5.1. yoga instructions in the imperative

As the research has revealed, a vast part of the yoga instructions in Polish and a much smaller part of the data in Russian employ the imperative clause type, as in (6–7), respectively.

Schematically, the conceived scene evoked by a yoga instruction employing the imperative pattern includes as its salient elements the yoga instructor – Speaker (S) – and the yoga practitioner – Hearer (H) – who are engaged in a relation such that S exerts a (relatively low) degree of mental (interpersonal, socio-psychological) force directed at H. The Speaker is thus the Force Agent (FA) and the Hearer is the Force Target (FT). Following Takahashi (Reference Takahashi2012, p. 13), we shall assume that inherent in this configuration are the force exertion component and hearer-directedness. In the expressed event, the Hearer is presented as the Agent (Ag) of the relevant future activity (A).

It is important to note that, while in the conceived scene the Speaker exerts a socio-psychological force on the Hearer with the aim of ‘pushing’ the Hearer towards the performance of the activity A, the mere idea of ‘pushing’ the Hearer does not presuppose that it will be successful. Nevertheless, part of the idealised cognitive model of a speech act such as an order is accepting the scenario and complying, while a decision not to comply is a departure from the model (Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Kwiatkowska2011, p. 184). Given the characterisations of yoga instructions overviewed in the introductory part of this section, and especially the fact that compliance is beneficial for the practitioner, we shall assume that the above condition holds also for directives in the examined discourse genre.

On a final note at this juncture, it will be observed that the illocutionary force of an instruction in the imperative is not derived through the use of figurative language, nor does it rely on the hearer’s inferential activity, as the future event profiled by the imperative represents the CORE component of the scenario.Footnote ⁶

Focusing now on the meaning of the construction, it will be stated that, in light of Langacker’s analysis, the semantic characterisation of the imperative follows from its function: the imperative is employed by the speaker to elicit an effective response from the hearer (Reference Langacker2009, p. 156). According to Takahashi (Reference Takahashi2012, pp. 57, 71), the semantic components which appear to be essential for the schematic description of the category of the imperative are as follows: (a varying degree of) force exertion, the second person subject (prototypically, individuated, playing the semantic role of Causee/Agent), hypotheticality, and future orientation. The category of an illocutionary act conveyed by the construction in such a semantic description is left indeterminate. Put differently, the imperative does not always convey a directive speech act.

In Cognitive Grammar, the semantic import of any construction resides in the construal it imposes upon the scene of the conceptualised event. The conceptual configuration within the conceived scene evoked by the imperative, also encompassing the pragmatic properties of a direct directive in yoga overviewed in Section 5, is specified in Figure 3.

Fig. 3. The conceptual organisation of the scene in the imperative construction (adapted from Takahashi, Reference Takahashi2012, p. 12).

Following Langacker’s (Reference Langacker2008, p. 474) and Takahashi’s (Reference Takahashi2012, p. 13) analyses of the English imperative, we shall assume that the imperative construction in Polish and Russian expresses a complex event, or an action chain of two (sub)events E1 and E2 (in the sense of Langacker, Reference Langacker1991, pp. 283, 293, whereby temporally or causally sequenced event subcomponents can be treated as forming a natural path).

As illustrated in Figure 3, Event 1, which encompasses a relevant portion of the ground G, occurs prior to, and causes, Event 2, which is the utterance event. In the causing event, the yoga instructor (the Speaker / Force Agent) exerts interpersonal (social and psychological) force directed at the individuated yoga practitioner (the Hearer / Force Target), putting them under some degree of obligation to perform the required asana as Agent (Ag). In other words, E1 conveys the Speaker’s effective stance in regard to the process expressed in E2, i.e., her or his intention to bring about the occurrence of this process (Langacker, Reference Langacker2008, p. 474). (Relatively low) force impact carried by the imperative clause in the discourse genre under investigation is represented by a rightwards dashed arrow between S/FA and H/FT/Ag.

