kakoj est' + li

[John Dunn]

I suspect that the principles of poetic licence are broadly similar in English and Russian, but never mind.  The reason why I find poetic licence 'vaguely unsatisfactory' as an explanation is that according to my understanding of the term poetic licence is not licence to do what you like when you like; unless one is being intentionally transgressive (and Al. Arxipova's text doesn't strike me as that sort of writing), it should, in order to be effective, be founded on some sort of linguistic reality.    To give an example from English, the use in nineteenth-century poetry of the two-syllable form 'wingèd'   is justified by its existence in earlier varieties of the language.  A more complex example from Russian is the use of the so-called 'truncated adjectives' (темна ночь [témna noch']) in nineteenth-century poetry.  Here there is a reinterpretation, rather than a direct reproduction of an older linguistic form.  

My purpose was to enquire what linguistic reality lay behind the usage that Alina rejected as 'ungrammatical' (and which I, for what it is worth, would also have considered incorrect, had I been wearing my pedagogic hat).  In fact, Alina suggests another, perhaps more convincing answer than the one which I prorposed in my earlier e-mail, namely contamination between the pronoun какой [kakoj]

Я такой, какой (я) есть [ja takoj, kakoj (ja) est'] {i.e. I am the sort of person that I am}

and the conjunction как

Я хочу такого, как Путин [ja xocho takogo, kak Putin] {I want someone who resembles Putin, but not, obviously, the conspicuously uxorious man himself}.

Here too there is a possible parallel with English.  Conservative varieties of English (such as the one I use) preserve a distnction between 'such as' and 'like', which is lost elsewhere:

countries such as France and Spain (i.e. countries including/for example France and Spain)

countries like France and Spain (i.e. other countries that resemble France and Spain).

In any event, I would interpret Al. Arxipova's poem as demonstrating a loss of distinction between как [kak] and какой [kakoj] which is not (yet?) acceptable to many speakers.

On the question of lexicography and pedagogy we seem to be witnessing a clash of two different cultures.  The anglophone tradition has always seen the main purpose of lexicography as being that of recording that which actually occurs, while at the same time showing a greater readiness to see pedagogic value in unusual, striking and even 'incorrect' forms of language (as those who followed an earlier discussion on this list will have had occasion to notice).  Which tradition you prefer is, I suppose, a matter of personal inclination, though the anglophone tradition must be recognised as not being much favoured elsewhere.  Which in some ways is a pity; just think of the possibilities opened up by the use of 'On Ilkla' Moor baht 'at' or 'The Jeely Piece Song' as a means of introducing people to the delights of English.

John Dunn.





John Dunn
Honorary Research Fellow, SMLC (Slavonic Studies)
University of Glasgow, Scotland

Address:
Via Carolina Coronedi Berti 6
40137 Bologna
Italy
Tel.: +39 051/1889 8661
e-mail: J.Dunn at slavonic.arts.gla.ac.uk
johnanthony.dunn at fastwebnet.it

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------