To have or to be? The possessive picture of the world of the Belarusians

Authors

  • Syarhei A. Vazhnik Belarusian State University, 4 Niezaliežnasci Avenue, Minsk 220030, Belarus

Keywords:

possessive relationships, esse-languages (to be-languages) vs habere-languages (to have-languages), possessive model, rejecting / non-rejecting belonging

Abstract

The article describes the Belarusian be- and have-constructions from the standpoint of functional grammar and semantic syntax. These constructions are completely equal when expressing «rejected belonging», but there is no complete synonymy between the marked constructions. There are certain selective restrictions on the compatibility of the verb predicate мець with abstract and possesive names. The compatibility of the Belarusian verbs быць and мець with the names in the posessum position should be described by means of selective categories [+Concr] / [+Abstr], [+Anim] / [–Anim], [+Pers] / [–Pers].

Author Biography

  • Syarhei A. Vazhnik, Belarusian State University, 4 Niezaliežnasci Avenue, Minsk 220030, Belarus

    PhD (philology), docent; professor at the department of computational linguistics and linguodidactics, dean of the faculty of social and cultural communications

References

  1. Benveniste E. [The verbs «to be» and «to have» and their functions in the language]. In: Benveniste E. Obshchaya lingvistika [General linguistics]. Moscow: Progress; 1974. p. 203–224. Russian.
  2. Vazhnik SA. [The category of passivity in the aspect of contrastive (Polish-Belarusian parallels)]. In: Kiklevich AK, editor. Palanistyka. 1999;1999:105–121. Belarusian.
  3. Vazhnik SA. Kantrastywny sintaksis polskaj i bielaruskaj mow: sjemantyka i dystrybucyja dzjejaslownaga predykata [Contrastive syntax of Polish and Belarusian languages (semantics and distribution of the verbal predicate)]. Minsk: Prava i ekanomika; 2008. 492 p. Belarusian.
  4. Vjachorka V. [The Queen Bona, her husband, and the Pythagorean theorem. Belarusian language – for private ownership of everything]. RS. 2016:190–202. Belarusian.
  5. Vjachorka V. [«Ja maju» or «u mjanje jos’c’»? About Belarusian individualism and collectivisation in the language]. RS. 2017:221–229. Belarusian.
  6. Glinnik IV. [The verbs «to be» and «to have» in the system of means of expressing possessiveness in the Belarusian and Russian languages]. In: Golovnya AI, editor. Karpovskie nauchnye chtenija. Vypusk 5. Chastʼ 2 [Karpov scientific readings. Issue 5. Part 2]. Minsk: Belarusian State University; 2011. p. 148–152. Belarusian.
  7. Zhurinskaya MA. [Possessiveness]. In: Yartseva VN, editor. Lingvistichieskii entsiklopedichieskii slovar’ [Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary]. Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya; 1990. p. 388–389. Russian.
  8. Karskii EF. Belorusy. Vypusk 3 [The Belarusians. Issue 3]. Moscow: Izdatelʼstvo Akademii nauk SSSR; 1956. p. 413–414. Russian.
  9. Kiklevich AK. [About indexal expressions with the semantics of possessiveness (based on the material of the Russian and German languages)]. In: Belarusian State University. Slavyano-germanskie yazykovye paralleli [Slavic-Germanic language parallels]. Minsk: Belarusian State University; 1996. p. 190–212. Russian.
  10. Mihnjevich AJa. [Synonymy of phrases u mjanie josc’ – ja maju in the Belarusian language.]. In: Brest State University. Bielaruskaja mova i litaratura w vnu [Belarusian language and literature in higher educational establishments]. Brest: Brest State University; 1971. p. 123–126. Belarusian.
  11. Mihnjevich AJa. [Selective category «rejection / non-rejection»]. In: Mihnjevich AJa. Prabljemy sjemantyka-sintaksichnaga dasljedavannja bielaruskaj movy [The problems of the semantic-syntactic study of the Belarusian language]. Minsk: Navuka i tjehnika; 1976. p. 201–220. Belarusian.
  12. Mikhnevich AYa. Russko-bielorusskii razgovornik [Russian-Belarusian phrasebook]. Minsk: Vyshjejshaja shkola; 1991. p. 211. Russian.
  13. Norman BYu. [About possessive pronouns in Slavic languages]. Slavia Orientalis. 1999;XLVIII(4):599–616. Russian.
  14. Plungyan VA. [Compare offers]. In: Plungyan VA. Pochiemu yazyki takie raznye. Populyarnaya lingvistika [Why the languages are so different? Popular linguistic]. Мoscow: АST-Press; 2020. p. 178–200. Russian.
  15. Suprun AJa. [Belarusian literary language: between Slavia Orthodoxa and Slavia Latina]. In: Sjameshka LI, editor. Mova – Litaratura – Kultura. Chastka 1 [Language – Literature – Culture. Part 1]. Minsk: Belarusian State University; 1999. p. 21–24. Belarusian.
  16. Atrahovich KK, editor. Tlumachalny slownik bielaruskai movy. Tom 1 [Explanatory dictionary of the Belarusian language. Volume 1]. Minsk: Bjelaruskaja saveckaja encyklapedyja; 1977. p. 431–432. Belarusian.
  17. Lukashanec AA, editor. Tlumachalny slownik bielaruskaj litaraturnaj movy [Explanatory dictionary of the Belarusian literary language]. Minsk: Bjelaruskaja encyklapedyja; 1996. p. 99, 344. Belarusian.
  18. Kiklewicz A. Czy w języku polskim istnieją zaimki dzierżawcze. Prace Filologiczne. 1997;XLII:121–133.

Downloads

Published

2021-03-09

Issue

No. 1 (2021): Human in the Socio-Сultural Dimension

Section

Socio-Cultural Communications

How to Cite

[1]
Vazhnik, S.A. 2021. To have or to be? The possessive picture of the world of the Belarusians. Human in the Socio-Cultural Dimension. 1 (Mar. 2021), 4–13.