ,skf jxtym nz;tkjq. Xnj,s [jnm vfkj-vfkmcrb rjhvbnm ct,z<j> b cdjb[<j> ltntq, bv<j> ghb[jlbkjcm ghjlfdfnm cdjb<j> ytvyjujxbcktyyst dtob. Life was difficult. To feed themselves and their children, however minimally, they had to sell off their not very numerous possessions.

Occasionally, an anaphoric adjective (tuj´, t=, ∫[) occurs, if the possessed entity is defined independently. In [312], Nikolai is a known person; in [313], his years are a given:

[312]Jyf b Ybyrt Rehpjdjq ;fkjdfkfcm, f nf yfl ytq njkmrj cvtzkfcm, dnfqyt pfdblez, gjnjve xnj tt<j> Ybrjkfz b hfp d ytltk/ gjl,bnm yf эnj ,skj tq<j> yt nfr-nj ghjcnj.

She even complained to Ninka Kurzova, but that one just laughed at her, while secretly envying her, because it was not simple for her<j> to get her<j> Nikolai up to that once a week.

[313]Jnxtuj ,s tve<j> ecnfdfnm d tuj<j> ujls?

Why should he<j> be getting so tired at his<j> age?

The most complex construction is “object-controlled” infinitives, which have in effect two subjects: the implicit subject of the infinitive, which corresponds to a dative or an accusative object of the main predicate, and the subject of the main predicate. Either can in principle antecede a reflexive pronoun in the infinitival clause. The choice of pronoun depends on the cohesion of the infinitive and the matrix predicate, which in turn depends on the semantics of the matrix predicate. The two clauses are very cohesive if the subject of the matrix predicate controls the outcome of the event, as with lƒnm/lfdƒnm ‘give, let’, gjvj´xm/gjvjuƒnm ‘help’, pfcnƒdbnm/pfcnfdkz´nm ‘force’. The two predicates are not cohesive if the

250A Reference Grammar of Russian

matrix subject transfers responsibility for the event to the matrix object (implicit subject), as with evjk∫nm/evjkz´nm ‘beseech’, eujdjh∫nm/eujdƒhbdfnm ‘persuade’, e,tl∫nm/e,t;lƒnm ‘convince’, ghbukfc∫nm/ghbukfiƒnm ‘invite’, (gj)ghjc∫nm ‘ask’. Intermediate are ghbrfpƒnm/ghbrƒpsdfnm ‘order’, gjpdjk∫nm/gjpdjkz´nm ‘allow’, ghtlkj;∫nm/ghtlkfuƒnm ‘propose’, gjhex∫nm/gjhexƒnm ‘delegate’.

If the subject of the matrix predicate is the same person as an argument or a possessor in the infinitival clause, it is in principle possible to use either an anaphoric or a reflexive pronoun, depending on the matrix predicate, as in the

schematic example [314]:

[314]	lfkf vyt		ct,z<i> ?tt<i> }
				{	±
	Jyf<i> gjpdjkbkf vyt	cjghjdj;lfnm {ct,z<i>				tt<i>	.
	gjghjcbkf vtyz			{?ct,z<i> tt<i> }

She<i> {let allowed requested} me to accompany her<i> .

The reflexive is close to obligatory with cohesive predicates ([315]), variable for intermediate clauses ([316--17]), and unlikely for the least cohesive ([318]), yet possible ([319]):

[315]Jy<i> yt lfk эnjq dcgsirt gj,jhjnm ct,z<i> jrjyxfntkmyj. He<i> didn’t let this flare-up completely conquer him<i> .

[316]Gjkrjdybr<i> ytpfljkuj lj эnjuj ghbrfpfk gjlfnm ct,t<i> rjyz b relf-nj et[fk. Not long before, the colonel<i> ordered a horse brought to him<i> and had gone off somewhere.

[317]Gjkrjdybr<i> ghbrfpfk lfnm tve<i> rbntkm, yfltk tuj, pfcntuyekcz yf dct geujdbws b eujcnbk yfc pfdnhfrjv.

