On the question of the valence of emotive verbs in the Russian dialects of the Amur region

Fan Haixu Postgraduate student, the department of Russian Language and Publishing Industry, Pacific National University 680035, Russia, Khabarovsk Krai, Khabarovsk, Pacific street, 140 362457061@qq.com Other publications by this author

Sadchenko Valentina Tarasovna ORCID: 0000-0001-6276-6819 Doctor of Philology Doctor of Philology, professor, Head of the Department of Russian Language and Publishing, Pacific National University 680000, Russia, Khabarovsk Krai, Khabarovsk, K. Marx str., 68 ValentinaSadchenko@yandex.ru

The term "valence" in linguistics owes its appearance to the French linguist L. Tenier, who developed the theory of valence, according to which, in the semantic analysis of a sentence, the main role belongs to the verb, the meaning of which is realized with the help of actants – the subject and the complement ^[15].

In Russian studies, the term "valence" was first used by S. D. Katsnelson. In the article "On the grammatical category", published in 1948, he writes that "a full-fledged real word in every language is not a word at all, but a word with specific syntactic potentials that allow it to be used only in a strictly defined way, a predetermined level of development of grammatical relations in the language. This property of a word to be realized in a certain way in a sentence and enter into certain combinations with other words could be called its syntactic valence" ^{[8, p. 132]}.           

The concepts of valence formed in linguistics are quite controversial; the history of the use of the term "valence of linguistic units" currently represents an extensive field of research based on the material of various languages.

A fairly detailed analysis of the study of the valence category is contained in the article by M. V. Vlavatskaya "Valence as a potential of linguistic syntagmatics: lexicographic aspect", where valence is considered as a potential compatibility of words; the author focuses on the most controversial areas in the development of the theory of valence, on the importance of reflecting this phenomenon in combinatorial dictionaries, since "the valence of a word is a potential linguistic syntagmatics and its consideration are necessary when creating various combinatorial dictionaries that give a systematic description of syntagmatic connections (syntactic and/or lexico-semantic) of the most frequent words of a particular language" ^{[4, p. 51]}.

A brief overview of the history of the study of verbal valence in linguistics is also presented in a number of other works, in particular, in the doctoral dissertation of S. M. Kibardina, devoted to the valence of the verb in the German language.  According to S. M. Kibardina, "the valence of a verb is the ability to combine with a certain range of linguistic units, determining their number, semantics, method and form of expression" ^{[10, p. 42]}. 

S. V. Shustova and E. A. Smirnova, describing the valence potential of English verbs, verbal valence is understood as "a universal semantic-grammatical category fixing the ratio of semantic (potential) actants with syntactic (actualized)", in which "the semantic valence of the verb determines its syntactic valence" ^{[16, pp. 21-22]}.

V. G. Gak, summing up the approaches of previous studies, suggests determining the following parameters when analyzing the valence of a language unit: 1) the general type of valence: active or passive; 2) the obligatoriness of valence: mandatory or optional; 3) the syntactic function of the complementary term (subject, object, attributive, circumstantial, predicative valence); 4) the form of the complementary term, including its partial affiliation; 5) the categorical semantics of the word implementing valence; 6) the valence number ^{[5, p. 80]}.

V. B. Kasevich draws attention to the fact that since "the valence potential is a dictionary characteristic of the corresponding lexeme," if it is used in one of the grammatical forms in a certain syntactic construction, a loss of one or another valence may be observed ^{[7, p. 93]}.

From the studies of the valence category of recent years on the material of the Russian language, it should be noted the works of O. G. Tverdokhleb, which describe the types of valence of a number of lexico-semantic groups of verbal vocabulary, in particular, LSG verbs of vertical displacement; the author pays special attention to the problem of semantic actants ^[14].

The problems of valence theory existing in modern linguistics, the main concepts and approaches to the study of this theory are described in the work of N. N. Stepanova "Features of the verbal valence of the South Hessian (Samarq) island dialect in Altai in comparison with modern literary German" ^[13].

Of considerable interest is the article by O. G. Shchitova, in which the author analyzes the combinability possibilities of borrowed vocabulary in the Middle Siberian regiolect based on the material of the monuments of writing of the XVII century. O. G. Shchitova considers valence as "the general combinability ability of words, encompassing their lexical, morphological and syntactic characteristics in the relationship", and suggests a model of valence analysis developed by V. G. Gak to add a definition of the type of syntactic connection (subordination, composition, complementary connection), formal means of expressing this connection and word order, which, in our opinion, may be relevant not only when analyzing the valence of borrowed units, but also when studying the valence characteristics of dialectisms in various groups of dialects. In addition, the author introduces the concept of a "valence index", which should take into account all the valence features of borrowed lexemes ^{[17, p. 28]}.

In this paper, valence is understood, following S. D. Katsnelson and a number of other researchers, broadly: as a general combinative ability of words.

The valence of emotive verbs for the first time became the subject of research in the work of A. Zaliznyak "Polysemy in language and ways of its representation", in which different representations of the actant in the verb to be afraid are considered ^[6].

A number of dissertation studies are devoted to the description of the semantics and valence properties of verbs of emotional state: the German-language verbal vocabulary is analyzed in the work of T. V. Ebert, in which the author suggests considering the valence of verbs of emotional state, attitudes, influences, actions, behavior using field theory ^[18]; in the dissertation of M. M. Boboeva, the subject of analysis is the semantics and valence of verbs emotional state in Tajik and German ^[3].