In E2, the primary figure within the scene is the yoga practitioner (H/FT) in the semantic role of an Agent (Ag), who is conceptualised as engaged in performing the activity A. As a formal (structural) exponent of an imperative clause, the subject is by default left unexpressed, which is represented by an off-black circle marking the action chain head in E2. Put in conceptual terms, the trajector of the profiled process is conventionally not explicitly coded by any subject NP.

As the direction of the timeline t indicates, E2 is a future-oriented event. Specifically, as anticipated by the Speaker, it is an event located in the projected future in reality (as an actual event, see further Section 5.2.). Let us note that it is not anchored to the ground G independently of E1. As argued by Langacker, imperatives “conflate the functions of clausal grounding and illocutionary force” (Reference Langacker2009, p. 158). Parallel claims have been made for Polish, whereby the inflection which is specialised for the imperative mood is treated as a grounding predication that profiles a process anchored in the speaker’s intent (the effective grounding) (Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Kwiatkowska2011, p. 187, Reference Kochańska2015, p. 70). Premised upon the typological similarity of Polish and Russian, we make the same assumption about the status of the imperative inflection (the person–number markings specialised for the imperative) as a grounding predication for Russian as well. As observed by Langacker, the effective grounding shapes the epistemic grounding, as “something not yet affected is not yet real” (Langacker, Reference Langacker2008, p. 474; Kochańska, Reference Kochańska2015, p. 70).

As shown in our data, the process profiled in E2 is conventionally encoded by a verb in the perfective aspect (90% [Pl], 78% [Ru]). As convincingly argued by Kochańska (Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 351–352), in Polish and some other Slavic languages a perfective verb is prototypically selected when the process it expresses is conceived of as completed. In contrast, an imperfective verb prototypically encodes an ongoing process. As further observed by Kochańska, the imperfective may also designate a process which is conceptualised as completed, yet its final state is then viewed as not obtaining at the time of speaking (Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 351–352).

The aspectual opposition between the perfective and the imperfective in Russian, and more generally in East Slavic languages, differs considerably from the contrast discussed above in Polish and is apparently “typologically very unusual” (Dickey, Reference Dickey2020, pp. 544, 574). According to Dickey, the prototypical meaning of the perfective aspect in Russian is an instantiation of the schema of temporal definiteness, whereby an event coded by means of a perfective verb is “some kind of whole” that is unique, or “qualitatively different from the preceding and subsequent state-of-affairs” in a temporal and causal sequence of events (2020, p. 544). It will be noted that Dickey’s account challenges traditional analyses, whereby the perfective aspect is taken to express the totality of the event involving a change of situation when viewed from the observer’s deictic viewpoint (2020, p. 546).

As has been further argued by Dickey, the imperative construction ‘adds’ a distinct component to the temporal sequencing of events contributed by the perfective construction, which is a moment given to the hearer so that she or he can decide whether to perform the requested action (2020, p. 555). Put differently, it is part of the schematic meaning of the construction that, by selecting the perfective imperative, the speaker intends to give the hearer an opportunity to consider the request, choose to comply, and then carry out a complete single action with a desired outcome.Footnote ⁷

The core property common to the perfective imperative in both Polish and Russian, whereby the event that the construction expresses is construed as a completed whole, is marked in Figure 3 as A including a blocking black bar.

The preference for perfective verbs in both languages apparently contributes to the force impact of the imperative construction – the Speaker ‘pushes’ the Hearer to (make a choice to comply and) complete the required activity, while the final phase is typically invoked.

Let us further observe that in the imperative construction the speaker herself or himself is not conventionally construed as part of the onstage region – one instance of 1Pl is attested in the corpus for Polish and none for Russian. Thus, as part of the schematic characterisation of the Agent in E2 we have added the specification of Ag as speaker-exclusive [–S].

As follows from the descriptions offered above, certain aspects of the ground G (the Speaker’s intent or valuative attitude, and the Hearer) receive a partially objective construal in E1. By the same token, certain aspects of the onstage region (OS) encompassing E2 receive a partially subjective construal (the Agent of the relevant activity A).

On a final note, while the construction necessarily encodes the Speaker’s perspective, the relation between the communicators should more precisely be viewed as expressing a cognitively and socially negotiated Speaker–Hearer (intersubjective) perspective, which is represented by a left–right arrow between S and H within the ground G.

