On the Encoder’s Perception of Occurrences
A Parallel Corpus-based Study of Transposed Tense Usage in “Kolymskiye Rasskazy” by Varlam Shalamov and “Sumchi” by Amos Oz and Their Hebrew and Russian Translations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/ths.2025.004Keywords
invariant meanings, tense, Columbia School, Russian/Hebrew and Hebrew/Russian translationsAbstract
This study focuses on the comparative analysis of verb tense meanings in Russian and Modern Hebrew. Despite belonging to different language families, both languages feature the past, present, and future tenses of the indicative mood[1], which may indicate a corresponding similarity in meanings. While these forms often objectively reflect real-time relationships, systematic discrepancies are observed between the meanings of verb tenses and their actual uses in each language. To address this, we propose invariant meanings for each tense that will underlie all its uses, including transposed ones. Based on the Columbia School sign-oriented linguistic framework (see Diver, 1981; 1995; García, 1975; Tobin, 1990a; 1995), we focus on verb tense usage in “Kolyma Tales” (“Kolymskie rasskazy”) by Varlam Šalamov (2013) and “Sumchi” by Amos Oz (1978), along with their literary translations into Hebrew (2005) and Russian (2015), respectively. On the one hand, we postulate that the tense systems of both languages share a common semantic content, which relates to the speaker’s or writer’s perception of actions, states, or events at the moment of speaking or writing. This explains the similarity in tense usage between original texts and their translations. On the other hand, differences in tense usage are more likely attributed to language-specific communicative strategies – standardized ways of combining invariant meanings to convey particular messages, as described within Columbia School theory.
[1] While Russian has forms, traditionally categorized as perfective and imperfective verbs, and Hebrew possesses a so-called compound past tense expressing hypothetical or habitual actions in the past, these facts are beyond the scope of this paper.
[1] While Russian has verbs, categorized as perfective and imperfective, and Hebrew possesses a compound past tense expressing hypothetical or habitual actions in the past, these facts are beyond the scope of this paper.
References
1. Diver, W. (1981). On defining the discipline. Columbia University Working Papers in Linguistics, 6, 59-117.
2. Diver, W. (1995). Theory. In E. Contini-Morava, B. Sussman Goldberg, & R.S. Kirsner (Eds.), Meaning as Explanation: Advances in Linguistic Sign Theory (pp. 43–114). Walter de Gruyter.
3. García, E.C. (1975). The Role of Theory in Linguistic Analysis: The Spanish Pronoun System. North Holland.
4. Oz, A. (1978). Sumchi. Am `Oved.
5. Oz, A. (2015). Sumkhi. Pantera v podvale. (V. Raduckiy, Trans.). 2P.
[Оз, А. (2015). Сумхи. Пантера в подвале. (В. Радуцкий, перевод). 2P.]
6. Shalamov, V. (2005). Sipurei Kolyma. (R. Chen, Trans.). Yedioth Ahronoth.
7. Shalamov, V. (2013). Sobraniye sochineniy. T. 1: Rasskazy 30-x godov; Kolymskiye rasskazy; Levyy bereg; Artist lopaty. Knizhnyy Klub Knigovek. (Originally published in 1954.)
[Шаламов, В. (2013). Собрание сочинений. Т. 1: Рассказы 30-х годов; Колымские рассказы; Левый берег; Артист лопаты. Книжный Клуб Книговек. (Первоначально опубликовано в 1954.)]
8. Tobin, Y. (1990a). Semiotics and Linguistics. Longman.
9. Tobin, Y. (1995). Invariance, Markedness and Distinctive Feature Analysis: A Contrastive Study of Sign Systems in English and Hebrew. John Benjamins.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Igor Dreer

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 110
Number of citations: 0