The Megrelian verb is a complex syntagmatic formation consisting of lexical-semantic and grammati... more The Megrelian verb is a complex syntagmatic formation consisting of lexical-semantic and grammatical representants. According to the strict phonotactic rules of the Megrelian language, sequences of morphemes are transformed into sequences of phonemes. This complicates their further segmentation into functional elements. The changes mostly affect the system of prefixes; suffixes are characterized by higher degree of stability. The given paper focuses on the segmentation and morphological annotation of Megrelian verbal prefixes and analyzes the problem of glossing, arising in the process of interlinear morphemic annotation. The analysis is based on the electronic database, created using the interlinear method (Lehmann, Ch., LGR) and embracing 2613 Megrelian sentences and far more verbs. The paper presents the results of analysis of Megrelian verbs and outlines the problems related to morphemic division of the verbal models of the Megrelian language. The paper also focuses on the difficulties related to the identification of boundaries between morphemes, as well as causes of these problems and the issue of morphological qualification (glossing) of the segmented elements. The aim of the paper is to explain the reasons for the above-mentioned problems and find solutions with respect to the recording of morphological information in the interlinear during manual annotation, so that the information is accurate, clear and comprehensible.
მონოგრაფია "მეგრული ლინგვისტური ანალიზი" დაიწერა საქართველოს ეროვნული სამეცნიერო ფონდის... more მონოგრაფია "მეგრული ლინგვისტური ანალიზი" დაიწერა საქართველოს ეროვნული სამეცნიერო ფონდის (შემდგომში - რუსთაველის (ქართველოლოგიის, ჰუმანიტარულ და სოციალურ მეცნიერებათა ფონდი) მიერ 2006 წელს გამოცხადებულ კონკურსში გამარვების შედეგად დაფინანსებული ამავე სათაურის პროექტის ფარგლებში.
Preverb in Zan language groups (Megrelian and Laz languages) is a principal prefix which, in comb... more Preverb in Zan language groups (Megrelian and Laz languages) is a principal prefix which, in combination with verb roots and stems referring to dynamicity and stativity (in association with other functional elements), is involved in organizing of space, and by means of which we establish spatial relations.Similarly to other Kartvelian languages, spatial features, encoded in the Zan preverb, in fact describe a direction (landmark, path) of movement of a subject (figure) of motion and its relation with other im/mobile objects in space (person, thing). As different from simple ones, Zan derived preverbs provide information about topological or landscape features of a place; therefore, we refer to them as locative, while to simple ones – as orienting.
Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Scieces, 2020
In Megrelian and Laz, spatial adverbs, as meaningful notional linguistic items, refer to: 1. Dire... more In Megrelian and Laz, spatial adverbs, as meaningful notional linguistic items, refer to: 1. Direction of motion/movement of bodies in space (dynamics), 2. Localization of bodies in space (stativity). Three models have been distinguished with respect to form: basic (occurring as a stem), derived (by means of case markers, particles, affixes), and compound (reduplicated structure). Formal structures of adverbs render their semantic structures and contain information about direction of motion, body localization, point of departure, arrangement of bodies in space, orientation (deictic, anthropomor-phic, anthropocentric, intrinsic), widening and narrowing of space, visualization; their rendering is due to the strategy based on geographic, cultural and other factors, their application for determining of a direction of motion and localization, that is, for selecting of principles of orientation in space across languages. Physical features of motion and immobility of bodies in space and peculiarities of their linguistic representation make it necessary to characterize adverbs semantically and grammatically, according to horizontal and vertical spaces, in relation to a landmark or without it.
In terms of phonosemantic doubling, root reduplication (in combination with affixation) is the mo... more In terms of phonosemantic doubling, root reduplication (in combination with affixation) is the most productive technique in Kartvelian languages (Georgian, Megrelian, Laz, Svan). The paper is a description of patterns of Kartvelian phonosemantic reduplication with respect to their both morphological and phonological parameters. The following types have been identified: 1. Root reduplication; 2. Syllable reduplication; 3. Redupluication with affixation. Each type has its respective sub-types. Based on abounding empirical data, the paper is an attempt to scrutinize and detect whether and how the above mentioned patterns are valid for all the four Kartvelian languages and to draw inferences about occurring formal and/or functional regularities associated with phonosemantic reduplication.
The present monograph was written within the framework of the project Phonosemantic
Vocabulary in... more The present monograph was written within the framework of the project Phonosemantic Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages (Structure, Semantics, Pragmatics) (No 31/20) funded by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation in 2013-2016; the project was implemented at the Institute of Linguistic Research (specifically, Research Group of Kartvelian Languages), Ilia State University. Success of the project proposal was due to a number of factors: 1. Phonetic symbolism and onomatopoeia, as rather significant linguistic phenomena in Kartvelian languages, was not systematically described and analyzed by scholars; moreover, it was not studied at all in Svan and Laz; however, these phenomena always attracted scholarly interest, and this is well attested with occasionally published papers. 2. Notwithstanding the fact that phonosymbolic and onomatopoeic items are parts of actual language, most of them were not considered “full-fledged members” of the lexicon. Their inclusion in dictionaries were a disputable issue. Recently published dictionaries (Svan – A. Liparteliani’s dictionary, Megrelian – O. Kajaia’s and A. Kobalia’s dictionaries, Laz – A. Tandilava’s dictionary, Georgian Dialect Corpus and dialect dictionaries: http://www.corpora.co), providing a more comprehensive description of the items in point, stated the necessity of the scholarly study of the phenomenon in question, on the one hand, and facilitated its complete research. The present book Phonosemantic Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages provides analyses of a number of significant linguistic problems associated with phonosemantics (as a linguistic process) and phonosemantic vocabulary (as outcome of the process).
The Megrelian verb is a complex syntagmatic formation consisting of lexical-semantic and grammati... more The Megrelian verb is a complex syntagmatic formation consisting of lexical-semantic and grammatical representants. According to the strict phonotactic rules of the Megrelian language, sequences of morphemes are transformed into sequences of phonemes. This complicates their further segmentation into functional elements. The changes mostly affect the system of prefixes; suffixes are characterized by higher degree of stability. The given paper focuses on the segmentation and morphological annotation of Megrelian verbal prefixes and analyzes the problem of glossing, arising in the process of interlinear morphemic annotation. The analysis is based on the electronic database, created using the interlinear method (Lehmann, Ch., LGR) and embracing 2613 Megrelian sentences and far more verbs. The paper presents the results of analysis of Megrelian verbs and outlines the problems related to morphemic division of the verbal models of the Megrelian language. The paper also focuses on the difficulties related to the identification of boundaries between morphemes, as well as causes of these problems and the issue of morphological qualification (glossing) of the segmented elements. The aim of the paper is to explain the reasons for the above-mentioned problems and find solutions with respect to the recording of morphological information in the interlinear during manual annotation, so that the information is accurate, clear and comprehensible.
მონოგრაფია "მეგრული ლინგვისტური ანალიზი" დაიწერა საქართველოს ეროვნული სამეცნიერო ფონდის... more მონოგრაფია "მეგრული ლინგვისტური ანალიზი" დაიწერა საქართველოს ეროვნული სამეცნიერო ფონდის (შემდგომში - რუსთაველის (ქართველოლოგიის, ჰუმანიტარულ და სოციალურ მეცნიერებათა ფონდი) მიერ 2006 წელს გამოცხადებულ კონკურსში გამარვების შედეგად დაფინანსებული ამავე სათაურის პროექტის ფარგლებში.
Preverb in Zan language groups (Megrelian and Laz languages) is a principal prefix which, in comb... more Preverb in Zan language groups (Megrelian and Laz languages) is a principal prefix which, in combination with verb roots and stems referring to dynamicity and stativity (in association with other functional elements), is involved in organizing of space, and by means of which we establish spatial relations.Similarly to other Kartvelian languages, spatial features, encoded in the Zan preverb, in fact describe a direction (landmark, path) of movement of a subject (figure) of motion and its relation with other im/mobile objects in space (person, thing). As different from simple ones, Zan derived preverbs provide information about topological or landscape features of a place; therefore, we refer to them as locative, while to simple ones – as orienting.
Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Scieces, 2020
In Megrelian and Laz, spatial adverbs, as meaningful notional linguistic items, refer to: 1. Dire... more In Megrelian and Laz, spatial adverbs, as meaningful notional linguistic items, refer to: 1. Direction of motion/movement of bodies in space (dynamics), 2. Localization of bodies in space (stativity). Three models have been distinguished with respect to form: basic (occurring as a stem), derived (by means of case markers, particles, affixes), and compound (reduplicated structure). Formal structures of adverbs render their semantic structures and contain information about direction of motion, body localization, point of departure, arrangement of bodies in space, orientation (deictic, anthropomor-phic, anthropocentric, intrinsic), widening and narrowing of space, visualization; their rendering is due to the strategy based on geographic, cultural and other factors, their application for determining of a direction of motion and localization, that is, for selecting of principles of orientation in space across languages. Physical features of motion and immobility of bodies in space and peculiarities of their linguistic representation make it necessary to characterize adverbs semantically and grammatically, according to horizontal and vertical spaces, in relation to a landmark or without it.
In terms of phonosemantic doubling, root reduplication (in combination with affixation) is the mo... more In terms of phonosemantic doubling, root reduplication (in combination with affixation) is the most productive technique in Kartvelian languages (Georgian, Megrelian, Laz, Svan). The paper is a description of patterns of Kartvelian phonosemantic reduplication with respect to their both morphological and phonological parameters. The following types have been identified: 1. Root reduplication; 2. Syllable reduplication; 3. Redupluication with affixation. Each type has its respective sub-types. Based on abounding empirical data, the paper is an attempt to scrutinize and detect whether and how the above mentioned patterns are valid for all the four Kartvelian languages and to draw inferences about occurring formal and/or functional regularities associated with phonosemantic reduplication.
