Abstract
Previous grammars of the Russian language are written on the same methodological background and with the same purpose and may therefore be characterized in their entirety. It appears that they (1) are oriented towards the interpretive function, i.e. the hearer, (2) describe the different parts of the grammar in isolation without internal connection, (3) lack a contrastive element and finally (4) incorporate only written sources. In that respect previous grammars fail and cannot live up to what could be called modern standards. Against this background a new type of grammar is proposed -a grammar which (1) takes the speaker into consideration, (2) differentiates three types of “wrongness”, (3) views the Russian language as a specific member of a linguistic supertype which is opposed to two other supertypes, and (4) takes its starting point in speech production, i.e. in oral discourse. After a theoretical discussion several pieces of evidence will be presented in favour of such type of grammar.
Highlights
The atomistic mode of presentationIt goes without saying that any existing grammar has been written on certain principles which together can be said to form the leitmotif of the entire grammar
Previous grammars of the Russian language are written on the same methodological background and with the same purpose and may be characterized in their entirety
The traditional approach in Russian grammar new grammars are written in order to compensate for shortcomings experienced with previous grammars, they need not include a new framework or be based on totally new principles
Summary
It goes without saying that any existing grammar has been written on certain principles which together can be said to form the leitmotif of the entire grammar. In our case it is quite evident that all are based on structuralist principles, where one of the most important principles says that language constitutes a structured whole in which everything is tied together. This leading principle of structuralism is not, reflected in traditional grammars. The verbal categories of tense, aspect, and mood might be described in the same structuralist feature framework, but you will not find the description that tells you how the three verbal categories form a structured whole and how they are tied together. In that way aspect, which is considered to be the most complicated category, may be treated as the final category (cf. Mathiassen 1990) - an order of presentation which makes sense only from the point of view of the layman, not from the point of view of the Russian language
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 callMore From: HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business
Disclaimer: 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.
