semantics and metaphorization ways
The semantic core of actional sentences is the relationship of purposeful influence on the ob-
ject by the active, controlling subject. The impact is carried out in the physical sphere and repre-
sents the causation of the existence or non-existence of the object, as well as the causation of the
transition from one state to another. Hence, there are two semantic types of actional sentences ‒
creative and destructive action, on the one hand, and the transformation of the object, on the oth-
er. The complex of causal-aspectual relations is superimposed on the elementary meanings of
existence and state. The following lines of metaphorical transfers are identified, with the physical
sphere being the starting point:
1) figurative values, resulting in a system of polysemants ‒ elementary simple sentences with
semantics derived from the original one ‒ based on actional typical syntactic structure:
the Khanty language); the figurative meaning is determined by the semantics of the predicate tăjti
‘to have’, in which the active role of the agent is reduced, possession does not imply a direct im-
pact on the object;
the physical sphere → characterization in the physical sphere; in partitive subject-object relations,
there is one more obligatory component ‒ an adjective accompanying the object position; such
sentences are expressive syntactic synonyms of characterization sentences with an adjectival
predicate;
2) the transfer of meaning from the physical sphere to the mental and intellectual ones, with
syntactic homonyms being formed ‒ non-elementary simple and polypredicative constructions
with modus-dictum relations (constructions with sentential predicates). The position of the object
is replaced either by the names of abstract semantics, or by words representing the reduced propo-
sitions, or by predicative actants. The criterion for classifying these sentences as homonyms is
their non-elementary semantics.
Barkalova M. V. Funktsional’no-semanticheskaya klassifikatsiya glagol’nykh modeley
nenetskogo yazyka [Functional-semantic classification of verbal models of the Nenets language].
Yazyki korennyh narodov Sibiri. Novosibirsk, 2004, iss. 14, pp. 171–217.
Csepregi M. Szurguti osztják chrestomathia [Reference book of the Surgut dialect of the
Khanty language]. Studia Uralo-Altaica. Suppl. 6, Szeged, 1998.
Nenetskiy fol’klor [Nenets folklore]. Moscow, 1960.
Shmeleva T. V. Semanticheskiy sintaksis [Semantic syntax]. Krasnoyarsk, 1988.
Solovar V. N. Modeli prostykh predlozheniy khantyyskogo yazyka s dvukhmestnymi
predikatami [Models of simple sentences of the Khanty language with transitive predicates]. In:
Predlozhenie v yazykah severa Sibiri [A sentence in the languages of the north of Siberia]. Novosibirsk, 1989, pp. 47‒55.
Solovar V. N. Modeli elementarnykh prostykh predlozheniy s pryamym ob”yektom v khantyyskom yazyke [Models of elementary simple sentences with direct object in Khanty language].
Yazyki korennyh narodov Sibiri. Novosibirsk, 2002, iss. 8, pp. 58‒67.
Solovar V. N. Paradigma prostogo predlozheniya v khantyyskom yazyke [The paradigm of
a simple sentence in the Khanty language]. Novosibirsk, Lyubava, 2009, 250 p.
Sosa S. Functions of morphosyntactic alternations, and information flow in Surgut Khanty
discourse: Doctoral dissertation. Helsinki, 2017, 254 p.
Vsevolodova M. V. Teoriya funktsional’no-kommunikativnogo sintaksisa: Fragment
prikladnoy (pedagogicheskoy) modeli yazyka: Uchebnik [Theory of functional-communication
syntax: Fragment of applied (pedagogical) model of language: Textbook]. Moscow, MSU Publ.,
2000.
semantics and metaphorization ways // Сибирский филологический журнал. 2019. № 4. Pp. 267–280. DOI: 10.17223/18137083/69/23.