On language typology, semiotic modeling, and some peculiarities of contemporary standard Russian

Abstract

Boris Andreevic Uspenskij, whom we honor with this special issue of our journal, is currently not only the ranking Russist of the Soviet Union and, for that matter, the world, but he is also, along with Ju. M. Lotman, Vjac. Vs. Ivanov, and V. N. Toporov, among the most brilliant, prolific, and versatile representatives of what has become known as the Moscow-Tartu school of semiotics.1 It should be recalled here, moreover, that it was Uspenskij who, early on in his career, developed a new, ingenious approach to language typology. He did so, presumably, under the influence of the linguistic doctrine of the Copenhagen school of glossematics and, notably, its leading theoretician, Louis Hjelmslev (with whom Uspenskij had an opportunity to study during a research assignment in the Danish capital). This novel approach to typology is based on the concept of a metalinguistic model, or etalon language (jazyk-etalon), to be devised for the purpose of determining the specific, primarily morphosyntactic, criteria for establishing various language types. By the same token, such an abstract, "ideal" linguistic structure may serve as a standard against which individual natural languages can be gauged in terms of the extent and kind of deviation from the theoretical prototype underlying all member languages of a given typological class. In sketching this approach, Uspenskij thus developed a powerful tool for the typological classification of languages and for assessing the degree of their typological relationship or structural affinity. This innovative method has had a significant impact on subsequent work undertaken in the field of typology by a number of linguists, myself included.2 It would seem fitting, therefore, that the brief, preliminary remarks offered here as a tribute to Boris Andreevic on the occasion of his turning a mere fifty quite surprisingly in view of the quality, range, and sheer bulk of his output to date address some questions pertaining to the problem of modeling systems in semiotics, primary as well as secondary, and to some peculiarities of Contemporary Standard Russian (CSR, from here on) viewed from a semiotic-typological angle.