Spatial Deixis in Tatar and Russian: The Communicative Aspect of Pronominal Verbalization Revisited

Introduction. One of the important problems of contemporary linguistics is the incomplete correspondence between some linguistic categories and actual conditions of language use, which makes it difficult to apply scientific concepts in pragmatic terms. In this regard, some categories of classical linguistics require further clarification in the light of new scientific achievements. Goals. So, the article aims at analyzing deictic microsystems of languages different in origin and grammatical type through synergistic research approaches with due account of achievements of classical linguistics and data on the new communication theory. Materials and methods. The work employs comprehensive methodology: comparison of the Russian and Tatar deictic verbal means is accompanied by cross-situational/component analysis applicable in communication theory. The combination of new and traditional methods makes it possible, firstly, to optimize the traditional time-tested methods of comparing languages of different origins, and, secondly, to correct results of the comparative study in a communicative aspect. The study focuses on materials of the Tatar and Russian languages, since the latter coexist in one region and closely interact via Russian-Tatar bilingualism. Results. The use of comprehensive communicative/linguistic techniques yields a described universal action (deictic) category — implementing spatial coordination of participants and speech objects — for languages of different types. The study identifies spatial communicative indicators common to languages, features of action processes and means of their expression. Particular attention is paid to differences in the implementation of spatial deixis in the languages compared. Conclusions. Grammatically and communicatively, deixis is central to Russian and Tatar pronominal systems. Regular deictic means include key types of pronouns, such as personal, possessive, personal-demonstrative, and demonstrative ones. Functional qualities of all other pronouns and non-pronominal deictics are determined through relations with these central types.

1. Corpus of Written Tatar. Available at: https://www.corpus.tatar/ ( accessed: June 30, 2021). (In Tat. and Russ.)

2. Russian National Corps. Available at: https://ruscorpora.ru/ (accessed: June 30, 2021). (In Russ.)

3. Danilov Yu. A., Kadomtsev B. B. What is synergetics? In: Nonlinear Waves. Self-Organization. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya, 2008. Pp. 130–142. (In Russ.)

4. Fattakhova E. B. Demonstrative pronouns in the English and Tatar languages as a lexical means to express certainty. Philological Sciences. Questions of Theory and Practice. 2014. No. 9(39). Part I. Pp. 187–191. (In Russ.)

5. Kurdyumov S. P. New trends in scientific worldviews. On: Synergetics and Scientific Prognosis (website of S. Kurdyumov). 2009. Available at: http://spkurdyumov.narod.ru/KurdyumovSergPavlovich.htm (accessed: June 30, 2021). (In Russ.)

6. Kuznetsov P. S. Historical Grammar of Russian: Morphology. Moscow: Moscow State University, 1953. 305 p. (In Russ.)

7. Lyons J. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Moscow: Progress, 1987. 542 p. (In Russ.)

8. Sukhorukova N. G. Foundations of Communication Theory. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management, 2006. 195 p. (In Russ.)

9. Szemerényi O. Introduction to Comparative Linguistics. Moscow: Progress, 1980. 407 p. (In Russ.)

10. Urunova R. D. Introduction to Slavic Linguistics. Kazan: Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, 2019. 204 p. (In Russ.)

11. Urunova R. D. Quantification of pronouns in the genre of campaign speech. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication. 2020. No. 3. Pp. 122–129. (In Russ.)

12. Urunova R. D. Russian Pronouns: Descriptions from Different Aspects. Ulyanovsk: Ulyanovsk State University, 2014. 174 p. (In Russ.)

13. Vinogradov V. V. Russian Language: The Grammatical Theory of Word. Moscow: Vysshaya Shkola, 1972. 614 p. (In Russ.)

14. Yartseva V. N. (ed.) Encyclopedic Dictionary of Linguistics. Moscow: Sovetskaya Entsiklopediya, 1990. 685 p. (In Russ.)

15. Yusupova Z. F. Linguistic methodological comparison of relative pronouns in the Russian and Tatar languages. Vestnik Tatarskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarno-pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2011. No. 3(25). Pp. 181–185. (In Russ.)

16. Zakiev M. Z. Tatar Grammar. Kazan: Tatarstan Book Publ., 1993. Vol. II: Morphology. 383 p. (In Russ.)