The presentation of information 465

[70]-- Ns rjytxyj d chjr ybrfr -- You of course will never finish by the

e;t yt rjyxbim?	deadline?
-- Ytn / z gjcnfhf/cm.	-- No / I’ll make an effort.

[71]-- Jyb, yfdthyjt, yt gjyzkb --They most likely didn’t understand

ybxtuj?	anything?
-- Ytn, ds pyftnt, gjyzkb,	-- No, you know, they understood, some
ytrjnjhst lf;t jxtym gjyzkb.	of them even understood quite well.

Polarity operators not only apply to the literal words of the previous question, but can respond to questions that the speaker anticipates.19 In [72], the speaker responds not by listing the songs but to the implicit question of whether she can remember what was sung.

[72]Xnj vs njulf gtkb? Ytn, эnj dcgjvybnm ytdjpvj;yj.

What did we used to sing then? No, that’s impossible to remember.

The polarity words lf and (less usually) ytn can be inserted in many places in an utterance to focus the question on a specific constituent, as in [73]:20

[73]Yf gthdjv / lf? ye;yj t[fnm.

On number one [tram] / yes? we need to ride.

Lf, especially, is used initially in utterances to remind the addressee of what the speaker takes to be an obvious truth:

[74]Y: Z bv gtxtymt ghbytckf -- I brought them some cookies by the way

	vt;le ghjxbv ctujlyz.	today.
F:	-- Rjve?	-- To whom?
Y:	Lf ve;brfv!	-- To the guys [of course]!

[75]F: --Nfr, f pfxtv egfrjdrf lkz -- So, what is this egg-packing material for? Is

zbw, vj;yj epyfnm? эnj	it necessary?
ye;yj?
D: -- Lf ytn.	-- Well no.

In this way lf can even combine with ytn, as in [75].

7.6 Lexical information operators

7.6.1 Conjunctions

The all-purpose conjunction b combines pairs (or multiples) of analogous elements: argument phrases (njkmrj vjz vfnm b ctcnhf Cjyz ‘just my mother and sister Sonia’), adjectives (jlyj bp cfvs[ e/nys[ b ;bdjgbcys[ ctk ‘one of

19 Rakhilina 1990.

20 Zemskaia 1973:362.

466A Reference Grammar of Russian

the most pleasant and picturesque villages’), and predicates (cnfhe[f pfcbzkf b djcrkbryekf ‘the old lady beamed and exclaimed’). When b applies only to one element x, it indicates that it is surprising that this single element x participates, given the participation of other elements: D cnhf[t ;bk b z ‘In terror lived I as well’. Put before the initial element as well as the second, it emphasizes the unexpected participation of both: jlbyfrjdj ghtpbhftvst b ,jkmitdbrfvb, b

,tcgfhnbqyjq vfccjq ‘detested equally both by the Bolsheviks and by the partyless masses’.

Lf adds an additional element or property, one which is not entirely expected or one which is a concession: Rfr ybult yt xbckzobqcz, lf tot yt xkty ghjacj/pf z yt bvtk ybrfrjuj ghfdf [kjgjnfnm j ,/kktntyt ‘As someone who was never officially registered for work, not to mention not a member of a union, I had no right to seek a medical dispensation’. Stylistically it is conversational to folksy.

Bkb ‘or’ likewise applies to various kinds of elements -- predicates (Jy yt gjyzk bkb cjpyfntkmyj jndthu ktybycrbt bltb ‘He did not understand or deliberately rejected Leninist ideas’), adverbs (,scnhtt bkb vtlktyytt ‘more quickly or more slowly’), arguments (k/,jq ghtlctlfntkm rjk[jpf bkb lbhtrnjh cjd[jpf

‘any chairman of the kolkhoz or director of a sovkhoz’). The proposition holds of at least one of the two elements, quite possibly both. When bkb is repeated before both elements, it forces the exclusive (disjunctive) reading: {fys Chtlytq Fpbb bkb dsgecrfkb pfkj;ybrjd, bkb ,tp dczrjuj celf evthodkzkb ‘The khans of Central Asia would either release the hostages or put them to death without any trial’. Kb,j serves similar functions in a more portentous style: <hfrb pfrfyxbdfkbcm kb,j hfpdjljv, kb,j cvthnm/ ve;f d n/hmvt ‘Marriages would end either in divorce, or with the husband’s death in prison’.

The emphatic negative operator yb, which is used to make a series of negative existential pronouns such as ybrnj´ ‘no one’, can be applied to constituents other than a pronoun, when it emphatically precludes the participation of that element (yb jlyj´q z´ujls in [76]). Doubled, the combination yb . . . yb . . . conjoins and emphatically rejects both of two possible elements ([76]):

[76]Reifqnt crjkmrj [jnbnt, yj yb d rfhvfy, yb d cevre yb jlyjq zujls.

Eat as much as you want, but not into your pocket, not into your bag, not a single berry.

7.6.2 Contrastive conjunctions

Yj and f create contrasts.21 Yj presumes or imputes a general rule which some particular situation or individual does not follow; the fact that it does not is

21 Silukova 1968, Babiuch 1985, Sannikov 1989.

The presentation of information 467

noteworthy. In [77], a brief acquaintance by general rule would imply a superficial friendship, but not in this instance. In [78], the individual dog Black is an exception to the general treatment of dogs.

[77]Z pyfk Bujhz Dkflbvbhjdbxf vtytt ujlf, yj [jhjij. I knew Igor Vladimirovich less than a year, but well.

[78]J[hfyybrb gthtcnhtkzkb dct[ cj,fr, yj <kэr e,t;fk. The guards shot all dogs, but Black ran away.

Yj, then, differentiates a specific individual or situation from a general rule. The conjunction f takes for granted a background situation in which an in-

dividual has a certain property, from which one might expect other individuals to have the same property. Contrary to this expectation, insists f, the property has the opposite polarity for another individual. In [79], the kolkhoz survived in one village, but not in another nearby village.

[79]D ctkt K/,tw, ult z ctqxfc ;bde, rjk[jp ewtktk. F d ctkt Rjnjdt, ult z ;bk njulf, rjk[jp chfpe hfpdfkbkcz.

In the village of Liubets, where I live now, the kolkhoz survived. But in the village of Kotovo, where I lived then, the kolkhoz immediately fell apart.

Often the contrast is made explicit by yt . . ., f . . . -- in [80], one time frame as opposed to another:

[80]D cdjtq cnfnmt Pbyjdmtd ,tp rfrb[-kb,j ljrfpfntkmcnd endth;lfk, xnj vbhjdfz htdjk/wbz yfcnegbn yt ghjcnj crjhj, f d njv ;t ujle, d ,kb;fqibt vtczws, lf;t xthtp ytltk/.

In his article, Zinovev without any proof asserted that world revolution would arrive not just soon but in that very year, in the coming months, even in a week.

Thus yj differentiates one instance (usually a situation) from a general rule, while f contrasts one specific instance (usually an entity) from another analogous instance.

7.6.3 Nfr;t, nj;t

Nƒr;t and nj´;t both say that something under discussion now, whether an entity or a situation, is similar to something that is already known. (The similarity can be explicit and known in advance, or it can be imputed retroactively by the new utterance.) At the same time, the similarity of the new to the given is not entirely expected and is worthy of note.22

22 A rich literature, though lacking consensus: Boguslawski 1969, Dahl 1969, Paducheva 1974[a], 1979 ([88]), 1991 ([85]), Gundel 1977, Lubensky 1982 ([89]), Sussex 1982, Chojnacka 1985, Girke 1985, Yokoyama 1986 (306--26; [94], from Gvozdev). A clearer picture results if the opposition is phrased in terms of polarity (of a property) vs. a list (of entities).

468 A Reference Grammar of Russian

Nj´;t operates on entities. It presumes or imputes a background in which one individual has a certain property, and allows or invites the expectation that other individuals would not also have that property. Against this background, nj´;t asserts that, contrary to possible expectations, another individual shares the property in question. Nj´;t, usually stressed, occurs after the constituent on which it operates, usually an argument phrase that comes before the verb. That argument can be the subject ([81]), the subject of an existential predicate ([82]), or a pre-verbal object ([83]):

[81]Dct jhfkb, b z nj;t jhfk: ≤Ljkjq Rfhfgtnzyf!≥

Everyone shouted, and I also shouted, “Down with Karapetian!”

[82]Rjydthnjd nj;t yt ,skj. There were no envelopes as well.

[83]Yf cktle/obq ltym zdbkbcm tot ldt ctvmb c vfksvb ltnrfvb, b[ nj;t hfpvtcnbkb d ,e[ufknthbb.

The next day there appeared two other families with small children, and they as well were put into the office.

The domain of an existential or modal predicate:

[84]Jn njq wthrdb ntgthm nj;t yt jcnfkjcm b cktlf. Of that church as well there remained no trace.

[85]Vyt nj;t ye;ty ,bktn. I also need a ticket.

Or even the occasions for events (in [86], a series of attempted meetings):

[86]Nhb;ls z tplbk d Ktybyuhfl, cnhtvbkcz c ybv dcnhtnbnmcz, tuj yt pfcnfdfk.

