Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T11:26:17.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Voice

from Part 3 - Syntax

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

By
Jasmina Milićević
Edited by
Danko Šipka  and
Wayles Browne
Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

The article describes grammatical voice in Slavic: (1) informal characterization of voice; (2) definition of voice and a general inventory of specific voices; (3) voice types in Slavic; (4) Slavic derived voices; (5) discourse functions of voices; (6) historical development of voice in Slavic; (7) some voice-like phenomena in Slavic; and (8) summary of the main issues in the study of Slavic voice. Voice phenomena are considered in a dependency approach to language.

Keywords

diathesisgrammatical voiceinflectionuniversal calculus of possible voices
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics , pp. 447 - 476
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abraham, W. & Leisiö, L., eds. (2006). Passivization and Typology, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, A. & Dorian, E. (2012). The syntactic construction of two non-active voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics, 48(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babby, L. (1998). Voice and diathesis in Slavic. Paper presented at the Workshop Comparative Slavic Morphosyntax. Bloomington, IN, 5–7 June 1998.Google Scholar
Bahrt, N. (2020). Towards a Typology of Voice Syncretism. PhD Thesis, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Bondarenko, A. (2022). The dog bites: On the “aggressive” antipassive in Slavic and Baltic. Language: Codification, Competence, Communication, 1(6–7), 40–61.Google Scholar
Borik, O. & Gehrke, B. (2016). Imperfective past passive participles in Russian. In Lenertová, D, Meyer, R, Šimík, R., & Szucsich, L, eds., Advances in Formal Slavic Linguistics 2016, Berlin: Language Science Press, pp. 53–76.Google Scholar
Blevins, J. (2003). Passives and impersonals. Journal of Linguistics, 39(3), 473–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B. (1977). In defense of spontaneous demotion: The impersonal passive. In Cole, P. & Saddock, J., eds., Grammatical Relations (Syntax and Semantics 8), New York, NY: Academic Press, pp. 47–58.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1987). Russian. In Comrie, B., ed., The World’s Major Languages, London & New York, NY: Croom Helm & Oxford University Press, pp. 329–347; 2nd ed. 2009, pp. 274–288; 3rd ed. 2018, pp. 282–297.Google Scholar
Creissels, D. (1995). Éléments de syntaxe générale, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Dimitrova-Vulchanova, M. (1999). Verb Semantics, Diathesis and Aspect, Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. & Aikhenvald, A. (2011). A typology of argument-determined constructions. In Language at Large. Essays on Syntax and Semantics, Leiden & Boston, MA: Brill, pp. 44–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Đurković, M. (2004). Passive and impersonal in English and Serbian. In Hendriks, H, ed., Working Papers in English and Applied Linguistics, 10, Cambridge: Research Centre for English and Applied Linguistics, pp. 49–101.Google Scholar
Fehrmann, D., Junghanns, U., & Lenertová, D. (2010). Two reflexive markers in Slavic. Russian Linguistics, 34, 203–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-010-9062-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Féry, C. & Ishihara, S., eds. (2016). The Oxford Handbook of Information Structure, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frąckowiak, E. & Rivero, M.-L. (2008). Distinguishing between unintentional agents and unintentional causers. In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, p. 12.Google Scholar
Franks, S. (1995). Voice alternations. In Franks, S., Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 333–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, M. (2006). Agent backgrounding as a functional domain: Reflexivization and passivization in Czech and Russian. In Lyngfelt, B. & Solstad, T., eds., Demoting the Agent. Passive, Middle and other Voice Phenomena, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 83–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geniušienė, E. (1987). The Typology of Reflexives [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 2], Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. (2001). De-transitive voice. In Givón, T. (2001), Syntax: An Introduction, Vol. 1, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 91–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guentcheva, Z. (2004). Remarks on the interaction between voice and aspect in the Slavic domain. In Xrakovskij, V., Mal’čukov, A., & Dmitrenko, S., eds., 40 let Sankt-Peterburgskoj tipologičeskoj škole, Moscow: Znak, pp. 109–128.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (1990). The grammatizication of passive morphology. Studies in Language, 14(1), 25–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, M. & Müller-Bardey, T. (2004). Valency change. In Booij, G., Lehmann, C., & Mugdan, J., eds., Morphology. A Handbook on Inflection and Word Formation, Vol. 2, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 1130–1145.Google Scholar
