ABOUT THE RATIO OF PREDICATIVE AND FULL PARTICIPIAL FORMS OF RUSSIAN VERBS AND THE METHOD OF THEIR TRANSMISSION INTO PERSIAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52547/iarll.22.10Keywords:
Russian, Persian, Participial Constructions, Predicative Constructions, Synonymic Relations, Russian as a Foreign Language, Comparative StudiesAbstract
The predicative forms of the verb and participle, when functioning in the text, represent a certain set that the language needs to ensure its communicative task.
The article deals with the problem of interchangeability of syntactic constructions with homogeneous verb forms (participial and predicative) in Russian and their equivalents in Persian. The functional dependence of the transformational potential of participial constructions on the contextual conditions of their use is also established, as a result of which a picture of possible Persian equivalents of the real and passive forms of Russian participles with a variety of their uses emerges. The implementation of transformational substitution of participles with predicative forms of verbs in lessons of Russian as a foreign language helps students to better understand the meaning of participles and participial phrases, and thereby it becomes possible for them to better understand the grammatical meaning of the original construction.
Extended abstract:
Participles are verbal adjectives. As such, they have characteristics of both verbs (tense, aspect, voice) and adjectives (gender, number, case). In Russian, participles are used to describe a quality or characteristic of a subject that depends on a verbal action: present active, past active, present passive and past passive participles. Past passive participles are almost always derived from perfective verbs. They are used all the time in Russian and are often thought of as adjectives. Like adjectives, they have both a short and a long form.
The predicative forms of the verb and the participle, when functioning in the text, represent a certain set that the language needs to ensure its communicative task.
In the teaching of Russian in Iranian universities, more careful consideration should be given to translated texts of Russian fiction in Farsi (preferably translated directly from Russian, without an intermediate language). The correct understanding of the participle in Iranian universities should be more carefully considered in translated texts of Russian fiction in Farsi (preferably directly translated from Russian, without an intermediate language).
The article deals with the problem of interchangeability of syntactic constructions with homogeneous verb forms (participial and predicative) in Russian and their equivalents in Persian. The functional dependence of the transformational potential of participial constructions on the contextual conditions of their use is also established, as a result of which a picture of possible Persian equivalents of the active and passive forms of Russian participles with a variety of their uses emerges. The implementation of transformational substitution of participles with predicative forms of verbs in the teaching of Russian as a foreign language helps students to better understand the meaning of participles and participial phrases, and thus makes it possible for them to better understand the grammatical meaning of the original construction.
The article considers participial forms at the textual level. These forms can function both as 'substitutes' for finite forms and as independent elements. The relations of classical collateral correlativity are observed when, during the transformation of the participial construction, the predicative form of the forming verb with the subject in the position of the first actant is introduced instead of the participle. Translators of Russian literature into Persian mostly adhere to the participial "character" (in specific and collateral meanings) when translating from Russian into Persian, which, contrary to expectations, indicates sufficient knowledge of the participial forms and their comprehensive consideration by translators, and can promise us even better translations of Russian literature.
References
Бабайцева В.В. Чеснокова Л.Д. (2003). Русский язык. Теория (для 5-9 кл.). М. : Дрофа.
Богданов С.И., Воейкова М.Д., Евтюхин В.Б. и др. (2007). Современный русский язык. Морфология. Препринт (рабочие материалы для учебника). СПб.: Факультет филологии и искусств СПбГУ.
Бондарко, A.B. (1976). Теория морфологических категорий. Акад. наук СССР, Ин-т языкознания. Л. : Наука.
Булгакова М. (2011). «Четыре портрета» и «Золотые корреспонденции Ферапонта Ферапонтовича Капорцева», перевод: Махназ Садри, Тегеран : Нашре Салес.
Волынец, Т.Н. (1992). О некоторых особенностях функционирования причастных форм на уровне текста. Весн. Беларус. дзярж. ун-та. Сер. 4, Філасофія. Журналістыка. Педагогіка. Псіхалогія. – № 2.
