2

In current Internet speech, there are a lot of colloquial phrases placing this particle at the end of a phrase, mostly in topic-commentary strategies (thematic comments) like:

  • Двойное отрицание же.

  • Законодательство же.

  • Комментарий же.

This partice seems to be more like that of Chinese emphatical clitics always taking utterance-final position, for же-particle normally, to the best of my knowledge, seldom, if ever, takes final position in a sentence.

Since when did this usage become wide-spread?

10
  • 3
    Would it be possible to reformulate without referring to Chinese? (or explaining what is special in the Chinese emphatical clitic). – c.p. May 11 '13 at 22:13
  • I think the properties of this particle are obvious from what I have alreay written. However, I have added up some extra words. – Manjusri May 12 '13 at 9:17
  • 2
    Will you give any evidence that "же-particle is normally seldom, if ever, takes final position in a sentence," and that this is a new tendency? – Yellow Sky May 12 '13 at 11:40
  • 1
    @Quassnoi: the reference to Chinese is relevant, since it demonstrates comparative mechanism of clitics taking final position under topic|commentary theory. Please refrain from blotching the initial and natural form of my quesion. – Manjusri May 13 '13 at 18:30
  • 2
    @Quassnoi three persons are not community. You are not the community. And you have no right to blotch my question, because this is what you do: you are making it worse, you are making it stupid. So please show some respect towards me, because as a member of the community I have the right for respect, but you are insulting me with re-editing my question and forcing me to follow the requests of the people who don't understand the subject. Besides, as soon as the ban you have threatened me with shall be over, I shall re-edit my own question again so that it would convey the meaning intended. – Manjusri May 14 '13 at 3:16
6

All three sentences are constructed using the same transformation: what's usually written as

{pronoun} же {something}!

often becomes

{something} же!

colloquially in situations when {pronoun} can be derived from the context.

Your three sentences can be rewritten as follows to get the familiar form of these sentences with "же" used to emphasize the point that the speaker considers compelling or indisputable:

Это же двойное отрицание.

Это же законодательство.

Это же комментарий.

It is hard to translate these sentences without much context. Here is one way to do it, with a context where it would make sense:

-- Why "не может не радоватъ" means "makes one happy?" (Почему "не может не радовать" значит "радует"?)

-- Clearly, that's a double negative. (Двойное отрицание же.)


-- Why did police release them so soon? (Почему полицейские отпустили их так быстро?)

-- You know that such is the legislation. (Законодательство же.)


-- Why was he so rude? (Почему он так нагрубил?)

-- C'mon, it's only a comment. (Комментарий же.)

4

Когда первый участник диалога не замечает, не видит, не обращает внимания на очевидные вещи или просто не знает, не понимает их, не реагирует на приводимые доводы, то второй собеседник может реагировать приведёнными в качестве примера фразами. Если их переформулировать, то получится примерно так:

  • Но ведь это двойное отрицание!
  • Как ты не поймёшь, что это определено законодательством!
  • Прочти внимательно предыдущий комментарий, в нём всё доходчиво изложено!

Применение же просто позволяет вместить тот же самый смысл в очень короткую фразу.

Эта форма стала широко применяться в последние 2-3 года в связи с ростом популярности блогов, микроблогов, борд и т.п.

1
  • The question was "when did it become widespread" – Quassnoi May 13 '13 at 17:51
3

These examples sound like discussion sentences. The speaker emphasizes the statement with help of же if the opponent does not understand a thing that is obvious for the speaker. An exclamation symbol (!) should be suitable at end of each example:

  • Двойное отрицание же!
  • ...

This is not answer for the question Since when but may help in some way.

1
  • These sentences are however incomplete without a verb and thus are more similar to those uttered in Chinese. – Manjusri May 12 '13 at 18:21
2

же-particle normally, to the best of my knowledge, seldom, if ever, takes final position in a sentence.

Let's check this using Russian National Corpus. Internet speech is very close to the spoken speech. However many people are not good with typing and tend to write shorter sentences. Anyway, let's check the Spoken corpus that contains transcripts of the speech from movies and magnetic tape records of public and private speech. I took the version of the corpus that disambiguates particles and conjunctions. Here are the results:

As you can see же is used at the end of the sentence in 8% of all cases - not so often, but it is not so rare as well. As for же after a noun at the end of the sentence, looks like the manually tagged corpus is too small to show such case: if there are still 8% then out of 15 entries there should be only 1. But if searched in disambiguated version the amount is close to 10%.

Though if we look closely on examples of usage of же after a noun, 3 of them come before pause:

Ну уничтожение же/ они же уничтожали те нации / которые считали низшими как бы. [Беседа в Москве // Фонд «Общественное мнение», 2003]
Какой-то процент же есть же / смотрят же. [Беседа в Москве // Фонд «Общественное мнение», 2003]
Не Лукьяненко же / или кто у нас там сельсовет в Госдуме? [Беседа в Новосибирске // Фонд «Общественное мнение», 2000]

In such case almost 20% of such cases match the pattern "комментарий же".

But if we look at non-disambiguated corpus the numbers are almost the same:

So, 8.5% times же is placed at the end of the sentence. If we require that the же is placed after a noun then the number of such expressions at the end of the sentence is 11%.

Examples:

Кстати / с днём рождения! У вас сегодня день рождения же. Да? [Шаши Мартынова, Елена Лихачева. Интервью в передаче «Они сделали это» // Finam_FM, 2009]

[Сеня, муж] Командный. [Юля, жен] Начальник же. [Оля, жен] У меня был такой в детстве. [Разговоры за игрой в карты (2009)]

[Сергей] Да я про театр совершенно забыл. [Костя] Точно, театр же! Так возьми такси, может, успеешь ещё. [Карен Шахназаров и др. Исчезнувшая империя, к/ф (2008)]

[Алла, жен, 22] А как терь учиться буишь кста? [Даша, жен, 20] Дык я не учусь / практика же! [Алла, жен, 22] Везет тебе! [В гостях у подруги. Разговор московских студенток (2007)]

[Мужчина1] Я говорил / стакан и бутылка! [Мужчина2] Ну да / ну и тарелка же. [Мужчина1] Ну и… тарелка. [Городок (юмористическая передача), вып. 39-40, 49-52 (1995-1998)]

As for beginning of the usage "noun + particle at the end of the sentence". I searched in main corpus for such structure and according to this chart (you can get it by clicking "Распределение по годам" link) it looks like there is no big difference between modern usage and with usage during previous 180 years. Though currently we have local maximum of usage after local minimum at the beginning of 2000. In fact global maximum is around 1910.

Frequency of usage noun + же at the end of the sentence

So it doesn't look to me that it is something newly invented.

1

Since when did this usage become wide-spread?

IIRC this usage of же become popular in Internet last 2-3 years, but in spoken language it isn't something new or modern.

1

It was always here and didn't become wide-spread lately.

What you are talking about is most likely near-image boards and Japanese (anime) -based "десу же".

Not far off from Chinese and "Internet speech".

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.