The colonel<i> gave an order to bring him<i> a coat, he put it on, buttoned up all buttons and treated us to breakfast.

[318]Lzlz<i> gjctkbkcz d Zgjybb b ghjcbn ghjcnbnm tuj<i> pf dytpfgyjt bcxtpyjdtybt.

Uncle<i> has settled in Japan and asks [us] to forgive him<i> for disappearing suddenly.

[319]Pbyfblf<i> gjghjcbkf gjkj;bnm ct,z<i> gj,kb;t r ldthb. Zinaida<i> asked [one] to place her<i> a bit closer to the door.

When both reflexive and non-reflexive are possible, the difference lies in how the whole complex action is understood. With the reflexive in [316], the matrix predicate and infinitive together amount to one action: he acquired a mount for himself. In [317], with non-reflexive, there are two actions, first commanding and then producing the coat, an entity which becomes the focus of the subsequent narrative.

Less freely, cdj´q in the infinitive clause can refer to the matrix subject, but only if the predicates are cohesive:

							Arguments 251
[320]	pfcnfdkzkf vtyz		cdjtve<i> / ±tt<i>
				{±
	Jyf<i> ghbrfpfkf vyt	gthtlfnm gbcmvj {			cdjtve<i> / tt<i>} lzlt d
	evjkzkf vtyz			{ cdjtve<i> / tt<i>		}

Vjcrdt.

She {tried to force me ordered me beseeched me} to deliver a letter to her uncle in Moscow.

The other potential antecedent of reflexive pronouns inside the domain of the infinitive is the implicit subject of the infinitive (and object of the matrix predicate). If an argument of the infinitive is the same as the implicit subject, ct,z´ must be used, with all matrix verbs:

[321]	yt lfk tq<j>			r ct,t<j>		r ytq<j>	.
	Jy yt gjpdjkbk tq<j> pf,hfnm vfkmxbire		{
						}
	evjkbk tt<j>

He {would not allow her<j> did not permit her<j> beseeched her<j> } to take the lad to live with her<j>

With possessive adjectives, the non-reflexive is occasionally possible ([322]):

[322]	pfcnfdkzkb tt<j>			cdj/<j> /	tt<j> }
	Lbhtrnjhf yt hfp ghtlkfufkb tq<j>	bpvtybnm		{cdj/<j> /	?tt<j>	}
				{
	ghjcbkb tt<j>			{cdj/<j> /	tt<j> }

afvbkb/ yf byjcnhfyysq vfyth.

Directors more than once {tried to force her<j> suggested to her<j> asked her<j> } to change her<j> name to the foreign style.

Cohesive matrix predicates allow anaphoric possessives ([323--24]), while the less cohesive almost require the reflexive ([325]), unless the possessive is a kind of epithet applied to a noun that is defined independently ([326]):

[323]B ,sk cxfcnkbd, kbim ,s tve<j> lfdfkb gbcfnm tuj<j> hfccrfps. And he was happy if they only just let him<j> write his<j> stories.

[324]Jy yf[jlbkcz d Gfhb;t b gjvjufk Fylht Vfkmhj<j> cj,bhfnm tuj<j> bynthyfwbjyfkmye/ эcrflhbkm/.

He was in Paris and helped Andr† Malraux<j> organize his<j> international brigade.

[325]Vs gjghjcbkb Vfrfkbycrjuj<j> ghjxtcnm cdjb<j> cnb[b. We asked Makalinsky<j> to read his<j> poems.

[326]Vs eghjcbkb Dkflbvbhf<j> gjdtcnb yfc r ,jkmijve tuj<j> lheue [elj;ybre Rjhbye.

We begged Vladimir<j> to take us to that good friend of his<j> the artist Korin.