Holvoet, A. & Linde-Usiekniewicz, J. (2015). The middle voice in Polish: An attempt at rehabilitation. Studies in Polish Linguistics, 10(3), 105–124.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. & Thompson, S. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56(2), 251–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Israeli, A. (1997). Semantics and Pragmatics of the “Reflexive” Verbs in Russian [Slavistische Beiträge, Vol. 349], Munich: Otto Sagner Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivić, M. (2005 [1959]). Značenja srpskohrvatskog instrumentala i njihov razvoj: sintaksičko-semantička studija, Belgrade: Beogradska knjiga/Institut za srpski jezik SANU.Google Scholar
Janic, K. (2014). A rare type of reflexive use in Slavonic languages. New Insights into Slavic Linguistics, 3, 161–178.Google Scholar
Janic, K. (2016). L’antipassif dans les langues accusatives, Brussels: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallulli, D. (2007). Rethinking the passive/anticausative distinction. Linguistic Inquiry, 38(4), 770–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazenin, K. (2008). The passive voice. In Haspelmath, M., König, E., Oesterreicher, W., & Raible, W., eds., Language Typology and Language Universals, 2, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 899–916.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & Dryer, M. (2007). Passive in the world’s languages. In Shopen, T., ed., Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 1, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 325–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemmer, S. (1993). The Middle Voice. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kibort, A. (2004). Passive and Passive-Like Constructions in English and Polish. PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Knjazev, J. (1988). Resultative, passive and perfect in Russian. In Nedjalkov, V., ed., Typology of Resultative Constructions, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 343–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knjazev, J. (2007). Grammatičeskaja semantika: Russkij jazyk v tipologičeskoj perspektive, Moscow: Jazyki.Google Scholar
König, E. & Gast, V. (2008). Reciprocity and reflexivity – description typology and theory. In König, E., & Gast, V., eds. (2008), Reciprocals and Reflexives. Theoretical and Typological Explorations, The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, T. & Slocum, J. (2013). Old Church Slavonic online. www.utexas.edu/cola/centers.Google Scholar
Kučanda, D. (1992). Funkcionalni pristup analizi pasiva u hrvatskom. Suvremena lingvistika, 18(2), 175–184.Google Scholar
Kulikov, L. (2012). Voice typology. In Song, J. J., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 368–398.Google Scholar
Kulikov, L. & Lavidas, N. (2015). Reconstructing passive and voice in Proto-Indo-European. In Kulikov, L. & Lavidas, N., eds., Proto-Indo-European Syntax and Its Development, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 101–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, B. (1993). English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lavine, J. E. (2005). The morphosyntax of Polish and Ukrainian -no/-to. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 13(1), 75–117.Google Scholar
Levine, J. S. (2010). On the status of Russian perfective passive in -sja. Russian Language Journal/Russkij jazyk, 60 [Special Issue: Divergent Thinking: Prospectives on the Language Enterprise in the 21st Century – Presented to Richard D. Brecht by His Students and Colleagues], 37–51.Google Scholar
Lenardič, J. (2020). A syntactic re-analysis of the Slovenian impersonal se-construction. In Marušič, F., Mišma, P., & Žaucer, R., eds., Advances in Formal Slavic Linguistic 2017 [Open Slavic Linguistics 3], Berlin: Language Science Press, pp. 151–178.Google Scholar
Letuchiy, A. (2011). Reciprocity and similar meanings in Slavic languages and SAE. In Kosta, P., & Schûrcks, L., eds. Formalization of Grammar in Slavic Languages [Potsdam Linguistic Investigations 6], pp. 297–314.Google Scholar
Lunt, H. (2001). Old Church Slavonic Grammar, Berlin & New York, NY: Mouton De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malicka-Kleparska, A. (2016). Old Church Slavonic as a language with the middle voice morphology. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 13(2), 215–230.Google Scholar
Marušič, F. & Žaucer, R. (2014). The involuntary state/FEEL-LIKE construction: What aspect cannot do. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 22(2), 185–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, Y. (1988). Resultative, perfect and aspect. In Nedjalkov, V., ed., Typology of Resultative Constructions, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 63–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. (1974). Opyt teorii lingvističeskix modelej Smysl-Tekst. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. (1988). Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice, New York, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. (1993). The inflectional category of voice: Towards a more rigorous definition. In Comrie, B. & Polinsky, M., eds., Causativity and Transitivity [Studies in Language Companion Series 23], Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1–46.Google Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. (2001). Communicative Organization in Natural Language, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. (2006a). Voice. In Aspects of the Theory of Morphology, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 181–162.Google Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. (2006b). Zero sign in morphology. In Aspects of the Theory of Morphology, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 469–516.Google Scholar
