Abstract
In this paper, I will examine a specialty of colloquial Russian - the omission of verbs - and compare it to the possibilities of verb omission in Czech, where this phenomenon is rather rare. The omissions in question are to be separated from compulsory ellipses, which will not be taken into account in this paper. They are also not to be regarded as zero lexemes, which are elusive to attempts of reconstruction. The nature of this third kind of omission itself presents a frame for the comparison, since these omissions can be placed along two scales, that of AMBIGUOUS/VAGUE VS. UNEQUIVOCALLY RECOVERABLE and FREE FORMATION VS. PHRASEOLOGICALLY BOUND PHRASE. The comparison of verb omissions in the two languages along these scales emphasizes the restrictions of omissions in Czech and the high degree of freedom in Russian. Moreover, verb omissions in Russian can lead to changes in the meaning of a sentence, whereas they seem to be merely a stylistic device in Czech.
Highlights
In this paper, I will examine a specialty of colloquial Russian – the omission of verbs – and compare it to the possibilities of verb omission in Czech, where this phenomenon is rather rare
The unique possibilities of Russian verb omission will be pointed out through a comparison to the rather restricted possibilities of such omissions in Czech and it will be shown that in Russian omissions are much more than “holes” in sentences just as much as the swiss cheese which gave this paper its title is not produced by drilling holes into other cheese sorts
One of the first linguists to address the question of verb omission in Russian was Širjaev in the collective monograph Русская разговорная речь (Širjaev 1973, 288)
Summary
I will examine a specialty of colloquial Russian – the omission of verbs – and compare it to the possibilities of verb omission in Czech, where this phenomenon is rather rare. This distinction is not of importance, since the omission of verbs is not restricted to actions, e.g. в кого это он ∅? It is just as impossible to call this omission a zero, since the completion of the sentence with a concrete lexeme is possible and does not change its meaning.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
