Fundamentals in the Structure and History of Russian: A Usage-Based Approach

Chapter 5. Inflectional Morphology: Verbs

  CHAPTER 5 INFLECTIONAL MORPHOLOGY: VERBS   5.1. Introduction Like  the  Russian  nominal  and  adjectival  inflectional  system,  many  of   the  complexities  of  the  verbal  system  can  be  understood  by  using  mor-­‐‑ phology  as  a  descriptive  device.  In  this  chapter  we  will  first  review  the   facts  of  verbal  inflection  as  expressed  by  normal  orthography.  We  will   use   this   to   point   out   a   few   important   generalizations   about   variant   endings  which  may  have  previously  escaped  the  student.  We  will  then   apply  the  principles  of  morphology  to  the  verbal  paradigms.     5.2. Present/Future Tense Endings Unlike  nouns,  which  have  four  different  sets  of  endings,  verbal  inflec-­‐‑ tion  is  limited  to  two  sets  of  endings  (1st  conj  and  2nd  conj)  with  only   four  irregular  verbs  that  do  not  belong  completely  to  either  conjuga-­‐‑ tion.  Much  of  the  regularity  of  conjugation  can  be  seen  even  on  the  or-­‐‑ thographic   level,   which   we   will   review   in   this   section.   Conjugation   (спряже´ние)   refers   to   the   set   of   endings   a   verb   takes   in   the   present   tense.  In  this  chapter  “present  tense”  refers  to  conjugation  in  the  pre-­‐‑ sent   tense   and   simple   (perfective)   future.   There   are   three   variants   of   the  1st  conj,  illustrated  as  (a),  (b),  and  (c)  in  (1):       (1)   First  Conjugation  Endings           a.   b.   c.       я     чита´  +  ю   ид  +  у´   ста´н  +  у       ты     чита´  +  ешь   ид  +  ёшь   ста´н  +  ешь       он/а/о   чита´  +  ет   ид  +  ёт     ста´н  +  ет       мы     чита´  +  ем   ид  +  ём   ста´н  +  ем       вы     чита´  +  ете   ид  +  ёте   ста´н  +  ете       они   чита´  +  ют   ид  +  у´т   ста´н  +  ут     94 5. INFLECTIONAL MORPHOLOGY: VERBS While   the   endings   are   similar   in   the   three   paradigms   given   above,   certain   variations   are   evident.   How   can   we   relate   the   three   sets   of   endings   and   how   do   the   morphological   principles   already   discussed   explain  the  observed  variations?   Looking  vertically,  the  paradigms  in  (1)  show  three  different  sets  of   endings.  However,  looking  horizontally,  we  find  only  two  variations.   For  example,  the  first  sg  ending  of  the  verb  in  (a)  differs  from  those  in   (b)  and  (c).  In  the  former  the  ending  is  -­‐‑ю,  in  the  latter  the  ending  is  -­‐‑у.   When  will  it  be  -­‐‑ю  and  when  will  it  be  -­‐‑у?  It  is  clear  that  stress  does  not   play  a  role  in  the  choice  of  endings  here,  because  the  ending  -­‐‑ю  may   occur  under  stress  (даю´)  or  not  and  the  ending  -­‐‑у  may  occur  with  or   without  stress  (ста´ну).  For  first  conj  verbs,  the  ending  -­‐‑у  is  used  when   the   verbal   stem   ends   in   a   consonant,   -­‐‑ю   when   the   stem   ends   in   a   vowel.  The  same  thing  is  true  for  the  они´  forms.   The  second  variation  evident  in  the  endings  in  (1)  can  be  seen  in   the  endings  for  the  ты,  он/а/о,  мы,  and  вы  forms.  In  the  verbs  in  (a)   and  (c)  these  endings  have  the  vowel  -­‐‑e-­‐‑,  while  verbs  like  those  in  (b)   have  a  ё.  This  variation  is  due  to  the  location  of  stress.  When  stress  falls   on  these  endings,  then  the  vowel  will  be  -­‐‑ё-­‐‑.  When  stress  falls  on  the   stem,   then   the   vowel   in   the   ending   is   -­‐‑e-­‐‑.   These   differences   are   all   based   on   information   that   is   part   of   the   verb   itself—the   location   of   stress  and  the  type  of  sound  found  at  the  end  of  the  verbal  stem.     Practice A.   The  following  are  1st  conj  verbs.  Conjugate  them  as  in  (1):   обозна´ться   вести´   привы´кнуть       So  far  we  have  seen  that  the  differences  in  endings  observed  in  1st   conj  verbs,  as  illustrated  in  (1)  above,  are  based  on  features  associated   with  the  verb  stem  or  stress.   Consider   now   several   apparent   exceptions   to   the   principles   re-­‐‑ garding  the  distribution  of  the  endings  -­‐‑ю/у  and  -­‐‑ют/ут.  There  is  a  set   of  1st  conj  verbs  that  do  not  have  a  vocalic  stem  in  the  present  tense,   that  is,  their  stems  do  not  have  a  vowel.  They  all  end  in  -­‐‑ить  in  the  in-­‐‑ finitive:  бить,  пить,  лить,  etc.  When  conjugated,  these  verbs  all  have   a  soft  sign:  я  бью,  я  пью,  я  лью.  Thus  the  stems  of  these  verbs  all  end  in   a   (soft)   consonant:   бь-­‐‑,   пь-­‐‑,   ль-­‐‑.   According   to   the   generalization   dis-­‐‑ 5.2. PRESENT/FUTURE TENSE ENDINGS 95   cussed  above,  the  ending  -­‐‑у  should  follow  a  stem  ending  in  a  conso-­‐‑ nant.  We  can  complicate  matters  by  altering  the  characterization  given   above  regarding  these  endings  by  suggesting  that  in  1st  conj  verbs,  the   ending  -­‐‑ю  occurs  after  vowels  and  after  soft  signs.  This  is  not  too  bad,   since,  as  we  will  see  in  chapter  7,  the  soft  sign  historically  was  a  vowel.   Inflectional  morphology  will  allow  us  to  eliminate  this  exception,  but   it  is  valid  when  dealing  just  with  orthography.     Another   apparent   exception   regarding   the   endings   -­‐‑ю/у   and     -­‐‑ют/ут  are  verbs  that  have  the  form  -­‐‑ороть  or  -­‐‑олоть  in  the  infinitive.   For  example:  боро´ться  ~  я  борю´сь.  This  is  a  clear  violation  to  the  state-­‐‑ ment   that   the   ending   after   consonants   is   -­‐‑у.   Neither   of   these   excep-­‐‑ tional  classes  of  verbs  (1st  conj  verbs  in  -­‐‑ить  or  -­‐‑ороть/олоть  verbs)   will  be  exceptional  when  we...