Mel‘čuk, I. & Xolodovič, A. (1970). K teorii gramatičeskogo zaloga (opredelenie, isčislenie). Narody Azii i Afriki, 4, 111–124.Google Scholar
Miličevič, J. (2022). A sketch of the grammatical voice in Serbian. In L. Iomdin, J. Miličevič, & A. Polguère, eds., Lifetime Linguistic Inspirations: To Igor Mel’čuk from Colleagues and Friends for his 90th Birthday, Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 295–308.Google Scholar
Nedashkivska Adams, A. (1998). -no/-to and voice: Statality and actionality in contemporary Ukrainian. Canadian Slavonic Papers, 40(3–4), 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nedjalkov, V., et al. ed. (2007). Reciprocal Constructions, 4 vols., Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oraić Rabušić, I. (2017). Podjela konstrukcija sa se u hrvatskom jeziku. Suvremena lingvistika, 43(84), 173–198.Google Scholar
Padućeva, E. (2003). Semantic and pragmatic inferences of decausative verbs. Studies in Communication Science, 3(1), 133–154.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. & Postal, P. (1977). Toward a universal characterization of passivization. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 394–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percov, N. (2003). Vozvratnye stradatel’nye formy russkogo glagola v svjazi s problemoj suščestvovanija v morfologii. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 4, 43–71.Google Scholar
Piper, P., Antonić, I., Ružić, V., Tanasić, S., Popović, L., & Tošović, B. (2005). Sintaksa savremenoga srpskog jezika: prosta rečenica, Belgrade & Novi Sad: Beogradska knjiga & Matica srpska.Google Scholar
Pullum, G. (2014). Fear and loathing of the English passive. Language and Communication, 37, 60–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plungjan, V. (2003). Obščaja morfologija. Vvedenije v problematiku, Moscow: URSS.Google Scholar
Rivero, M.-L. & Milojević Sheppard, M. (2003). Indefinite reflexive clitics in Slavic: Polish and Slovenian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 89–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ronko, R. (2017). Nominative object in Modern North Russian dialects. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP 61/LNG/2017. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3087849 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3087849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, M. (1985). Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis. Language, 61(4), 821–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, M., ed. (1988). Passive and Voice [Typological Studies in Language 16], Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, A. (1984). The Passive: A Comparative Linguistic Analysis, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Siewierska, A. (1988). The passive in Slavic. In Shibatani, , pp. 243–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, A. (2013). Passive constructions. In Dryer, M. & Haspelmath, M., eds., The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/107 (accessed August 1, 2022).Google Scholar
Siewierska, A. & Baker, D. (2013). Passive agents: Prototypical vs. canonical passives. In Brown, D., Chumakina, M., & Corbett, G., eds., Canonical Morphology and Syntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 151–189.Google Scholar
Spalatin, L. (1973). Some Serbo-Croatian equivalents of the English passive. The Yugoslav Serbo-Croatian-English Contrastive Project, 8, 115–131.Google Scholar
Tanasić, S. (2014). Sintaksa pasiva u savremenom srpskom jeziku, Belgrade: Beogradska knjiga/Institut za srpski jezik SANU.Google Scholar
Tesnière, L. (1959). Éléments de syntaxe structurale, Paris: Klincksieck [English translation by T. Osborne & S. Kahane, Elements of Structural Syntax, 2015, Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins].Google Scholar
Timberlake, A. (1974). The Nominative Object in Slavic, Baltic and West Finnic, Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topolińska, Z. (2003). Pasivot kako (semantička i) gramatička kategorija (vo makedonskiot i polskiot jazik). Južnoslovenski filolog LIX, 17–34.Google Scholar
Toyota, J. & Mustafović, M. (2006). Grammatical voice and tense-aspect in Slavic. In Abraham, & Leisiö, , pp. 191–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhlik, M. & Žele, A. (2020). Sub‘’jektno-impersonal’nye refleksivnye konstrukcii v slovenskom jazyke. Slavistica Vilnensis, 65(2), 98–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xolodovič, A. ed. (1974). Tipologija passivnyx konstrukcij (datezy i zalogi), Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Xrakovskij, V., ed. (1978). Problemy teorii grammatičeskogo Zaloga, Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Xrakovskij, V., ed. (1981). Zalogovye konstrukcii v raznostrukturnyx jazykax, Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Voice
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.022
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Voice
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.022
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Voice
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.022
Available formats
×