Ldf;ls, dj dhtvz tuj ghbtpljd d Vjcrde, gsnfkcz r ytve ghj,bnmcz, yj nj;t

,tphtpekmnfnyj.

Three times I went to Leningrad, I tried to meet with him, I couldn’t find him. Twice, during his trips to Moscow, I tried to get to see him, but also without result.

The predicate need not be repeated:

[87]Dct pfcvtzkbcm, b Jrcfyf nj;t.

Everyone burst out laughing, and so did Oksana.

Nj´;t, with weak stress, can be applied to properties if they are treated as elements in a set of possible properties:

[88]Jy ,sk evty, yj jy ,sk b kj˝djr njŸ;t.

He was intelligent, but he was clever as well.

The presentation of information 469

Nj´;t usually follows immediately after an argument phrase, but not always. Additional possibilities, with interpretive glosses, are given in [89], which presumes a situation in which Vitia will arrive and Misha may or may not do likewise:

[89]
Dbnz ghbltn dtxthjv b		Vitia will come in the evening and
Vbif nj;t ghbltn dtxthjv		as for Misha -- he also will come this evening
Vbif ghbltn nj;t dtxthjv .		as for Misha’s arrival -- that will also happen this evening .
Vbif ghbltn dtxthjv nj;t		as for Misha’s arrival this evening -- that will also happen

Nj´;t operates on the individual (V∫if) and any intervening constituents; whatever remains to the right of nj´;t is the property on which the comparison hangs -- for instance, in b Vbif ghbltn nj;t dtxthjv, it is Misha’s arrival specifically in the evening that makes the situation similar to that with Vitia. When nj´;t is final, at issue is the similarity of whole facts -- Vitia’s evening arrival and Misha’s evening arrival.

While nj´;t operates on entities in a list, nƒr;t operates on situations. Nƒr;t presumes (or imputes) a background in which a property holds of an individual. Nƒr;t evokes and then disputes the expectation that no other related property holds. What stays constant and what contrasts depends on context. Four cases can be distinguished.

Most transparently, an additional related property is said to hold of one individual:

[90]Dkflbvbh gbcfk nfv gtqpf;b, b jy nfr;t cltkfk bkk/cnhfwbb r ldev bkb nhtv rybufv.

Vladimir drew landscapes, and he also did illustrations to two or three books.

In [90], two kinds of endeavors are compared and contrasted. In this use, nƒr;t follows the argument and precedes the predicate stating the new property.

In a second construction, nƒr;t comes between a preceding verb and a following argument. The effect is to assert that the background situation is not limited to individuals named in the prior context, but includes another individual; it is the fact of the existence of another individual, of a certain type, that is the new, surprising situation. In [91], the dinner company includes, surprisingly, a captive officer. In [92], the possessions of the uncle include, surprisingly, cobbler’s tools.

[91]Pf j,tltyysv cnjkjv cbltk nfr;t gktyysq fdcnhbqcrbq jabwth Pfkmwvfy, rjnjhsq ,sk ghtrhfcysv crhbgfxjv. Jy lfdfk ehjrb vepsrb ltdjxrfv <j,hbycrbv.

At the dinner table there also sat a captured Austrian officer Salzmann, who was a superb violinist. He gave music lessons to the Bobrinsky girls.

470A Reference Grammar of Russian

[92]Lzlz ghbdtp c cj,jq dtob, crjkmrj vju pf[dfnbnm, jlt;le b j,edm, ghbdtp nfr;t zobr c cfgj;ysvb bycnhevtynfvb. Jy cj,bhfkcz gthtvtybnm /hblbxtcre/ rfhmthe yf cfgj;yjt htvtckj.

My uncle brought as many things with him as he could, such as clothing and footwear. He also brought a box with cobbler’s tools. He intended to trade his legal career for the cobbler’s trade.

The newly introduced individuals become the topic of the subsequent discourse (Salzmann and his music lessons; the uncle’s aspirations to being a cobbler).

Third, nƒr;t, presuming a situation in which a property holds of an individual x, says that an analogous property holds of an analogous individual x . What is of interest is that the second situation holds at all. In [93], Kostia’s confessions are compared to the author’s.

[93]Gjcntgtyyj vs hfpjnrhjdtyybxfkbcm. Z hfccrfpfk Rjcnt j cdjtv ckfdyjv ryz;tcrjv hjlt. Hfccrfpfk, xnj c ltncndf vtxnf/ ,snm gbcfntktv <. . .> B Rjcnz nfr;t hfpjnrhjdtyybxfkcz, hfccrfpfk, xnj hjl Vfifhjds[ cnfhbyysq regtxtcrbq bp ujhjlf Nj,jkmcrf.

