360A Reference Grammar of Russian

Table 5.18 Predicate type and predicate agreement: quantifier subject

			low general
		paucal	numeral (djctvm,		approximate
	predicate type	numeral	ldflwfnm, etc.)		quantifier
(a)	existential, modal	sg ≈ pl	sg | ?pl		sg | pl
(b)	weak existential	±sg | pl	sg | ?pl		sg | pl
(c)	position/motion	?sg | pl	±sg < pl		sg ≥ ±pl
(d)	ref lexive intransitive	sg | pl	±sg < pl		sg ≥ ±pl
(e)	activity intransitive	sg | pl	sg | pl		sg ≥ ±pl
(f)	passive participle	sg | pl	sg | pl		sg ≈ pl
(g)	transitive	sg | pl	sg | pl		sg | pl
(h)	predicative	sg | pl	sg | pl		sg | pl

5.10 Subordinate clauses and infinitives

5.10.1 Basics

Infinitives, adverbial participles (lttghbxfcnbz), and adjectival participles are less articulated than finite predications, in two respects: morphologically, they do not inflect for the full range of tense and mood as finite predicates, and syntactically, they cannot have their own nominative subject in the clause. The implicit subject is (usually) understood to be the same as some major argument of the main predicate. Each type of non-finite form has a distinct occurrence and function. Adjectival participles act as adjectives (§4.4.3).

5.10.2 Finite clauses

Finite clauses introduced by conjunctions can be used in a wide range of functions that correspond approximately to arguments, in the extended sense used here (§5.1). Clauses introduced by rjulƒ ‘when’, †ckb ‘if ’, gjrƒ (yt) ‘until’, d nj´ dh†vz ‘(at a time) while’, function as adverbial arguments (on tense: §6.3.2). Clauses introduced by xnj (or under more specialized circumstances, xnj,s ‘in order to’) report the content of speech and analogous mental operations of thought, belief, memory. Such clauses can have a role analogous to that of the subject ([333]) or to that of the object ([334--35]):

[333]Vyt ,skj ljcflyj, xnj vjq ldj/hjlysq ,hfn cj vyjq yt buhftn. It was annoying to me that my cousin did not play with me.

[334]Dcrjht hf,jxbt gjyzkb, xnj hf,jnf/n jyb, d ceoyjcnb, ,tcgkfnyj.

Soon the workers understood that they were working, in essence, for no pay.

[335]Jy lj,fdbk, xnj ghjnbd yfc tcnm jlby dtcmvf ceotcndtyysq geyrn. He added that there was one very substantive point against us.

Predicates and arguments 361

And in other instances, the clause has a role analogous to that of an oblique argument, a relation often marked by a placeholder demonstrative in the main clause:

[336]Vjq ,hfn Dkflbvbh ujhlbkcz (ntv), xnj ,sk gj[j; yf cdjtuj lzl/.

My brother Vladimir was proud of the fact that he was similar to his uncle.

[337]F d xtv ghbpyf/ncz? D njv, xnj [jpzqrf k;tfhntkb b[ эrcgkefnbhjdfkf. And in what should they confess? In the fact that the manager of the pseudo-guild had been exploiting them.

The placeholder is more or less frequent depending on the verb: ujhlbkcz ntv, xnj ‘[he] took pride’ 205/308 xx = 67 percent but elbdbkcz njve, xnj ‘[he] was surprised’ 157 / 726 xx = 22 percent, cjvytdf/cm d njv, xnj ‘I doubt’ 124 / 1914 xx = 6 percent.68 Modal arguments introduced by prepositions, however, require the demonstrative: Rehybrjdf gjlftn bcr yf Penthouse pf nj, xnj gjkej,yf;tyyjq cyzkb yt tt ‘Kurnikova is suing Penthouse for the reason that they photographed someone else half-naked’.

Finite clauses can be attached to event nouns ([338]):

[338]D ufptnf[ yfxfkb gjzdkznmcz cnfnmb, xnj hsyjr -- эnj vtkrj,eh;efpyfz jnhs;rf. In the newspapers there began to appear articles [saying] that the free market -- that was a petty bourgeois belch.

In these finite subordinate clauses, the most widely used conjunction is xnj ‘that’ (tense in reported speech: §6.3.3). Among the kinds of “reported speech,” in the broad sense, are indirect questions, which have the same form as other questions that are not subordinated.

5.10.3 Adverbial clauses and adverbial participles (lttghbxfcnbz)

Adverbial participles are the predicates of clauses that function as adverbial arguments.69 They lack an overt subject, but are understood to have an implicit subject that corresponds to a known entity, almost always the subject of the main predicate (in [339], vƒnm):

[339]F vjz vfnm, e,tlbdibcm<dee> , xnj tt ltnb [jhjij ecnhjtys, cj cgjrjqyjq leijq dthyekfcm d Vjcrde.

And my mother, having become convinced that her children were well settled, returned with a calm heart to Moscow.

68Site www.libr.ru <10.X.02>.