5.2. yoga instructions in the imperfective non-past indicative

As the quantitative part of this research has shown, yoga teachers, both Polish and Russian, rely heavily on the use of the imperfective non-past indicative pattern. For illustration, consider the examples in (8–9):

At its core, the pragmatic characterisation of the examined construction is comparable to that of the imperative insofar as it pertains to the causal relation between E1 and E2; the configuration within the ground G, whereby the Speaker / Force Agent exerts (relatively weak) mental force upon the Hearer / Force Target, putting them under some degree of obligation to perform the required activity as Agent; and, finally, the conceived future-time event of the Hearer performing the relevant activity (E2).

However, in contrast to the imperative, the illocutionary force of a yoga instruction in the imperfective non-past indicative is clearly derived via figurative use of language. We shall argue that any such instruction expresses a perlocutionary effect, and consequently the after component of the scenario, in a special viewing arrangement described below. The inferential activity in meaning construction leads to the interpretation that the description of the perlocutionary effect is in actual fact a persuasive act of force exertion by the Speaker / Force Agent upon the Hearer / Force Target. The inferential path is facilitated by the underlying metonymic mapping from the trigger, i.e., the after component of the scenario, to the target, i.e., the scenario as a whole, compelling the Hearer to perform the activity A, in the part for whole metonymy.

On a final note at this juncture, let us observe that, as directive uses of the imperfective non-past indicative in Polish and Russian are apparently conventionalised in the two languages, the mechanism of metonymic inferencing should no longer be viewed as the mechanism of interpreting the relevant utterances by the hearer locally, in the here and now of the speech situation, but rather as the mechanism motivating, or facilitating, the emergence of the relevant conventionalised meanings.

In proceeding further, let us note that the semantic import of the imperfective non-past indicative construction derives from the semantics of the declarative clause type, the indicative mood, the non-past tense, in an interaction with the imperfective aspect. We shall briefly overview the meanings that these grammatical patterns evoke.

In contrast to other sentence types, a declarative clause delivers a representation of the world’s facts. It is then conventionally associated with assertion and the word-to-world direction of fit. Yet, as argued by Siemund, the pattern can be used with “practically all imaginable illocutionary forces” (Reference Siemund2018, p. 127). Therefore, assertive force is not part of the semantic import of the construction, which is instead described as force-neutral (Recanati, Reference Recanati1987, pp. 163–169; Siemund, Reference Siemund2018, pp. 135–136).

In a cross-linguistic perspective, the mood markings on the verb in the declarative clause indicate the speaker’s epistemic attitude with respect to the mood – realis or irrealis – of the proposition expressed by the declarative clause. In other words, by selecting the indicative mood in the construction at hand, the speaker signals their perspective that they can present the content of the proposition as a possible element of reality (Achard, Reference Achard1998, p. 225). It has to be added that in the systems of both Polish and Russian the indicative is the unmarked mood.

Further, while the mood locates a given event vis-à-vis reality, the tense system of a language locates the event in time in relation to the moment of speech or in relation to an established temporal reference point. In both Polish and Russian, a distinction is made between past and non-past, marked with person–number inflection. Finally, part of the meaning of the construction at hand is contributed by the (lexically marked) imperfective aspect (see also footnote 2).

To recall from the previous discussion in Section 5.1., in Polish and some other Slavic languages the imperfective aspect is prototypically selected to encode a process which is conceived of as ongoing (not completed), or when its final state is not obtained at the time of speaking (Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 351–352).

According to Dickey’s model of the aspectual opposition between the perfective and the imperfective in Russian, when the imperfective verb form is employed, the sequential and causal structuring of qualitatively different events, i.e., the temporal definiteness of the expressed event, is cancelled (see Section 5.1). The imperfective is thus used in three prototypical situations: (i) when it encodes an ongoing process; (ii) when the situation is construed as a habitual repetition; and finally, (iii) when the expressed event, completed or not, is isolated from its temporal context, or the temporal context is defocused (Reference Dickey2020, pp. 544–545).