Gradually we opened up. I told Kostia about my glorious princely clan. Told him, that from childhood I have dreamed of being a writer <. . .> And Kostia also opened up, saying the Masharovs were an old merchant clan from Tobolsk.

Here nƒr;t is used after the subject.

With respect to such examples, when analogous properties hold of two individuals, it is often said that nj´;t and nƒr;t are interchangeable, with only the stylistic difference that nƒr;t is formal, bookish, while nj´;t is said to be colloquial.

[94]	nj;t
	Ctcnhf jnkbxybwf, b csy nfr;t [jhjij exbncz.

Sister’s an outstanding student, and brother also does well.

Still, there is a difference. Nj´;t imputes a set of students who perform well and asserts that the set is not limited to the one previously known individual (sister). Nƒr;t in this context compares the existence of situations, emphasizing that it is noteworthy that the second exists at all: not only is one fact true (about sister), but as if that were not enough, a similar fact can be reported (about brother). They are close, but not identical in value.

A fourth, idiomatic use of nƒr;t is the phrase f nƒr;t added to an argument in a phrase in which one or more entities are already listed ([95]):

The presentation of information 471

[95]Dkflbvbh, Kbyf, f nfr;t Fkmrf <j,hbycrfz et[fkb d Vjcrde. Vladimir, Lina, and also Alka Bobrinsky left for Moscow.

In summary, nj´;t starts with the observation that an individual has a certain property, and counters the possible presumption that no other individuals have that property: the property is held constant, and entities are contrasted. (By extension, properties can be treated as elements in a list of possible properties, and contrasted in the same way.)23 Nƒr;t, in contrast, compares and contrasts situations. With nƒr;t, the fact that the initial situation holds at all might seem to preclude any further related situation, but in fact -- insists nƒr;t -- another related situation holds as well. Often the new situation is a new property of the same individual ([90]), but there are other possibilities. Nƒr;t can establish the existence of a new entity, defined in essential terms ([91]), or establish the existence of an unexpected parallel event ([93]). When, unusually, the constituent directly affected by nƒr;t is an argument phrase, nƒr;t does not merely contrast two known individuals, which is the purview of nj´;t, but compares two situations which hold of two different individuals ([94]).

7.6.4 :t

The particle ;t, frequently used in colloquial Russian, presumes (or imputes) a background situation of a certain polarity; the particle then asserts that the actual polarity is the opposite of the presumed polarity.24 For example, in [96] the addressee presumes a certain property (availability to serve as guide); the response with ;t counters that expectation.

[96]-- Ds vyt gjrf;tnt <jkmijq ntfnh?

--Z ;t gthdsq ltym d Vjcrdt!

--Will you show me the Bolshoi?

--[But] I’m [only] in Moscow for the first day.

:t is used frequently to insist that the identity of some entity is truly this one (indeed x), either as opposed to the contrary expectation that this specific individual would not be involved (rather than not x) or as opposed to other possible entities (rather than x or x ). In [97], the speaker confirms that these UV rays are indeed the culprit, lest one think otherwise:

23This analysis extends to two unusual examples cited in Paducheva 1991. In Pushkin’s D Gjkmie c(tplbk z nj;t ‘To Poland went I as well’, whole events -- journeys -- are listed and compared. In Gorky’s Vfvf jxtym gkfxtn . . . , ,jkmyfz gjnjve xnj b pkfz nj;t ‘Mama cries a lot, she’s sick is why, and foul-tempered as well’, properties become elements in a list.

24Vasilyeva (n.d.:54) ([96]) says ;t means “insistent emphasis on the indisputability of a fact.” Rathmayr (1985:254) suggests that ;t signals “an appeal to that which is already known in supplementary motivations (explanations, commentaries, justifications) of verbal or non-verbal acts.”

472A Reference Grammar of Russian

[97]Kexb UVB yfv bpdtcnys. Bvtyyj ,kfujlfhz bv yf rj;t gjzdkztncz pfufh, jyb

;t zdkz/ncz ghbxbyjq j;jujd.

Ultraviolet-B rays are familiar. It is because of them that the skin tans, it is they that are the cause of burns.

It is this sense that is the basis for the usage of ;t in various idiomatic phrases: d g†hdsq ;t l†ym ‘on the very first day’, nfrj´t ;t ‘exactly such a’, nén ;t ‘right there’, rjulƒ ;t ‘and when indeed’, gjxtvé ;t ‘why indeed’.