Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Stress
III. Some major differences between Russian noun and verb stress.
1. The Russian noun is divided into singular and plural subparadigms. The verb
has the two basic subparadigms of non-past and past, but is more complex,
with other forms that can be derived from the basic subparadigms (past
passive participle, other participial forms, imperative infinitive.
2. As shown above, type B and C Russian noun stress is correlated to the
phonological shape of grammatical endings (desinences). (E.g. genitive
zero/non-zero, nominative low/non-low.)
3. Verb stress is predicted on the basis of three possible criteria: the
phonological shape of endings, as in the noun; the phonological shape of
the verb stem; and the presence or absence of a vocalic verbalizing suffix.
The following flow charts and examples will show how this works in both
the non-past (present-future) and past subparadigms.
4. One of the most important rules is that the presence of a verbal suffix in
the form prevents the B vs. C opposition; it doesnt matter if the suffix was
never there or was deleted in the Jakobsonian system.
Note that Ivanova allows for the use of the non- type C
stress for , but that Eskova et al do not
recommend it.
Ivanova (2005):
Eskova et al (1988):
3. Some or all of the accentual oppositions (A, B, and C) can be suspended (or
neutralized) in specified morphophonemically environments. This can be
illustrated with the following two examples:
A. There is no B vs. C opposition when a syllabic verbalizing suffix is present in the
word, either absent in the basic form or deleted. In this case, the neutralized
form is realized as type B in the non-past and past subparadigms. E.g. the verbs
and differ in the non-past as type B vs. type C, where the
syllabic suffix is absent (and deleted, according to the Jakobsonian one-stem
system), but in the past tense they merge as suffix-stressed type B, due to the
presence of the verbal suffix i- in all forms. When a syllabic suffix is present in
the past passive participle, the opposition between types B and C is also
neutralized, but the form is realized as neither B nor C stress, but stress that is
retracted to one syllable preceding the suffix: e.g. , .
B. There is no opposition of stress types when the stem is non-syllabic. This occurs
in the non-past tense, where all stress types merge and are realized as type C endstress. E.g. the non-past forms of and merge as type C (, ),
but the past tense has a syllabic stem and opposes these lexemes as type A vs.
type C: e.g. , ; , .
4. It was noted above that the past passive participle merges stress types B and C
when a syllabic suffix is present. The realization does not match either that of B or
C, since it is pre-predesinential (e.g. , ). This allows us to
make the point that the type A, B, and C invariants only are valid in distinctive
environments. Neutralized environments can take on the accent of either of the
merged types, or a third type, such as in the past passive participle. In the latter
case, the stress also becomes a redundant grammatical marker.
5. Observe that when a masculine noun has the nominative plural ending a, and
non-zero stress in the genitive case, the resulting plural stress fits the definition of
both types B and C (e.g. , ). This means that in this restricted subset
of nouns, there is a neutralization of stress types B and C in the plural. Taken
together with the singular, the choice of stress for such words is either CC or CB.
Arbitrarily, the simpler type CC would seem to be indicated.
Ronald Feldsteinrff000@gmail.com