As argued by Kochańska in her analysis of the construction in Polish, uses of the imperfective non-past for future-time occurrences involve a special viewing arrangement, to be explained below (Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 360–369). We shall claim that the construction in Russian evokes a comparable configuration on the scene of the conceptualised complex event.

The conceptualisation evoked by a yoga instruction employing the imperfective non-past indicative construction, in Polish and Russian alike, is specified in Figure 4 (adapted from Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, p. 367). As illustrated in Figure 4, the construed temporal sequencing of E1 and E2 radically departs from their arrangement in Figure 3. E2 is construed and represented in the figure as coincident with the configuration within the ground G encompassed by E1. Following Kochańska (Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 360–369), we shall elucidate the conceived scene evoked when the imperfective non-past indicative is used in terms of the contrast between virtual and actual events (in the sense of Langacker, Reference Langacker1999, pp. 97, 99).

Fig. 4. The conceptual organisation of the scene in the imperfective non-past indicative construction.

In coding E2, the imperfective non-past construction is clearly used with immediate future-time reference. As argued by Kochańska, the selection of the construction means that the speaker is only indirectly concerned with the occurrence of the profiled event in the future in reality (as an actual event). Instead, the profile is shifted from the actuality plane (in the future) to the virtuality plane, whereby the virtual counterpart of the actual event is presented as initiated at the time of speaking (Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 360–369). In Langacker’s own terms, a virtual counterpart of an actual event should metaphorically be thought of as a record in a mental representation of scheduled events, or a virtual document with entries that represent processes in events which are planned to occur in the future (Langacker, Reference Langacker1999, p. 94, Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, p. 362). Typically, this kind of viewing arrangement pertains to habitual, planned, or scheduled events, and such events that occur as a normal course of events, in both Polish and Russian (Grenoble, Reference Grenoble1989, p. 99; Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, p. 363). When the construction is used in the situational context of yoga, the profile is shifted from an actual event in the immediate future (the conceived after component of the illocutionary scenario) to its virtual record which is ‘read off’ at the speech time. To be more specific, the profiled virtual event is activated at the time of speaking and is conceived of as ongoing, or – when the conceptualised event is completed – its final phase is not invoked (the meaning ‘added’ by the imperfective aspect). Under such an arrangement, the speaker assumes immediate and automatic acceptance of the record of the event in the virtual document at the moment of its presentation to the hearer so that the record can be activated at the time of speaking (Kochańska, Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, pp. 363–364). As further explained by Kochańska: “Activating a record at the time of speaking results in the virtual occurrence of a process that is co-extensive with the speech event” (Reference Kochańska and Brisard2002, p. 364).

The force impact of a yoga instruction employing the imperfective non-past indicative construction, whereby the automatic and immediate acceptance by the Hearer of the relevant E2 is taken for granted, is weakened by the Speaker putting herself or himself on stage as the co-addressee of the directive. Thus, any power imbalance that might be invoked is reduced as the Speaker is put under the same strain of (relatively weak) pressure as the Hearer. In the examined construction, in the conceived scene, the Speaker chooses to put herself or himself on stage dramatically more often than in the conceptualisation evoked by the imperative construction. Specifically, as our data reveal, in Polish the speaker-inclusive construal of the Agent is attested in 80% of cases, while in Russian it is attested in 90% of cases. The selection of the speaker-inclusive construal of the Agent of the activity A apparently contributes to the construction’s force impact. Thus, as part of the schematic characterisation of the Agent in E2 we have added the specification of Ag as speaker-inclusive [+S].

5.3. yoga instructions in the past indicative in russian

In their typological research on the declarative clause, König and Siemund (Reference König, Siemund and Shopen2007, p. 281) state that in its primary function it conveys “the belief of the speaker that the proposition is true or will turn out to be true”. They add that a number of extra conditions have to be met for a declarative clause to carry directive meaning, and they list, among other factors, a non-past tense. In light of our findings, König and Siemund’s observation about the distribution in directive declaratives of non-past tenses solely appears to be challenged by the data from Russian.Footnote ⁸ Nearly one-fifth of yoga instructions in our corpus of Russian are expressed as a declarative clause in the indicative mood with the perfective verb inflected for the past tense, as in (10):

