Cover not available
Part of
Language Contact in the Territory of the Former Soviet Union
Edited by Diana Forker and Lenore A. Grenoble
[IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society 50] 2021
► pp. 217–258

Quotative indexes in Permic

Between the original strategies and Russian

 | University of Tartu
In this paper, I discuss the use of quotative indexes in new media texts of the Permic languages Komi and Udmurt. I focus on quotative strategies that emerge under the influence of Russian. Even though both Permic languages are found nowadays relatively equally under the influence of Russian, its impact is realized to different extents. In Udmurt, both matter and pattern replication can be observed (the quotative particles mol and deskatʹ, new quotative tipa, the complementizers čto and budto), while in Komi, only the pattern replication of the complementizer strategy is noticed. It leads to the conclusion that Komi speakers keep control over the separation of linguistic repertoire in the written form, while Udmurt speakers use already conventionalized markers from the contact language as new quotatives.
Keywords: quotative index, new quotative, Permic, language contact Russian–Permic, matter replication, pattern replication
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The Permic languages
    • 1.2Quotative indexes and new quotatives
    • 1.3Methodology and data
    • 1.4The content of the paper
  • 2.Quotative indexes in Russian
    • 2.1Complementizer strategies in Russian: Speech verbs and complementizers čto and budto
    • 2.2Quotative particles mol and deskatʹ as markers of reported discourse in Russian
    • 2.3New quotative indexes in Russian
  • 3.Quotative indexes in Udmurt
    • 3.1The autochthonous quotative strategies in Udmurt
      • 3.1.1The autochthonous Udmurt quotative particles
      • 3.1.2The autochthonous complementizer strategy in Udmurt
    • 3.2Russian influence on the quotative strategies in Udmurt
      • 3.2.1The complementizers čto and budto in Udmurt
      • 3.2.2The quotative particles mol and deskatʹ in Udmurt
      • 3.2.3New quotative tipa in Udmurt
      • 3.2.4The ambiguous case: Deictic syče as part of the QI-clause
  • 4.Quotative indexes in Komi
    • 4.1The autochthonous quotative strategies in Komi
    • 4.2On some traces of matter and pattern replication in the complementizer strategy in Komi
  • 5.Summary
  • 6.Discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • Other symbols and fonts
  • References
Published online: 18 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.50.08tep
References (41)
References
Arkhangelskiy, T. (2014). Clitics in the Beserman dialect of Udmurt. Basic Research Working Papers. Series: Linguistics, 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arutjunova, N. (2000). Pokazateli čužoj reči de, deskatʹ, mol. K probleme interpretacii rečepovedenčeskix aktov [The markers of reported speech de, deskatʹ, mol. Towards the problems of interpretation of speech acts]. In N. D. Arutjunova (Ed.), Jazyk o jazyke [The language about the language] (pp. 437–453). Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kulʹtury.Google Scholar
Bartens, R. (2000). Permiläisten kielten rakenne ja kehitys [Structure and development of Permic languages]. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
Boye, K. (2012). Epistemic meaning: A crosslinguistic and functional-cognitive study. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, I., Rickford, J., Wasow, T., Zwicky, A., & Traugott, E. (2007). Intensive and quotative ALL: Something old, something new. American Speech, 82(1), 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, I., & van Alphen, I. (2012). Introductory remarks on new and old quotatives. In I. Buchstaller & I. van Alphen (Eds.), Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. xii–xxx). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H., & Gerrig, R. (1990). Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66, 764–805. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edygarova, S. (2013). Ob osnovnyx raznovidnostjax sovremennogo udmurtskogo jazyka [On the fundamental varieties of the modern Udmurt language]. Ežegodnik finno-ugorskix issledovanij, 3, 7–18.Google Scholar
(2014). The varieties of the modern Udmurt language. FUF, 62, 376–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fedjunëva, G. V. (Ed.). (1998). Komi jazyk. Ènciklopedija [The Komi language. Encyclopedia]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Güldemann, T. (2008). Quotative indexes in African languages: A synchronic and diachronic survey. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Thetic speaker-instantiating quotative indexes as a cross-linguistic type. In I. Buchstaller & I. van Alphen (Eds.), Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 117–142). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, B., Letuchiy, A., & Błaszczyk, I. (2016). Complementizers in Slavonic. In K. Boye, & P. Kehayov (Eds.), Complementizer Semantics in European Languages (pp. 175–225). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helasvuo, M.-L., Johansson, M., & Tanskanen, S.-K. (2014). Johdatus digitaalisen vuorovaikutukseen [Introduction to the digital interaction]. In M.-L. Helasvuo, M. Johansson, & S.-K. Tanskanen (Eds.), Kieli verkossa: Näkökulmia digitaaliseen vuorovaikutukseen [Language on the internet: Perspectives on digital interaction] (pp. 9–29). Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Hlavac, J. (2006). Bilingual discourse markers: Evidence from Croatian-English code-switching. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(11), 1870–1900. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalašnikova, V. (1968). K ètimologii nekotoryx sojuzov udmurtskogo jazyka [Towards etymology of some conjunctions in the Udmurt language]. Učenye zapiski UGPI 18, 141—149.Google Scholar
Kaysina, I. (2013). The adoption of Russian conjunctions in Udmurt. ESUKA – JEFUL, 4(2), 131–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kibardina, T. (2012). Sredstva vyraženija modalʹnosti v udmurtskom jazyke [The means of expressing modality in Udmurt]. Iževsk: Udmurtskij universitet.Google Scholar
Klumpp, G. (2016). Semantic functions of complementizers in Permic languages. In K. Boye & P. Kehayov (Eds.), Complementizer semantics in European languages (pp. 529–586). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsov, N. (2010). Komi keelest. Mitte eriti optimistlikult [About the Komi language. Not very optimistically]. Oma keel, 1, 86–93.Google Scholar
Leinonen, M. (2000). Evidentiality in Komi Zyryan. In L. Johanson & B. Utas (Eds.), Evidentials: Turkic, Iranian and neighbouring languages (pp. 419–440). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). The Russification of Komi. Slavica Helsingiensia, 27, 234–245.Google Scholar
(2009). Russian influence on the Ižma Komi dialect. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(3), 309–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Y. (2009). Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nekrasova, G. A. (2013). Dublirovanija v televizionnoj reči komi bilingva [Duplications in a television speech of bilingual Komi]. Jazyk i kulʹtura, 3(23), 73–81.Google Scholar
Pischlöger, C. (2014). Udmurtness in Web 2.0: Urban Udmurts resisting language shift. FUM, 38, 143–162.Google Scholar
(2016). Udmurt on social network sites: A comparison with the Welsh case. In R. Toivanen & J. Saarikivi (Eds.), Linguistic genocide or superdiversity? (pp. 108–132). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plungjan, V. (2008). O pokazateljax čužoj reči i nedostovernosti v russkom jazyke [On markers of reported speech and uncertainty in Russian]. In B. Wiemer & V. Plungjan (Eds.), Lexikalische Evidenzialitäts-Marker in slavischen Sprachen [Lexical evidential markers in Slavic languages] (pp. 285–311). München: Sagner.Google Scholar
Riese, T. (1998). Permian. In D. Abondolo (Ed.), The Uralic languages (pp. 249–276). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salánki, Z. (2007). The present-day situation of the Udmurt language (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Eötvös Loránd University.Google Scholar
(2015). The bilingualism of Finno-Ugric language speakers in the Volga Federal district. In C. Stolz (Ed.), Language empires in comparative perspective (pp. 237–265). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serebrennikov, B. (1963). Istoričeskaja morfologija permskix jazykov [Historical morphology of Permic languages]. Moscow: Izdatelʹstvo akademii nauk SSSR.Google Scholar
Stolz, T. (1996). Grammatical hispanisms in Amerindian and Austronesian languages. The other kind of Transpacific isoglosses. Amerindia, 21, 137–160.Google Scholar
Švedova, N. (Ed.). (1980). Russkaja grammatika. V dvux tomax [Russian grammar. In two volumes]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Tánczos, O. (2013). Hogy … hogy? Kettős kötőszók az udmurt mondatban [That … that?: Double conjunctions in the Udmurt sentence]. Nyelvelmélet és Kontaktológia, 2, 95–112.Google Scholar
Teptiuk, D. (2015). New quotatives in Finnish and Estonian (Unpublished Master thesis). University of Tartu.Google Scholar
(2019). New quotatives in Finnish and Estonian. FUM, 42, 207–249.Google Scholar
Uotila, T. E. (1985). Syrjänische Texte I. Komi-Permjakisch [Zyrian texts I. Komi-Permyak]. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
(1989). Syrjänische Texte III. Komi-Syrjänisch: Luza-Letka-, Ober-Sysola-, Mittel-Sysola, Prisyktyvkar-, Unter-Vyčegda- und Udora-Dialekte [Zyrian Texts III. Komi-Zyrian: Luza-Letka, Upper Sysola, Middle Sysola, Prisyktyvkar, Lower Vyčegda and Udora dialects]. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
Winkler, E. (2001). Udmurt. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
(2011). Udmurtische Grammatik [Udmurt grammar]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Internet sources
Materials have been collected from the period: 1 September, 2015 – 1 February, 2017
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Guz, Wojciech
2024. Quotative uses of Polish similative demonstratives. Linguistics 62:3 ► pp. 541 ff. DOI logo
Teptiuk, Denys & Eda-Riin Tuuling
2024. Manner expressions in Finnish and Estonian: their use in quotative constructions and beyond. Linguistics 62:3 ► pp. 577 ff. DOI logo
Forker, Diana & Lenore A. Grenoble
2021. Some structural similarities in the outcomes of language contact with Russian. In Language Contact in the Territory of the Former Soviet Union [IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society, 50], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.