Thus, in infinitive clauses whose implicit subject is an object of the main predicate, either the implicit subject of the infinitive or the matrix subject can

252A Reference Grammar of Russian

Table 4.13 Ref lexives with object-controlled infinitives

	antecedent = matrix	antecedent = infinitive
matrix predicate	subject	subject
lfnm/lfdfnm ‘give, let’,	{ct,z | ?tt}	{ct,z | tt}
gjvjxm/gjvjufnm ‘help’,	{cdj/ | ?tt}	{cdj/ | tt}
pfcnfdbnm/pfcnfdkznm ‘force’	{ct,z | tt}	{ct,z | tt}
ghtlkj;bnm/ghtlkfufnm ‘propose’,
gjhexbnm/gjhexfnm ‘delegate’,	{±cdj/ | tt}	{cdj/ | ?tt}
ghbrfpfnm/ghbrfpsdfnm ‘order’,
gjpdjkbnm/gjpdjkznm ‘allow’	{?ct,z | tt}	{ct,z | tt}
evjkbnm/evjkznm ‘beseech’,
eujdjhbnm/eujdfhbdfnm ‘persuade’,	{ cdj/ | tt}	{cdj/ | ?tt}
e,tlbnm/e,t;lfnm ‘convince’,
ghbukfcbnm/ghbukfifnm ‘invite’,
(gj)ghjcbnm, eghjcbnm/eghfibdfnm
‘request’

antecede a pronoun in the infinitive clause. Matrix predicates can be hierarchized according to the cohesion between matrix predicate and infinitive, and that influences the choice of pronoun (Table 4.13). As cohesion decreases, the possibility of using reflexives to refer to the matrix subject decreases, and the pressure to use a reflexive in reference to the infinitival subject increases.

4.7.10 Firstand second-person antecedents

Reflexive pronouns in Russian can refer to firstor second-person antecedents. When the subject of a finite predicate antecedent of an argument pronoun is a first or second person, ct,z´ is used:

[327]Z ybrjve yt dth/. Ybrjve! Njkmrj ct,t. Z b {ct,t vyt} ntgthm yt dth/! I don’t trust anyone. No one! Only myself. These days I don’t even trust myself!

One difference from third persons is that, when the pronoun site and the potential source are not in a close domain, it is natural to use a personal pronoun (vtyz´, dƒc), for example in Z djccnfyjdbk gj cdt;tq gfvznb df;yst lkz {vtyz

?ct,z} gjlhj,yjcnb ‘I reconstructed from memory important for me details’. In this context, a reflexive pronoun might easily be used with a third-person antecedent ([278] above).

With possessive adjectives, either the reflexive cdj´q or a non-reflexive possessive adjective -- vj´q, ndj´q, yƒi, dƒi -- can be used:

[328]D {±cdjtq vjtq} pfgktxyjq cevrt, z dtp htrjvtylfntkmyjt gbcmvj. In my shoulder bag I was carrying a letter of introduction.

Arguments 253

Table 4.14 Cdjq with first-person and second-person antecedents (Petr Tarakhno,

Zhizn , otdannaia tsirku; Konstantin Simonov, Raznye dni voiny, vol. II)

		cdjq	non-reflexive	total	% cdjq
Tarakhno	1st sg	90	7	97	93
Tarakhno	1st pl	10	11	21	48
Simonov	1st sg	187	17	204	92
Simonov	1st pl	39	11	50	78
Simonov	2sg/2pl (not imperative)	24	1	25	96
Simonov	2sg/2pl (imperative)	11	9	20	55

[329]Z dgthdst edbltk {cdj/ ±vj/} ,eleoe/ ;tye. I first saw my future wife.

The non-reflexive, likely in [328], refers to an entity known independently. In contrast, the reflexive is appropriate with an essential reading; in [329], cdj/ ,eleoe/ ;tye is the person who can be defined as fulfilling the role of wife to x, x being the subject.

