Cover not available
Part of
Negation in Uralic Languages
Edited by Matti Miestamo, Anne Tamm and Beáta Wagner-Nagy
[Typological Studies in Language 108] 2015
► pp. 487–516

Negation in contemporary Votic

| University of Tartu and Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences
| University of Tartu and Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences
This paper describes negation in contemporary Votic – a near-extinct Finnic language. All the data come from fieldwork carried out in the last decade. We analyse different aspects of the negation system, including such typologically important features as expression of the person and number of the negative construction by the negative auxiliary verb, while the main verb expresses the tense and mood characteristics; the formation of the Votic prohibitive and its classification in the World Atlas of Language Structures; a specific system of negative pronouns; the use of the abessive suffix only in verbal forms; negative conjunctions that can conjugate. The paper also includes a short overview of the changes in the system of negation in contemporary Votic as compared to previous descriptions.
Published online: 24 June 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.108.18roz
References (23)
References
Adler, Elna. 1966. Vodskiy jazyk (The Votic language). In Jazyki narodov SSSR. Tom III. Finno-ugorskije i samodijskije jazyki, Vasilij I. Lytkin & Klara E. Majtinskaja (eds), 118–137. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar
Adler, Elna & Leppik, Merle (eds). 1990. Vadja keele sõnaraamat I (Dictionary of the Votic language, Vol. I). Tallinn: Eesti keele instituut.Google Scholar
Agranat, Tatiana B. 2007. Zapadnyj dialekt vodskogo jazyka (The western dialect of Votic) [Mitteilungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica 26]. Moskva & Groningen.Google Scholar
Ariste, Paul. 1948. Vadja keele grammatika (A grammar of the Votic language). Tartu: Teaduslik Kirjandus.Google Scholar
. 1968. A Grammar of the Votic Language [Uralic and Altaic Series 68]. Bloomington IN: Indiana University & The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Lejeune, Ludo (with Valentin Goussev). 2011. The prohibitive. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), Ch. 71. Munich: Max Plank Digital Library. á[URL] (8 August 2013).Google Scholar
Ernits, Enn. 2005. Vadja keele varasemast murdeliigendusest ja hilisemast hääbumisest (About the early division of Votic into dialects and its recent decline). In Piirikultuuriq ja -keeleq. Konvõrentś Kurgjärvel, 21.-23. rehekuu 2004, Karl Pajusalu & Jan Rahman (eds), 76‑90. Võro: Võro Instituut.Google Scholar
Heinsoo, Heinike. 1998. Vadjalased ja vadja keele kujunemine (The Votic people and the development of the Votic language). In Kaheksa keelt, kaheksa rahvast, Jaan Õispuu & Marje Joalaid (eds), 14–29. Tallinn: Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool.Google Scholar
Köppen, Peter. 1867. Erklärender Text zu der ethnographischen Karte des St. Petersburger Gouvernements. St. Petersburg: Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Markus, Elena B. & Rozhanskiy, Fedor I. 2011a. Sovremennyj vodskij jazyk. Teksty i grammatičeskij očerk, Tom I: Vodskije teksty (The contemporary Votic language. Texts and a grammar, Vol. I: A collection of Votic texts). St. Peterburg: Nestor-Istorija.Google Scholar
. 2011b. Sovremennyj vodskij jazyk. Teksty i grammatičeskij očerk, Tom II: Grammatičeskij očerk i bibliografija (The contemporary Votic language. Texts and a grammar, Vol. II: A grammar and bibliography). St. Peterburg: Nestor-Istorija.Google Scholar
Markus, Elena & Rozhanskiy, Fedor. 2012. Votic or Ingrian: New evidence on the Kukkuzi variety. Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen 35: 77‑94.Google Scholar
. 2014. Comitative and terminative in Votic and Lower Luga Ingrian. Linguistica Uralica 50 (4): 241–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miestamo, Matti. 2005. Standard Negation: The Negation of Declarative Verbal Main Clauses in a Typological Perspective [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 31]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Musajev, Vadim I. 2004. Političeskaja istorija Ingermanlandii v konce XIX–XX veke (The political history of Ingria at the end of the 19th – 20th century). St. Peterburg: Nestor-Istorija.Google Scholar
Muslimov, Mehmet Z. 2005. Jazykovyje kontakty v Zapadnoj Ingermanlandii (nižneje tečenije reki Lugi) (Language contacts in Western Ingria (the Lower Luga area)). Ph.D. dissertation, Institute for Linguistic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Rozhanskiy, Fedor I. 2009. Otricatelnyje formy kak svidetelstvo formirovanija novogo morfologičeskogo mexanizma v vodskom jazyke (Votic negative forms as an evidence of a new morphological category). In Logičeskij analiz jazyka. Assercija i negacija. Nina D. Arutjunova (ed.), 506–520. Moskva: Indrik.Google Scholar
Rozhanskiy, Fedor & Markus, Elena. 2015. Dialectal variation in Votic: Jõgõperä vs. Luuditsa. Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics 6 (1).Google Scholar
Suhonen, Seppo. 1985. Wotisch oder Ingrisch? In Dialectologia Uralica. Materialen des ersten Internationalen Symposions zur Dialektologie der uralischen Sprachen 4–7. September 1984 in Hamburg, Wolfgang Veenker (ed.), 139–148. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Tsvetkov, Dmitri. 1995. Vatjan kielen Joenperän murteen sanasto (The dictionary of the Jõgõperä dialect of Votic) [Lexica Societatis Fenno-Ugricae XXV. Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja 79], Johanna Laakso (ed.). Helsinki: Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy.Google Scholar
. 2008. Vadja keele grammatika [The grammar of the Votic language]. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.Google Scholar
Viitso, Tiit-Rein. 1998. Fennic. In The Uralic Languages, Daniel Abondolo (ed.), 96‑114. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Winkler, Eberhard. 1997. Krewinisch. Zur Erschließung einer ausgestorbenen ostseefinnischen Sprachform [Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica 49]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar