sphere of sense perception
The paper discusses the patterns of secondary meaning formation in verbal adjectives with
suffixes -em- / -im-. Factors influencing these processes are the presence of a mandatory modal
component in the semantic structure of adjectives, the participation / non-participation of non-
prefix in their formation, the semantics of the motivating verb. Given these factors, two main
semantic groups of adjectives are identified: (1) derivatives of perceptual state verbs
(oshchutimyy, ulovimyy); (2) derivatives of perceptual action verbs (obozrimyy, razlichimyy). The
classification is built on the opposition of verbal nouns with prefix ne- and without it (vidimyy –
nevidimyy, etc.). Systematization of secondary meanings allowed establishing paradigmatic rela-
tionships between perceptual adjectives with different generative foundations, revealing the pat-
terns of various meaning formation, noting the meanings not documented in dictionaries but de-
veloping in speech.
All perceptual adjectives denote in their secondary meanings the ontological feature of the ob-
ject regarding its distinctness of existence for the subject of perception. For ne- adjectives of this
group, the semantics of the impossibility of sensual perception may signal the existence of an
object in the consciousness of the perceptor. Contextual means often emphasize the value of such
ideally existing objects. When the meaning of purposeful mental action increases in verbal
adjective semantics, the character of secondary values changes. Perceptual action adjectives
denote a variety of qualitative characteristics of an object: temporal / spatial extent, similarity,
peculiarity degree, originality, distinctive character.
Only to some extent does the study confirm the idea of the linguistic priority of visual
perception. The tokens vidimyy / nevidimyy, zrimyy / nezrimyy demonstrate a high activity
of semantic derivation and are superior to tokens slyshimyy / neslyshimyy. The tokens osyazaemyy / neosyazaemyy and oshchutimyy / neoshchutimyy are not inferior to “visual” adjectives
and surpass them in the number of meanings in non-derivatives’ sphere. Based on the modal
semantics of adjectives of both groups, a quantitative value of strong / weak degree of a sign or
condition is formed, allowing perceptive adjectives to act as intensives.
Avdevnina O. Yu. Pertseptivnaya semantika: zakonomernosti formirovaniya i potentsial khudozhestvennoy realizatsii [Perceptual semantics: the laws of formation and the potential of artistic
realization]. Saratov, SSU publ., 2013, 340 p.
Apresyan Yu. D. Novyy ob”yasnitel’nyy slovar’ sinonimov russkogo yazyka [New explanatory dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language]. Y. D. Apresyan (Ed.). Vienna, LRC
Publishing House, Vienna Slavic Almanac, 2004, 1488 p.
Fatkhutdinova V. G. Derivatsionnaya dinamika glagolov slukhovogo vospriyatiya [Derivational dynamics of the verbs of auditory perception]. Vestnik of Lobachevsky University of Nizhni
Novgorod. 2010, no. 4 (2), pp. 759–762.
Garipova I. D. Spetsifika smyslovoy organizatsii slovoobrazovatel’nogo gnezda “VIDET”
[Specificity of the semantic organization of the word-building nest “VIDET”]. Philology and
Culture. 2011, no. 25, pp. 162–165.
Kolesov I. Yu. Problemy kontseptualizatsii i yazykovoy reprezentatsii zritel’nogo vospriyatiya
(na materiale angliyskogo i russkogo yazykov): Monografiya [Problems of conceptualization and
language representation of visual perception (on the material of English and Russian languages)].
Barnaul, BSPU Publ., 2008, 354 p.
Kustova G. I. O semanticheskom potentsiale slov energeticheskoy i eksperien-tsial’noy sfery
[On the semantic potential of the words of the energy and experimental sphere]. Voprosy
Jazykoznanija (Topics in the study of language). 2005, no. 3, pp. 53–79.
Slovar’ russkogo yazyka [Dictionary of the Russian language]. AN SSSR. In-t rus. yaz.;
A. P. Evgen’eva (Ed). 3-e izd., stereotip. Moscow, Russkiy yazyk, 1985−1988.
Maslova E. A universal constraint on sensory lexicon, or when hear can mean “see”? In:
Tipologicheskie obosnovaniya v grammatike [Typological reasons in grammar]. Мoscow, 2004,
pp. 300–312.
Miller G. N., Johnson-Laird P. N. Language and perception. Cambridge, MA, Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1976, 760 p.
Paducheva E. V. Dinamicheskie modeli v semantike leksiki [Dynamic models in the semantics
of vocabulary]. LRC Publishing House, Moscow, 2004, 608 p.
Paducheva E. V. K strukture semanticheskogo polya “vospriyatie” [To the structure of the
semantic field “perception”]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija (Topics in the study of language). 2001,
no. 4, pp. 23–44.
Tolkovyy slovar’ russkogo yazyka s vklyucheniem svedeniy o proiskhozhdenii slov [Explana-
tory dictionary of the Russian language with the inclusion of information about the origin of
words]. The V. V. Vinogradov Russian Language Institute of the RAS; N. Yu. Shvedova (Ed.).
Moscow, 2007, 1175 p.
Viberg A. The verbs of perception: A typological study. Linguistics, 1983, vol. 21, pp. 123–
162.
Vinogradova O. I., Kashkin E. V. Chto vidit slepoy i slyshit glukhoy: k leksicheskoy tipologii
slov dlya otsutstviya chuvstvennogo vospriyatiya [What the blind sees and hears the deaf: to the
lexical typology of words for the lack of sense perception]. Vestnik VSU. Series: Philology. Journalism. 2016, no. 3, pp. 92–98.
sphere of sense perception // Сибирский филологический журнал. 2020. № 2. Pp. 225–238. DOI: 10.17223/18137083/71/18.