Адрес: 105066, г. Москва,
Старая Басманная ул.,
д. 21/4, к. 518-528
Тел.: 8 (495) 772-95-90 *22699, *22687
Пенская Елена Наумовна
Заместитель руководителя школы
Ровинская Мария Михайловна
Павловец Михаил Георгиевич
Кривошеина Мария Андреевна
Успенский Ф. Б., Литвина А. Ф.
М.: Издательский дом НИУ ВШЭ, 2018.
М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2018.
Полян (Нерлер) Павел Маркович.
Paderborn: Brill, 2017.
Пиперски А. Ч.
М.: Альпина нон-фикшн, 2017.
Вдовин А. В.
М.: Молодая гвардия, 2017.
Акмальдинова А. А., Лекманов О. А., Свердлов М. И.
М.: Издательский дом НИУ ВШЭ, 2016.
Кронгауз М. А.
В кн.: Азбучные истины. М.: Clever, 2016. С. 112-115.
17-19 и 22-23 апреля 2013 г. на факультете филологии НИУ ВШЭ состоялись лекции Марии Копчевской-Тамм (Университет Стокгольма) на тему «Noun Phrase typology in a cross-linguistic and areal-typological perspective» («Типология именной группы в межъязыковой и ареальной перспективе»).
Annotation The course will focus on noun phrase structure mainly seen through an array of phenomena which are in various ways connected to adnominal possession across languages. Since particular attention will be paid to the geographic distribution of the relevant phenomena, we will start by discussing what is meant by areal typology.
After that we will look at the structural range of possessive NPs in the languages of the world, i.e., at how different languages render such phrases as Peter's house, the girl's hat and a boy's foot /sister. The structural diversity in this domain is truly fascinating, with some of the phenomena being especially striking. Since many languages make use of several different possessive constructions, we will discuss the various structural splits pertaining to possessive NPs across languages, including splits in accordance with the possessor’s animacy / referentiality / topicality, and alienability splits. In connection with the latter we will pay particular attention to the grammatical behaviour of kinterms in general. What makes linguistic possession particularly elusive is the variety of meanings and / or relations expressed by one and the same construction type. In the majority of cases, an entity, indicated by the head of a possessive noun phrase, is characterized via its relation to another entity, indicated by the dependent. Relations between the two differ, however, as to whether they involve an individualized dependent in a NP, as the case is with “anchoring” relations (e.g. Monday’s performance, a friend of my former teacher), or not, with “non-anchoring” relations (a women’s magazine, a journey of one month, etc.). We will discuss the meanings associated with possessive NPs across languages, paying particular attention to the distinction between anchoring and non-anchoring relations. Among other cases, we will consider Swedish compounds based on proper names (e.g. Palme-mord-et ‘Palme-murder-the’, i.e. 'the Palme murder'), which present an interesting example of a construction combining properties of typical anchoring and typical non-anchoring constructions. In addition to “prototypical possession”, two other groups of relations are sometimes, but far from invariably, expressed in similar ways – pseudo-partitive vs. partitive relations between a nominal quantifier and its complement, e.g. a cup of tea or a slice of bread vs. a cup of this freshly brewed tea and a slice of Mary’s bread. Both of these constructions will be considered in a cross-linguistic perspective.