Russian correspondences to Swedish bipartite comitatives

Abstract

The present parallel corpus investigation shows that the Russian correspondences to Swedish bipartite comitatives: med- ‘with’-constructions with the structure [med + NP + PP], largely can be predicted from the presence and positions of NPs referring to inalienable body parts in the constructions. When a Swedish bipartite med-construction contains an inalienable in the first (subject) part of the bipartite med-construction: [med + NP_inalienable + P + NP], perfective converb constructions is the most frequent Russian correspondence. Swedish: Han står med händerna mot ryggstödet ‘She is standing with her hands against the backrest of the chair’ corresponds to Russian on stoit položiv ruki na spinku sidenja, [… put(pfv):cvb hands[acc] on back:dim:acc sitting:gen]. When there is an alienable NP in the first part and an inalienable NP in the PP part: [med + NP_alienable + P + NP_inalienable], by contrast, the Swedish bipartite med-constructions frequently correspond to Russian comitative (s+instrumental) constructions. Swedish: Hon står med ett glas i handen; Russian: Ona stoit so stakanom v ruke [with glass:ins in hand:loc] ‘She is standing with a glass in her hand.’ The study shows two more important correspondence types, bare instrumental constructions expressing manner, Swedish: med ryggen mot publiken corresponds to Russian: spinoj k publike [back:ins towards audience:dat] ‘with his back to the audience’; and finite constructions expressing condition or temporal condition, Swedish Men med valet av Donald Trump till USA: s president försvann det sista hoppet om utländskt stöd ‘But with the election of Donald Trump as the president of the USA, the last hope of foreign support disappeared’; Russian No posle togo kak Donal′d Tramp byl vybran prezidentom SŠA, poslednjaja nadežda na inostrannuju podderžku isčezla. ‘But after Donald Trump was elected president of the USA, the last hope of foreign support disappeared’. These four Russian correspondence types represent four different ontological types, as they mark relations between, eventualities (states/temporary properties), entities, manners, and states of affairs, respectively.