The present monograph was written within the framework of the project Phonosemantic
Vocabulary in... more The present monograph was written within the framework of the project Phonosemantic Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages (Structure, Semantics, Pragmatics) (No 31/20) funded by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation in 2013-2016; the project was implemented at the Institute of Linguistic Research (specifically, Research Group of Kartvelian Languages), Ilia State University. Success of the project proposal was due to a number of factors: 1. Phonetic symbolism and onomatopoeia, as rather significant linguistic phenomena in Kartvelian languages, was not systematically described and analyzed by scholars; moreover, it was not studied at all in Svan and Laz; however, these phenomena always attracted scholarly interest, and this is well attested with occasionally published papers. 2. Notwithstanding the fact that phonosymbolic and onomatopoeic items are parts of actual language, most of them were not considered “full-fledged members” of the lexicon. Their inclusion in dictionaries were a disputable issue. Recently published dictionaries (Svan – A. Liparteliani’s dictionary, Megrelian – O. Kajaia’s and A. Kobalia’s dictionaries, Laz – A. Tandilava’s dictionary, Georgian Dialect Corpus and dialect dictionaries: http://www.corpora.co), providing a more comprehensive description of the items in point, stated the necessity of the scholarly study of the phenomenon in question, on the one hand, and facilitated its complete research. The present book Phonosemantic Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages provides analyses of a number of significant linguistic problems associated with phonosemantics (as a linguistic process) and phonosemantic vocabulary (as outcome of the process).
Uploads
The paper presents the results of analysis of Megrelian verbs and outlines the problems related to morphemic division of the verbal models of the Megrelian language. The paper also focuses on the difficulties related to the identification of boundaries between morphemes, as well as causes of these problems and the issue of morphological qualification (glossing) of the segmented elements. The aim of the paper is to explain the reasons for the above-mentioned problems and find solutions with respect to the recording of morphological information in the interlinear during manual annotation, so that the information is accurate, clear and comprehensible.
Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages (Structure, Semantics, Pragmatics) (No 31/20) funded by
Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation in 2013-2016; the project was implemented at the
Institute of Linguistic Research (specifically, Research Group of Kartvelian Languages), Ilia State
University.
Success of the project proposal was due to a number of factors:
1. Phonetic symbolism and onomatopoeia, as rather significant linguistic phenomena in
Kartvelian languages, was not systematically described and analyzed by scholars; moreover, it was
not studied at all in Svan and Laz; however, these phenomena always attracted scholarly interest,
and this is well attested with occasionally published papers.
2. Notwithstanding the fact that phonosymbolic and onomatopoeic items are parts of actual
language, most of them were not considered “full-fledged members” of the lexicon. Their inclusion
in dictionaries were a disputable issue. Recently published dictionaries (Svan – A. Liparteliani’s
dictionary, Megrelian – O. Kajaia’s and A. Kobalia’s dictionaries, Laz – A. Tandilava’s dictionary,
Georgian Dialect Corpus and dialect dictionaries: http://www.corpora.co), providing a more
comprehensive description of the items in point, stated the necessity of the scholarly study of the
phenomenon in question, on the one hand, and facilitated its complete research.
The present book Phonosemantic Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages provides analyses of a
number of significant linguistic problems associated with phonosemantics (as a linguistic process)
and phonosemantic vocabulary (as outcome of the process).
The paper presents the results of analysis of Megrelian verbs and outlines the problems related to morphemic division of the verbal models of the Megrelian language. The paper also focuses on the difficulties related to the identification of boundaries between morphemes, as well as causes of these problems and the issue of morphological qualification (glossing) of the segmented elements. The aim of the paper is to explain the reasons for the above-mentioned problems and find solutions with respect to the recording of morphological information in the interlinear during manual annotation, so that the information is accurate, clear and comprehensible.
Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages (Structure, Semantics, Pragmatics) (No 31/20) funded by
Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation in 2013-2016; the project was implemented at the
Institute of Linguistic Research (specifically, Research Group of Kartvelian Languages), Ilia State
University.
Success of the project proposal was due to a number of factors:
1. Phonetic symbolism and onomatopoeia, as rather significant linguistic phenomena in
Kartvelian languages, was not systematically described and analyzed by scholars; moreover, it was
not studied at all in Svan and Laz; however, these phenomena always attracted scholarly interest,
and this is well attested with occasionally published papers.
2. Notwithstanding the fact that phonosymbolic and onomatopoeic items are parts of actual
language, most of them were not considered “full-fledged members” of the lexicon. Their inclusion
in dictionaries were a disputable issue. Recently published dictionaries (Svan – A. Liparteliani’s
dictionary, Megrelian – O. Kajaia’s and A. Kobalia’s dictionaries, Laz – A. Tandilava’s dictionary,
Georgian Dialect Corpus and dialect dictionaries: http://www.corpora.co), providing a more
comprehensive description of the items in point, stated the necessity of the scholarly study of the
phenomenon in question, on the one hand, and facilitated its complete research.
The present book Phonosemantic Vocabulary in Kartvelian Languages provides analyses of a
number of significant linguistic problems associated with phonosemantics (as a linguistic process)
and phonosemantic vocabulary (as outcome of the process).