Research on the use of the perfective past with future reference in Russian is scarce. Most mentions focus on the colloquial style of such a grammatical form or the construction’s use under special politeness conditions, whereby it is selected to convey a very authoritative and, most often, purposively rude command, as pošel _past-pfv von ‘get out of here’, for example (Belikov, Reference Belikov2001; Belošapkova, Reference Belošapkova1997, p. 560). This variant of the construction – with a speaker-exclusive form of address – contrasts with instances of use in which the addressee is speaker-inclusive and when the profiled activity is of positive value. The utterance is then no longer perceived as abrupt and harsh. Belikov relates the difference in the pragmatic effects to power (im)balance among the communicators in the situational context of use (Reference Belikov2001, p. 162).

One of the contexts in which the perfective past construction is widely used to convey imperative meaning is the teaching context; note such classroom instructions as, for example, otkryli uchebiki ‘open _past-pfv textbooks’, or napisali segodnjašnee _past-pfv čislo ‘write today’s date’. In another variant of the construction, past tense perfective verbs of motion can be used to express an event about to occur in the imminent future with “rather hortative” reference, e.g., poexali _past-pfv ‘let’s go’ (Grenoble, Reference Grenoble1989, p. 99). The past tense is in such use more colloquial than non-past. The directive use appears to be similar to that variant.

At its core, the pragmatic characterisation of the past indicative construction used for yoga instructions is comparable to the previously discussed patterns: E1 and E2 are locked in a causal nexus E1→ E2; the configuration of the participant roles of Force Agent and Force Target remains the same – the Speaker exerts relatively weak pressure upon the Hearer, ‘pushing’ her or him to perform a relevant asana in the immediate future. In E2, similar to the imperfective non-past indicative construction, the illocutionary force of a directive is realised via figuration based on the illocutionary scenario. Specifically, the utterance event E2 expresses behavioural response (a perlocutionary effect), and consequently the after component of the scenario. In the situational context of use, with all the clues available to the addressee of the directive, this part triggers mental access to the whole illocutionary scenario. In other words, inferential activity on the part of H/FT is here facilitated by the underlying part for whole metonymy. Finally, as has been observed in relation to the previously discussed construction, directive uses of the indicative past in Russian appear to be fully conventionalised in the discourse of yoga, in addition to other contexts of use that have been discussed above. Thus, in such contexts metonymic inferencing apparently facilitates the emergence of the relevant conventionalised meanings.

In proceeding further, let us note that Mel’ničuk seeks the historical origin of the patterns with imperative meanings such as Pošel von!, Vzjali!’, Pošli s nami! in the construction with the particles a and by, as in Old Russian A my dokol xočem ruskuju zjemlju gubit’? A byxom sja uladili’ (Reference Mel’ničuk1966, p. 76). The particle by derives from bi(m), which marked the optative in Proto-Slavic, and which was further fused with by(h), which marked the aorist (Reference Mel’ničuk1966, p. 76). As argued by Mel’ničuk, the particle was then omitted to produce the imperative meanings conveyed by the remaining perfective verb forms (Reference Mel’ničuk1966, p. 77).

In light of the above, insofar as the analysis is extendable to the construction employed in yoga instructions, it is doubtful whether – despite its form in present-day Russian – the construction includes as its meaning component the prototypical meaning of the past tense in the indicative mood, which is an assertion of a past fact (in actuality). Instead, we shall suggest that the meaning contributed by the past tense form of a verb lexicalising the construction should be viewed through the prism of the temporal definiteness evoked by the perfective aspect (see Section 5.1) (Dickey, Reference Dickey2020, pp. 544–546). Specifically, given that the perfective signals a sequential conceptualisation of time, whereby events are arranged in a succession with respect to one another and irrespective of the observer’s deictic viewpoint (2020, p. 546), it will be claimed that the past tense may be employed to denote precedence of an event in virtuality and not its pastness relative to a point of reference in actuality. Note also that the event expressed by the perfective is construed as a completed whole.

