LINGUIST List 9.341

Sat Mar 7 1998

Disc: Russian Syntax

Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <>


  1. Lotoshko Yurij, Re: 9.249, Sum: Russian Syntax

Message 1: Re: 9.249, Sum: Russian Syntax

Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 14:26:46 -0800
From: Lotoshko Yurij <>
Subject: Re: 9.249, Sum: Russian Syntax

> I must have missed the original query, but I would like to take
> exception to the idea that Russian is "basically SVO". First of
> all, this seems to confuse theoretical and factual issues, since in
> many theories a language can be "basically" X and "superficially" Y,
> where X and Y are distinct (e.g., unless I am much mistaken there is
> hardly anyone other than me who does not accept the idea that within
> generative approaches to syntax Dutch and German basically are
> non-SVO, even though in another sense of the word "basically" they
> are precisely SVO). Second, and perhaps even more importantly, it
> is by no mean clear, and certainly highly theory-dependent, whether
> Russian has any "basic" word order statable in terms of the
> primitives S,V, and O. In fact, I dont think that this is the case
> at all, and any theory which requires it to be the case deserves to
> be scrapped. It is likely that reference to 'S' and 'V' maybe
> necessary, but I dont know that this is true of 'O', and certainly
> reference to these three is not sufficient.

Only some examples:

>From A. Blok (12 - poems)

Noch. Ulica. Fonar'. Apteka. ( 4 sent!!!! there no Verbs).
- -------------------

Xolodno. Temno. Nespit'sja --> 3 sent there no Sub. (podlezhashtego)


All in Russian codepade 1251: TvGU (Tver State University)

Rossija, 17002, Tver, pr.Cajkovskogo, 70, Filfak, kafedra russkogo
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue