Primestoimenno-otnositel'nye konstrukcii v sovremennom russkom jazyke

Relative Constructions with Pronominal Heads in Contemporary Russian Chapter 1 introduces the distinctive syntactic and semantic properties of Russian relative constructions (RCs), which are then divided into two main classes according to the type of the head phrase. The study concentrates on RCs with pronominal heads, which are systematically compared with noun-headed RCs. Chapter 2 clarifies the categorization of pronouns in Russian. The conclusion is that Russian pronouns include only personal, reflexive and wh-pronouns. The remaining words that are traditionally seen as pronouns are actually functional equivalents of determiners. This idea leads to the suggestion that RCs with these determiner-like words as the only constituent of the head phrase are actually headed by zero pronouns. In the other type of RCs with pronominal heads, the head position is occupied by wh-pronouns with clitics expressing different types of indefiniteness and quantification. Comparison of the two types of pronoun-headed RCs shows that the wh-heads and zero-heads share a number of common properties with respect to the grammatical gender, number and person as well as to the semantic distinction between animates and inanimates. The rest of Chapter 2 gives an overview of various uses of wh-pronouns in Russian and an experimental analysis of RCs headed by pronominal adverbs. Chapter 3 discusses fundamental differences between RCs with noun and pronominal heads. One of the main findings is that the choice of the relative pronoun (kto 'who' and chto 'what' versus kotoryj 'which') is motivated by a tendency to reproduce maximally the essential grammatical and semantic properties of the antecedent. Chapter 4 gives a detailed description of the determiner-like words and wh-based heads used in the two types of RCs with pronominal heads. In addition, several issues related to the syntax and semantics of free relatives are discussed. The conclusion is that there is no need to establish a separate category of free relatives in Russian. Chapter 5 discusses the syntax and semantics of correlative and free concessive constructions. They share a number of properties with pronoun-headed RCs and the two are often confused in Russian linguistics. However, a detailed analysis shows that these constructions must be distinguished from RCs. The study combines the methods of functionally-oriented Russian structuralism with some insights from generative syntax.

Betydelser i barnfamiljsbroschyrer : Systemisk-funktionell analys av den tänkta läsaren och institutionen

This thesis concerns Swedish and Finland-Swedish brochures to families with children, presenting family allowances from the social insurance institutions in the two countries. The aim of the study is to analyse what meanings are conveyed with reference to the conceivable reader and the institution in the brochures. The material consists of information brochures in Swedish from Kela, the social insurance institution of Finland, and Försäkringskassan, the Swedish social insurance agency, issued during 2003–2006. The general theoretical framework is systemic-functional linguistics (SFL) as presented by Halliday & Matthiessen (2004) and Holmberg & Karlsson (2006). The study consists of a quantitative study of the lexical choices of the social insurance brochures. Furthermore, a qualitative process and participant analysis is annotated with the UAM Corpus tool and the results are quantified. Speech functions and modal auxiliaries are analysed qualitatively. The analysis shows that material and relational processes are most common. The relational and verbal processes are used more in the Sweden-Swedish brochures, while the material processes are more common in the Finland-Swedish brochures. The participants in the brochures are the institution, mentioned by its name, and the conceivable reader, directly addressed with “you” (du). In addition, the referent “child” is often mentioned. The participants assigned for the reader are Actor, Receiver, Carrier and Speaker. In the Finland-Swedish texts, the reader is often an Actor, while the reader in the Sweden-Swedish texts is a Carrier. Thus, the conceivable reader is an active participant who takes care of his or her own matters using the internet, communicates actively to the institution and has legal rights and obligations. The institution is visible in the texts but does not have an active role as the name of the institution is mostly used in circumstances. The institution is not often a participant, but when it is, it is Actor, Receiver, Listener and Carrier, expecting the clients to address it. Speech functions are performed in different ways. For instance, questions structure the reading process and commands are realised by modal auxiliaries, not by imperatives. The most common modal auxiliary is kan (can, may), and another common auxiliary is ska (shall, must). Statements are surrounded by subordinate clauses and adverbs that describe situations and criteria. The results of the study suggest that the brochures in the two countries are similar, in particular when produced in similar ways, that is, when the Finland-Swedish texts are not translated. Existing differences reflect the differences in the institutions, the social insurance systems and the cultural contexts. KEYWORDS: Finland-Swedish, Swedish, comparative analysis, SFL, discourse analysis, administrative language, institutional discourse, institutional communication