The conceptual architecture of the conceived scene evoked by the directive use of the indicative past construction in Russian, which is employed to refer to an immediate future-time occurrence, is specified in Figure 5. As illustrated in Figure 5, the profile of E2 is shifted from the future event in the actual plane to its virtual record in a virtual document. We shall very generally describe this virtual document as a simulation of the future event in the actuality plane. In the virtual record, the Hearer is construed as the Agent who completed the activity A, while the utterance event E2 precedes the force exertion event E1. It will be observed that presenting an as yet unrealised event as a fully realised occurrence preceding the utterance event appears to be a case of the conceptualiser’s effort to persuade H/FT to comply, rather more forceful than mere ‘pushing’ or taking for granted immediate compliance evoked by the previously discussed constructions.

Fig. 5. The conceptual organisation of the scene evoked by the indicative past directive.

Finally, given that Russian is a partially pro-drop language (Biberauer et al., Reference Biberauer, Holmberg, Roberts and Sheehan2010, p. 11), let us note that in our data the trajector of the process is invariably left unexpressed (represented in Figure 5 as an off-black circle). As the past tense inflection on the verb in Russian makes no formal distinction between 1pl and 2pl, the meaning of the construction is potentially ambiguous with respect to the addressee of the instruction – between the speaker-inclusive and speaker-exclusive readings (3pl is by default excluded in the situational context of use). In light of some claims which have been made in the research on the use of the perfective past for future-time occurrences in Russian that pertain to the semanto-pragmatic distinction between the speaker-inclusive and speaker-exclusive readings – as previously discussed in this section – under the conditions of use in the context of yoga, the agent in the profiled activity will necessarily be construed as speaker-inclusive. This aspect of construal apparently contributes to the construction’s force impact. Putting the Speaker under the same strain of (relatively weak) pressure as the Hearer weakens slightly the force of the directives. Thus, the specification of Ag as speaker-inclusive has been included into the schematic characterisation in E2.

5.4. within- and between-language differences in directive force impact

It becomes apparent in light of the analysis developed in the preceding sections that the examined constructions differ in the strength of the imposition when viewed through the prism of a few aspects of construal. These pertain to: (i) the actual/virtual status of the record of the event evoked when the respective construction is used; (ii) the Speaker’s presence in the onstage region or the lack thereof; and also (iii) the aspectual specification of the process as ongoing (initiated) or completed (with the final phase invoked). Let us briefly summarise the fundamental details of the respective conceptual make-ups of the constructions under scrutiny.

In the imperative, the conceived scene involves the idea of the Speaker exerting force with the aim of ‘pushing’ the Hearer to perform the relevant activity. The utterance event presents an actual event in the immediate future as it is projected (or conceived of) by the Speaker. Crucially, the Hearer’s complying with the instruction is not presupposed or automatically assumed. To recall, in the perfective imperative in Russian, the Hearer’s decision to comply is allowed an additional time unit in the temporal sequence of events evoked schematically by the construction. Accepting the scenario and acting accordingly – especially that complying is beneficial for the addressee of the directive – is a default arrangement, but the conceptual content to this effect is supplied by a separate cognitive model. In this respect, the imperative encodes the weakest force impact. Furthermore, the profiled event is viewed as completed, yet without setting any temporal boundaries (apart from the general assumption of immediacy, which is easily available for the addressee of the directive in the situational context), it does not seem to affect the force impact of the construction to a high degree. Finally, the Agent is construed as speaker-exclusive, which may be a factor contributing to a somewhat stronger force of the pattern (yet, as we shall see further in this section, it may also be attributable to contextual factors).

In the imperfective non-past indicative, the conceived scene involves the Speaker ‘pushing’ the Hearer to perform the activity A, in addition presenting to the Hearer a virtual record of the event, whereby the Hearer initiates the relevant activity A at the very moment of its presentation to her or him, ensuring that the record can be read off. Thus, the Hearer’s immediate and automatic acceptance is taken for granted and the conceived degree of optionality left for the Hearer is much smaller. Hence, the force impact evoked by the construction appears to be stronger. Yet, putting the Speaker onstage in a speaker-inclusive construal of the Agent in the activity A, who thus shares the strain of the pressure, apparently weakens the force of the directive to a degree. Also, the fact that the event is construed as initiated at the moment of speaking and ongoing (not completed, or at least the final phase of it is not invoked) appears to contribute to the construction’s force impact, by weakening it (in relative terms). All in all, the force impact of instructions evoked by the two constructions above appears to be comparable, and weaker than the force impact of the third construction, recapitulated below.