Волынец Т.Н. (2015). Русский язык и литература в пространстве мировой культуры: материалы ХIII Конгресса МАПРЯЛ (г. Гранада, Испания, 13-20 сентября 2015 г.) / Ред. Коллегия: Л.А. Вербицкая, К.А. Рогова, Т.И. Попова [и др.]. В 15 т. – Т. 4. Санкт-Петербург : МАПРЯЛ.
Галкина-Федорук Е.М. (1964). Современный русский язык (морфология, синтаксис). М. : МГУ
Костомаров В.Г. и Максимов В.И. (2003). Современный русский литературный язык: учебник, М. : Гардарики.
Лекант П.А. и др. (2001). Современный русский язык. Учебное пособие для студентов учреждений среднего профессионального образования педагогического профиля, М. : Дрофа
Милославский, И. Г. (1981). Морфологические категории современного русского языка: учеб. пособие. М. : Просвещение.
Панов, М.В. (1999). Позиционная морфология русского языка. Москва : Наука.
Русская грамматика. (1980). Под ред. Н. Ю. Шведовой, Т.1. М. : Наука.
Сазонова И. К. (2008). Толково-грамматический словарь русских причастий. 3-е изд. М. : АСТ-Пресс.
Чехов А. (2018). Драма на охоте, перевод: Олег Хачатурьян, Тегеран : Экбатан.
Bibliography
Babajceva V.V. Chesnokova L.D. (2003). Russkij jazyk. Teorija (dlja 5-9 kl.). M. : Drofa.
Bogdanov S.I., Voejkova M.D., Evtjuhin V.B. i dr. (2007). Sovremennyj russkij jazyk. Morfologija. Preprint (rabochie materialy dlja uchebnika). SPb.: Fakul'tet filologii i iskusstv SPbGU.
Bondarko, A.B. (1976). Teorija morfologicheskih kategorij. Akad. nauk SSSR, In-t jazykoznanija. L. : Nauka.
Bulgakova M. (2011). «Chetyre portreta» i «Zolotye korrespondencii Feraponta Ferapontovicha Kaporceva», perevod: Mahnaz Sadri, Tegeran : Nashre Sales.
Volynec, T.N. (1992). O nekotoryh osobennostjah funkcionirovanija prichastnyh form na urovne teksta. Vesn. Belarus. dzjarzh. un-ta. Ser. 4, Fіlasofіja. Zhurnalіstyka. Pedagogіka. Psіhalogіja. – № 2.
Volynec T.N. (2015). Russkij jazyk i literatura v prostranstve mirovoj kul'tury: materialy HIII Kongressa MAPRJaL (g. Granada, Ispanija, 13-20 sentjabrja 2015 g.) / Red. Kollegija: L.A. Verbickaja, K.A. Rogova, T.I. Popova [i dr.]. V 15 t. – T. 4. Sankt-Peterburg : MAPRJaL.
Galkina-Fedoruk E.M. (1964). Sovremennyj russkij jazyk (morfologija, sintaksis). M. : MGU
Kostomarov V.G. i Maksimov V.I. (2003). Sovremennyj russkij literaturnyj jazyk: uchebnik, M. : Gardariki.
Lekant P.A. i dr. (2001). Sovremennyj russkij jazyk. Uchebnoe posobie dlja studentov uchrezhdenij srednego professional'nogo obrazovanija pedagogicheskogo profilja, M. : Drofa
Miloslavskij, I. G. (1981). Morfologicheskie kategorii sovremennogo russkogo jazyka: ucheb. posobie. M. : Prosveshhenie.
Panov, M.V. (1999). Pozicionnaja morfologija russkogo jazyka. Moskva : Nauka.
Russkaja grammatika. (1980). Pod red. N. Ju. Shvedovoj, T.1. M. : Nauka.
Sazonova I. K. (2008). Tolkovo-grammaticheskij slovar' russkih prichastij. 3-e izd. M. : AST-Press.
Chehov A. (2018). Drama na ohote, perevod: Oleg Hachatur'jan, Tegeran : Jekbatan.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Issledovatel'skiy Zhurnal Russkogo Yazyka I Literatury
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
"Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)"