| 1. |
- Kock Kobaidze, Manana
(författare)
-
Conjugation types of Georgian verbs
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Kartvelur Enata Strukturis Sakitxebi [Issues of the Structure of Kartvelian Languages]. - Chikobava Institute of Linguistics, Tbilisi, Georgia. ; 11, s. 98-131
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt)abstract
- There is a strong tendency to form morphologically marked two major groups of verbs in Georgian: dynamic verbs marked by thematic markers, on the one hand, and stative verbs makred by auxiliary verbs, on the other hand. This difference is manifested in the first and second persons of the present tense in the v-set marked forms. Stative verbs which formed the present tense without auxiliary verbs in old Georgian employ auxiliaries in contemporary Georgian (vzi vzivar ‘I am sitting’, vdga vdgavar ‘I am standing’...), whereas a large group of dynamic verbs presented without thematic markers in old Georgian takes thematic markers in contemporary Georgian (vtib vtibav ‘I am mowing it’, vt’ex vt’exav ‘I am breaking it’). All formally stative verbs are atelic verbs (vuq’varvar ‘S/he loves me’, vdgavar ‘I am standing’). They form the future tense by adding vowel prefixes. Within dynamic verbs, three large groups are distinguished: transitive telic verbs (vasheneb ‘I am building it’), intransitive telic verbs (vimalebi ‘I hide myself) and atelic verbs (vcxovrob ‘I live’, vmgheri ‘I sing’). Telic verbs (both dynamic transitives and dynamic intransitives) form the future tense by adding preverbs. Atelic verbs (both dynamic and stative) form the future tense by adding vowel prefixes. It is reasonable to identify three various types traditionally presented within conjugation type III: a) verbs formed with the markers –eb, -ob- and –av, b) verbs formed with the marker –i (vicini ‘I am laughing), and c) verbs formed with auxiliary verbs (vc’uxvar ‘I am worried). It is suggested to place the latter group (medioactives formed with auxiliary verbs, e.g. vc’uxvar ‘I am worried’, vdumvar ‘I am silent’) within the verbs formed with auxiliary verbs. Three other main groups within auxiliary formation verbs are the following: mediopassives (vdgavar ‘I am standing’), stative passives (vgdivar ‘I am lying thrown about’), and verbs where the 3rd subject person marker –a is attached directly to the root (cxela ‘It’s hot’). Some other features, characteristic of each type, are also described. Separation of auxiliary and non auxiliary verb formation makes it possible to describe the relation between phonematic structure of verbs and conjugation types. Inversive verbs are presented as differnet groups reflecting a variety of morphology of direct verbs but marked with a shared syntactic pattern C. (Abbreviations: PV – preverb, PVR – preradical vowel, R – root, Th – thematic marker, Syntactic B – syntactic pattern of transitive and labile transitive verbs, Syntactic pattern A – syntactic pattern of intransitive verbs, Syntactic pattern C – syntactic pattern of inversive verbs )
|
|
| 2. |
- Kock Kobaidze, Manana
(författare)
-
Towards the Versification Typology of Georgian Verse
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Tsakhnagi, Annual of Philological Studies. - Merab Ghaghanidze. - 1987-7218. ; 2, s. 135-149
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt)abstract
- Rhyme and Stress in Georgian Dialects (Towards the Versification Typology of Georgian Verse) Word stress is weak in standard Georgian. The typology of Georgian verse is an uncertain issue. Some researchers argue that the Georgian verse is accentual-syllabic, while according to another point of view, it is syllabic. An assertion about the exclusively specific nature of Georgian verse has also appeared. This paper is an attempt to introduce dialect data as material for versification research in Georgian. Georgian dialects have clearly marked stress patterns unlike the standard Georgian. It is noteworthy that the Georgian verse retains its structure regardless whether it is pronounced in standard Georgian intonation or in a dialectal accent. At the same time, the placement, tone pitch and intensity of a stressed syllable is quite diverse depending on dialects in Georgian. However, these differences do not affect the structure of Georgian verse. Especially significant is the fact that the place of dialectal stress (regardless of the diverse placement in various dialects) does not influence the length of a rhyme segment. On the basis of these data the following conclusions are suggested: 1. In difference from an accentual-syllabic verse (e.g. Russian verse) or syl¬labic verse (e.g. French verse), the stress (either a word stress or stress of a rhythmic segment) is not able to create a rhyme segment in Georgian. 2. Rhyme segments as well as feet in general are usually created by word boundaries in Georgian verse. 3. Word boundaries, in turn, are marked with pitch, intensity, and pause. A stress, characteristic of the standard Georgian or dialects, is usually presented along with word boundary markers, but the decisive factor for the verse structuring in Georgian is a word boundary and not a specific stress of dialects or that of the standard language. In other words, a word boundary forms a metrical stress in the Georgian verse. 4. In respect to the relation between a metrical stress, on the one hand, and a word stress (or rhythmic group stress), on the other hand, especially within a rhyme segment, an accentual-syllabic and a syllabic verse (at least, English and French verses) fall into one type. Georgian verse, along with certain languages, having a weak stress, makes up another group where the structural factor creating a rhythmi¬cal diversity is a word boundary.
|
|
