English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The article presents a contrastive description of the ways of expressing the indefi nite-personal agent in Swedish and Russian. Expressing the passive voice with an implicit agent in Swedish and Russian exhibits a systemic-typological similarity as both languages have forms with refl exive markers (-ся/-s) and analytic constructions with passive participles, although in functional-semantic terms there are signifi cant discrepancies between them. The main focus of the article is therefore the ways of expressing an unspecifi ed agent in the active mood, which are conditioned by the principle differences between the grammatical systems of these two languages. In Swedish the main means for that is the indefi nite-personal pronoun man in the syntactic function of grammatical subject, and in Russian – special functions of verbal agreement categories in the predicates of mononuclear sentences with 3rd person plural and 2nd person singular forms. The contrastive analysis is carried out on the basis of literary fi ction texts in the original language and their translations both from Swedish to Russian and from Russian to Swedish. It includes taking into account functional-pragmatic differences not only between Swedish and Russian, but also between mononuclear indefi nite-personal and generalised-personal utterances with diffe rently encoded grammatical predicates in Russian. A contextual analysis of lexical-syntactic and stylistic aspects of choosing translation equivalents exposes still other, more peripheral ways of expressing indefi nite-personal agents while preserving the main structural-syntactic differences between the languages. This is manifest in the binuclearity of Swedish sentences with various pronouns in the function of indefi nite-personal grammatical subject (någon ‘somebody’; vi ‘we’; de ‘they’; fl era ‘several / some people’) and the variation in mononuclear sentences with indefi nite-personal predicates of various structure in Russian. Key-words: comparative analysis, translation equivalent, unspecifi ed agent, indefi nite-personal pronoun, indefi nite-personal sentence Особенности выражения неопределенно-личного агенса, обусловленные различиями в синтаксической структуре предложений и в морфологической системе словоизменительных категорий глагола, представляют значительный интерес для контрастивного анализа шведского и русского языков. В русском языке при «умолчании о субъекте»1 используется функционально-семантический потенциал согласовательных категорий лица и числа глагола в структуре «семантически самодостаточных»2 односоставных предложений двух типов. В неопределенно-личных предложениях с формами 3 лица множественного числа настоящего, прошедшего и будущего времени содержится идея «несущественной субъектности»3, которая предполагает исключение говорящего из числа возможных референтов нулевого подлежащего и его «отчужденность, дистанцированность»4, «отстраненность»5 от 1 Виноградов В.В. Современный русский язык. Грамматическое учение о слове. Вып. 2. М., 1938. С. 367. 2 Шелякин М.А. О семантике неопределенно-личных предложений // Теория функциональной грамматики. Персональность. Залоговость. М., 1991. С. 62. 3 Шелякин М.А. Op. cit. С. 70; Падучева Е.В. Неопределенно-личное предложение и его подразумеваемый субъект // Вопросы языкознания. 2012. No 1. С. 31. 4 Падучева Е.В. Op. cit. С. 33. 5 Шелякин М.А. Op. cit. С. 68.

Expressing an Unspecifi ed Agent in Swedish and Russian: A Comparative Analysis and Translation Practice