Book Reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first volume of Schlegel's two-volume work on Russian verbal aspect is conceived as a textbook and provides the theoretical bases that underlie the practical language exercises contained in the companion volume.It begins with an indispensable index of numerous terminological abbreviations as well as explanations of signs and symbols to which the reader or language learner must constantly refer, if only to justify their role as graphic explanations of the complex relations described in the work.Unfortunately, the abbreviations and explanations are arranged topically rather than alphabetically and are grouped by theoretical concept.The abbreviations-both German and Russian-reflect a very broad spectrum of concepts common to both traditional aspectology (e.g., terminativity/aterminativity, perfective/imperfective aspect, Aktionsarten, and so on) and the particular theory propounded here, including: differential semantic traits; temporal and aspectual reference points; "event," "speech," and "reference" as understood in the framework of Reichenbach's temporal logic; and "state of affairs" (aktionale Situation), i.e., actions, states, and events.Terminativity (telicity) also plays an important role in the application of graphic symbols alongside such concepts as "duration" (Dauer), "iterativity"/"repetition" (Wiederholung), "sequence of actions" (Handlungskette), "parallelism of actions" (Parallelität von Handlungen), "incidence" (Inzidenz), etc.An appendix, which brings together the definitions of the principal aspectological concepts (pp.307-313), also serves as a doubtless necessary aid to users of this work.The textbook is intended primarily for use at the university level.Given the complexity of the grammatical category of aspect, the book's stated goal is to provide-by means of a "multimodal and multidimensional approach"-a theory with sufficient "explanatory force" for practical language use (p.17).As presented in chapter 2 (pp.21-34), the basic mechanisms of aspect use are understood as interactions between verbs and the context(s) in which they occur, verbs being defined basically by actionality (lexical aspect) and "terminativity" (i.e., telicity), with context(s) similarly classified according to "terminativity."The aspectual system is viewed as a projection of the temporal system onto individual time intervals (p.31), a kind of temporal microsystem whereby any given action is situated relative to an "aspectual reference point," i.e., a point in time to which the speaker refers or at which the speaker mentally situates her/himself (this stands in contrast to tense, whereby any given action is situated relative to the moment of speech).Chapter 3 is devoted to the formal expression of the category of aspect in Russian (pp.35-98), including Aktionsarten (both in the narrow sense of lexical derivation and in the broader sense of lexical semantics) as well as correlative pairs of verbs of motion and their delineation vis-à-vis aspectual pairs per se.While recognizing as "true" aspectual pairs those whose imperfective members are derived through stem suffixation, Schlegel also acknowledges so-called "functional aspectual pairs" like pisat'/napisat' 'write', which are formed "pleonastically" by means of a semantically redundant verbal prefix (an appropriate view from the standpoint of both theory and actual language use; see summarizing table, p. 98).The remaining chapters are devoted to the functions of the verbal aspects and the uses made of them, beginning with a broad range of meanings in the indicative mood (pp.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.709 | 0.642 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".