V. Yu. Apresyan, relying on the methodology of the Moscow Semantic School and using the method of corpus analysis, examines the valence of verbs with the meaning of emotional state in the Russian literary language, draws attention to the influence of the semantic structure of the verb on its management model, expressed in a variety of management models in emotive verbs, which, in turn, is due to "various ontological properties different types of emotions" ^{[1, p. 59]}.

Currently, the principles of valence classification of verbs, semantic types of actants and distributors are highlighted in the theory of valence, a methodology for studying the valence of a verb has been developed.          The valence features of dialect verbs are described extremely insufficiently; the features of the implementation of the valence of the verb word in the Russian dialects of the Amur region are not described at all, which determines the novelty of this work.

In the "Dictionary of Russian dialects of the Amur region" ^[11], 62 verbs with the meaning of an emotional state are recorded. Among them, 31 verbs are presented exclusively in this dictionary and have no analogues either in other dialects or in the literary language.

Taking into account the set of actants caused by the semantic and grammatical features of these verbs, an attempt was made to classify emotive verbs into the following subgroups:

– monovalent verbs: to gasp ("to be afraid"), to buzz ("to show nervousness, anxiety"), to light up ("to get bored, sad"), to drill ("to get angry"), to frown ("to be sad"), to shake(in the second, figurative meaning, "to become uninitiative, indifferent to everything"), to show off ("rejoice"), to mire ("suffer, grieve"), to stare ("go mad with fright"), to get excited ("calm down, come to your senses"), to criticize ("be surprised"), to be alarmed ("to be alarmed, to be alarmed"), to be jealous ("to be sad, to yearn, to grieve");

– divalent verbs: to shit ("to mock"), to look ("to like, to be to taste"), to please ("to disdain"), to favor ("to pity, to care"), to pity ("to love"), to be jealous ("to envy"), to eat ("to test and show objectively unjustifiably dislike and anger towards someone"), rat ("get angry, get angry at someone or something"), cheer up ("infect with gaiety, make fun"), tease ("very angry"), blend in ("get confused, shy, confused"), be stupid ("get angry"), to make fun ("to mock"), to smarten up ("to condemn");

– trivalent: to bully ("torment, annoy"), to prize ("look after, take care").

It is revealed that verbs with zero valence are absent in this group due to the specifics of their meaning: emotions, as a rule, on the one hand, are associated with the subject who experiences them, and on the other hand, with the object that causes them.

Russian Russian lexemes that have analogues in the Russian literary language or in other groups of Russian dialects are interesting, in particular, the verb to regret, which S. D. Katsnelson also applied to the analysis using MAS data ^{[9, p. 24]}. MAC distinguishes three values corresponding to the norm: "to feel pity, compassion for someone", "to be sad, to lament, to regret", "to cherish, to protect, to spare", - and one marked "regional": "to love" ^{[12, p. 470]}.

In the studied group of dialects, this verb has two meanings: the first, corresponding to the all–Russian dialect – "to love" and the second, characteristic only for the Russian dialects of the Amur region - "to caress":

PITY, nesov., whom. 1. Be in love. She still feels sorry for him(Cover Bic.). He pities her – loves her, does not beat her (Bashur. Irradiation.). Hub. (Bic. Irradiation.). 2. To caress. Sorry means caressing the child(Cover Bic.). Hub. (Bic.) ^{[11, p. 128]}. 

In the 1st meaning, the verb can be attributed, in accordance with the classification of L. G. Babenko, to a subgroup of emotional attitude with a categorical-lexical seme – "to feel a certain emotional attitude towards someone"; in the second meaning, to a subgroup of lexemes with the meaning of an external manifestation of emotions with a categorical-lexical seme – "to express in appearance, gesture emotional state, attitude" ^[2]. Both meanings assume two actants: an indication of the agent – the subject of the action – and the object of the action ("the actor" and "the subject being exposed" in the terminology of S. D. Katsnelson). 

Thus, from the circle of valence of the verb to regret in the Russian dialects of the Amur region, all combinations with prepositions about, about, about and with something are excluded, and only combinations with an uncomplicated accusative remain. It is possible to state some differences in the semantics of verbal dialecticism in comparison with the literary analogue, which leads to a limitation of the possibility of "completions", in the words of S. D. Katsnelson, or, in other words, the valence of this verb.

The second meaning of the verb to regret in the dialect is supported by derivational relations: the dictionary records the reflexive verb to complain:

STING, y s, y s, I, ness. Cuddle. The child is complaining to me, but they want to take him away(Cover Bic.). The kitten complains (Nev. Lazo). Hub. (Bic. Lazo) ^{[11, p. 128]}.

A derivative dialect derivative is an intransitive verb that excludes compatibility with a direct object, is not semantically related to the original meaning of the verb to regret – "to express a feeling of heartache"; it denotes an intentional action, i.e., the semantic structure of the verbal lexeme is modified, as a result of which the verb acquires a new necessary valence – an indirect object.

Thus, the composition of the components of the meaning of emotive verbs in a dialect may differ from literary analogues, which is reflected in the valence properties of this lexeme: the number of valences in such verbs, as a rule, narrows. It is noted that in this lexico-semantic group there are no verbs with zero valence; trivalent verbs are represented by single cases.