Usage can be investigated in memoirs, a genre in which first-person antecedents arise frequently. Table 4.14 records the usage in two memoirs. As can be seen in Table 4.14, the reflexive cdj´q is used pervasively with firstperson singular antecedents, somewhat less frequently with first-person plural. The reflexive is also usual for second persons, though less so in the imperative, when the immediacy of the situation makes the possessed items more individuated.

The memoirist can speak of himself as the unique, universal memoirist or as an individual whose properties differ in each time-world. The personal possessive vj´q reflects the unique memoirist: Z [jxe jcnfyjdbncz yf эnjv afrnt vjtq kbxyjq ;bpyb gjnjve, xnj <. . .> ‘I want to pause on this fact of my personal life because <. . .>’ [Tarakhno] -- his life is his total, unique life; Ltcznm ktn yfpfl z gjkexbk gbcmvj jn jlyjuj bp xbnfntktq vjtq rybub ≤Cjklfnfvb yt hj;lf/ncz≥

‘Ten years ago I received a letter from a reader of my book Not Born a Soldier’ [Simonov] -- the book is timelessly that book; Yt levfk z, xnj d gjcktlybq hfp db;e vjtuj lheuf Dbnfkbz Tabvjdbxf Kfpfhtyrj ‘It never occurred to me that I was seeing my friend Vitaly Efimovich Lazarenko for the last time’ [Tarakhno] -- friendships are not constantly redefined.

Cdj´q refers to another self who acted in other circumstances and was associated with entities that existed in other times and places -- Tarakhno had his repertoire, Simonov his notes and his feuilletons.

254 A Reference Grammar of Russian

[330] Ybrjulf lj эnjuj z yt vtyzk b yt bcrfk cdjq htgthnefh nfr jcvscktyyj. Never before had I modified and searched out my repertoire so studiously. [Tarakhno]

Here the argument with cdj´q has an essential reading: x, the speaker’s past self, attempted to define whatever would constitute the repertoire associated with x. The non-reflexive vj´q can be used, however, when the perspective shifts to a moment in the past:

[331]D эne yjxm z gjrfpsdfk Rfhf,bybye vjq htgthnefh.

That very night, there I was showing Karabinin my repertoire. [Tarakhno]

[332]Dct эnj yt vjukj yt hfljdfnm vtyz, b z c tot ,jkmibv hdtybtv ghbyzkcz pfybvfnmcz c vjbv gfhnythjv.

All this couldn’t help but please me, and so I began to rehearse with my partner with even greater enthusiasm. [Tarakhno]

Once the speaker shifts into the past world, the speaker at that moment has only one unique repertoire ([331]) and one unique partner ([332]).

Both reflexive cdj´q and non-reflexive ndj´q/dƒi can be used in the imperative. Simonov uses dƒi when the issue is what to do with known entities ([333]):

[333]-- Relf dgthtl?

--Yf Kjckfe. Pf,bhfqnt эnjn dfi inehvjdjq ,fnfkmjy b dtlbnt tuj dgthtl.

--Forward in which direction?

--To Loslau. Gather up that attack battalion of yours and lead it forwards. [Simonov]

He uses the reflexive for entities that are not known, but are defined by their relation to the addressee (essential reference: ‘whoever your adjutant is, because he has that role’):

[334]Jabwthjd cdjb[ dgthtl gjikbnt, fl(/nfynf cdjtuj gjikbnt, jcnfdmnt ghb ct,t jlyjuj-lde[ xtkjdtr, jcnfkmys[ dct[ gjikbnt dgthtl.

Send your officers ahead, send your adjutant ahead, but keep one or two behind, while you send all the others ahead. [Simonov]

Thus, with a firstor second-person antecedent, ct,z´ is used almost as regularly as with third persons. The possessive adjective allows more freedom of choice, but the reflexive is still more usual. The non-reflexive is used when an entity has an identity separate from the event and is associated with the unique speaker (vj´q, ndj´q).

4.7.11 Emphatic pronominal adjective cfv

The adjective cƒv creates a contrast between what is asserted and other options that might be entertained or expected. When it modifies ct,z´, cƒv reflects