Analysis reveals how Vietnamese conveys Russian aspectual meanings, indicating variability in context use.
In recent decades, the study of aspect typology, which involves examining different aspectual meanings and their expression across various languages, has advanced significantly. Challenges arise in transferring aspectual semantic components into another language, especially when the target language lacks a corresponding grammatical category. To facilitate the transfer of Russian verb forms’ semantic nuances into Vietnamese, this research employs an onomasiological approach. This approach helps to overcome terminological diversity and allows us to present the object of comparison as transparently as possible: from semantic features to the means of their expression in different languages. The aim of this article is to identify how Vietnamese conveys the particular aspectual meanings of Russian verbs and to determine the patterns of their use in translating Gogol’s Dead Souls. The study analyzes verb forms from the first three chapters of the text (1034 instances and an equal number of Vietnamese equivalents) selected through continuous sampling method. The analysis reveals that Vietnamese has many specialized words capable of expressing aspectual features. For instance, particles such as đã, xong, rồi, được, hết, lên are used to express integrity and efficiency associated with perfective verbs. Meanwhile, words like cứ, mãi, vẫn, còn, được, có, lại convey meanings of processiveness, repetition, and general-factual significance, which are key aspectual meanings of imperfective verbs. A notable feature of Vietnamese is that the necessity of these specialized words can vary, and aspectual indicators might not always be needed if the aspectual semantics are supported by context. Our observations suggest that contextual elements play a significant role in cases involving imperfective verbs. The analysis indicates that perfective meanings do not require contextual elements, and the Vietnamese perfective markers may not be used. This is because perfective verbs describe single, completed events or situations at a specific point in the past. In narrative texts, which present past events as a sequence of actions, perfective verbs are prevalent. As a result, Vietnamese readers, lacking explicit perfective markers and contextual aids, may interpret these actions as single, completed events with a specific outcome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: