No Abstract Available.
babbylh@pucc.princeton.edu

No Abstract Available.
feldstei@indiana.edu

Russian stanovitsja 'stands up' is the -i- imperfective of stanet, not the -sja intransitive of stanovit. It is like saditsja 'sit down' and lozhitsja 'lie down', which are likewise -i- imperfectives (cf. sjadet, ljazhet), not, as the accent shows (cf. sadit, -lozhit), -sja intransitives. With stanet, stanovitsja shares thematic -n-, which conditions thematic -ov- as it does in ischeznovenie, dunovenie, etc. Although thematic -i- has imperfectivizing force in the prefixed imperfectives nosit, -vodit, -vozit, and -xodit, it does not have it with prefixed -stanovit. Hence in prefixed use sta- has tended to replace -nov- with productive thematizations.

gladney@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu

Building on Mares's demonstration that velii and velikyi are equally old and differ as +/-definite, *-ko- is thus seen to be semantically empty, i.e. the element I have identified in ú-stem adjectives and jabl"ko. This *-ko- with an alternant *-Hko- is then equated with IE *-H{o}k{^w}o- (BSLP 68, 77-92, 1973) 'facing, appearing', and this equation then explains the suffix of adjectives of extent such as vysòk", shiròk". A new etymology of Albanian plak 'old man', with a different *-ko-, is given.

Dept. of Linguistics, University of Chicago, 1010 E. 59th St., Chicago, IL 60637

[Note: HTML text cannot yet adequately convey the diacritics required for this sort of linguistic text. In this abstract, back jer is rendered as ", hacek by addition of "h" (as in Library of Congress transliteration), a plus/minus sign by +/-; subscripts are enclosed in {} brackets, and superscripts are enclosed in the same {} brackets, but with an additional ^.]

No Abstract Available.
makantor@merle.acns.nwu.edu

No Abstract Available.

Russian Dept., 681 Phillips Hall, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, IA 52245

Verbs in Serbo-Croatian fall into two basic classes: those which select opaque complements (henceforth I-verbs, or Indicative-selecting verbs), and those which select transparent complements, allowing for domain extension (henceforth S-verbs, selecting Subjunctive-like complements). I-verbs are mostly verbs of saying and believing, whereas S-verbs are mainly verbs of wishing or requesting. The following dependencies are clause-bound with I-verbs, but can cross clause boundaries with S-verbs: lincensing of Negative Polarity Items, clitic climbing, and topic preposing. In addition, wh-movement in questions and relative clauses uses different strategies with I- and S-verbs.

The transparency of S-verbs correlates closely with their inability to select independent (uncontrolled) tense in their complements. I will propose that S-verbs allow domain extension by virtue of licensing deletion of Infl and Comp material in their comp lements at the level of Logical Form (LF). Such deletion will be possible with S-verbs, whose complements have recoverable Tense features, but not with I-verbs, whose complements host independent Tense. I will assume that the same mechanism can explain do main extension with subjunctive clauses in general.

lprogov@cms.cc.wayne.edu

No Abstract Available.
swan+@pitt.edu

No Abstract Available
eawilliams@center.colgate.edu