69The issues of “control” (matching the implicit subject to an argument of the main clause) and exceptions to the usual relationship have long been a concern: Babby 1975[c], Babby and Franks 1998.

362A Reference Grammar of Russian

Sentences are sometimes cited in which the implicit subject of the adverbial participle (indexed “<j>”) corresponds to a significant argument of the main predicate other than the subject: the unexpressed (or “º”) dative domain of a modal ([340]), the domain of an experiential predicate ([341]), the passive agent ([342]), or even direct objects of verbs of emotion ([343]):70

[340]Wtkezcm<j> <dat> vj;yj ,tcrjytxyj ghbpyfdfnmcz d k/,db ,tp ckjd. Kissing, it is possible to constantly declare one’s love without words.

[341]Ckeifz<j> эnjn hfccrfp, vyt<j> ,skj cnhfiyj. Listening to the story, it became terrifying to me.

[342]Hfpdbdfz<j> yfdsrb dj;ltybz, djlbntkzvb<j> ,elen bpexfnmcz vths ghtljcnjhj;yjcnb.

While [they are] developing driving techniques, safety measures will be learned by drivers.

[343]Djqlz<j> d rjvyfne, Rjk/<j> gjhfpbk ,tpgjhzljr. On entering the room, the disorder astounded Kolia.

It is difficult to determine the status of such sentences. They are cited by linguists (including Russian speakers) as “grammatical”; sometimes differences in acceptability are mentioned. (Those in which the argument is the dative domain of a modal predicate with a dependent infinitive, as in [340], are the most acceptable.) Yet such sentences are infrequent in texts, and many educated speakers do not consider them standard.

While the adverbial participle itself does not show agreement, a predicative or appositive in the clause reflects the gender and number of the implicit subject (fem sg in [344]):

[344]:tyobys jcdj,jlbkbcm, rf;lfz<fem sg> bp yb[ dthyedibcm dcnhtdj;tyyfz<fem sg> r cdjtq ctvmt.

The women were freed, each returning agitated to her own family.

And reflexive pronouns within the clause refer to the implicit subject (cdj´q in [344]).

The events of adverbial participles are understood to occur in time-worlds contiguous with those of the main clause. In [345], the speaker’s return occurs at the same time as the return, and is caused by the return; in [346], the expectation is embedded in the same time-world as the approach.

[345]Dthyedibcm c djqys, z ndthlj htibk cnfnm gbcfntktv.

On returning from the war, I firmly decided to become a writer.

70Itskovich 1974 ([342]), Yokoyama 1980, Rappaport 1980 ([341]), Legendre and Akimova 1994 ([343]), and Kazenin 2000 cite examples of adverbial participles not anteceded by the subject of a finite predicate.

Predicates and arguments 363

[346]Gjl[jlz r djhjnfv, z rf;le/ ctreyle j;blfkf jrhbrf: ≤cnjq!≥

As I approached the gate, every second I expected to hear the shout: “stop!”

5.10.4 The free infinitive construction (without overt modal)

In general, infinitives lack overt subjects but are interpreted as having an implicit subject. Infinitive clauses are generally attached to main predicates (though not always), and the subject of an infinitive can often be identified with a major argument of the main predicate. Infinitives present events with a modal coloring, as possible or desired or imposed.

An exception to the rule that infinitives are attached to matrix predicates is the dative-with-infinitive construction, or, since there is no main finite predicate, the free infinitive.71 This construction is responsible for some of the most famous apodictic pronouncements of older Russian:

[347]F Bujhtdf [hf,hfuj gk(re yt rh˜cbnb<inf> . Igor’s brave regiment is not to be resurrected.

[348]<. . .> ldf e,j Hbvf gfljif, f nhtnbb cnjbn, f xtndthnjve<dat> yt ,snb<inf>

<. . .> and two Romes have fallen, while the third still stands, and a fourth is not to be.

The construction, as a syntactic idiom, has a strong modal sense. Among other values, it can predict an inevitable result or, when negated, the impossibility of an event (as above). The dative is the goal of the modality and, implicitly, the subject of the infinitive (in [348], it is incumbent on the fourth Rome never to exist). The infinitive itself is not dependent on any overt matrix predicate -- the construction as a whole has modal value. Indeed, it is not clear how to reconcile this construction with contemporary models of syntax that derive constructions by composition of elements.

The construction illustrated above still occurs in the modern language; the modern Russian translations of [347] and [348] use the free infinitive construction, and other examples are found in modern Russian:

[349]Ujhtnm vyt, Nfyz, d uttyyt juytyyjq.

It is for me, Tanya, to burn in the fire of Gehenna.

[350]D j,otv, yt vyt nen celbnm.

But in general, it’s not for me to judge in these matters.

But this construction is used less pervasively than in earlier times; constructions such as [349--50] have an epic ring to them. The free infinitive is still used freely in decrees:

71 See now Fortuin 2000 for a comprehensive treatment of the construction.