In the perfective past, the conceived scene involves the Speaker exerting force upon the Hearer with the aim of ‘pushing’ her or him to perform the relevant activity, in addition presenting to them a virtual record of the event whereby, preceding the presentation, the Hearer has already complied and acted accordingly. Thus, the record can be read off as a fully realised occurrence. Construing the virtual event in such a manner leaves the Hearer no optionality, and hence the force impact evoked by the construction is rather stronger than in the cases previously discussed. Let us note that the perfective aspect appears to further strengthen the impact. What apparently weakens it to a degree is the construal of the Agent of the activity A as speaker-inclusive, whereby the Speaker and the Hearer alike are put under pressure, with no optionality left to them. In Table 1 we summarise the key features of the examined constructions, with a view to illustrating more clearly how they divide between themselves the ‘ecological niche’ of weak directives in the studied discourse genre in Polish and Russian.

table 1. Properties of directive constructions in yoga in Polish and Russian

If the analysis offered above is on the right track, the parameter of relative force impact in the studied constructions can be described as the cline shown in Figure 6, oriented towards the impact growth. We will conclude that Polish has at its disposal the relatively ‘weaker’ instruction types, while in Russian there is additionally a choice of a relatively more forceful construction.

Fig. 6. The parameter of relative force impact oriented from weaker to stronger.

Furthermore, we were curious to compare the grammatical patterns of instructions issued in two standard phases of a yoga class: a dynamic warm-up sequence and a relaxation sequence of instructions. Let us first explain the situational context of use of the instructions in both phases.

A yoga class starts with a warm-up routine, which consists in performing a series of asanas. The warm-up, which is called Surya Namaskar, is typically performed dynamically and the required postures come in quick succession. Let us note, however, that, Surya Namaskar may occasionally be performed at a slower pace.Footnote ⁹ Each class finishes with a relaxation stage, when the practitioners lie flat on their backs, with their eyes closed. When the practitioners remain in this position, which is called Savasana, the instructor typically directs their attention to body parts, one by one, with the intention of encouraging the practitioners to consciously relax them. Asanas are performed at a slower pace, which we assume goes with less forceful instructions.

Unfortunately, as the tutorial class naturally unfolds the (sequences of) asanas are very often not named and not individuated. We were thus unable to convincingly select the relevant material from our corpus. Instead, we randomly sampled four additional YouTube tutorials in each language which are devoted particularly to Surya Namaskar and Savasana. The sample is very small (20 clausal instructions in each language) and the study is not meant to support any far-reaching conclusions. Yet a very clear distribution pattern emerges, as seen in Table 2. As the data in Table 2 reveal, dynamic and energising yoga poses in Surya Namaskar are encouraged by the teacher by means of instructions which are only rarely in the imperative, in Polish and Russian alike. For illustration, see the samples below.

table 2. Distribution of the constructions in Surya Namaskar and Savasana in Polish and Russian

When the yoga teacher requires the practitioner to respond in a more dynamic way, more energy needs to be summoned to follow, and consequently more forceful instructions need to be issued. We shall seek the motivation for the use of the imperfective non-past indicative construction in Suria Namaskar in the following aspects of the construction’s characterisation: (i) a relatively stronger force impact evoked as the Speaker assumes the Hearer’s compliance and taking immediate action; and (ii) the speaker-inclusive construal of the Agent performing the relevant activity A. Such a construal is in harmony with the situational context, whereby the teacher demonstrates the pose and is typically actively involved in performing the relevant activity herself or himself.

It appears that another property of the construction, i.e., the construal of the relevant activity A as ongoing, does not really seem essential in this context of use. Let us also note that, when the construction is employed in instructions to perform a quick succession of actions, the relevant actions can only be understood to occur in succession if each is at least terminated, if not completed, when the next follows, but not that it is ongoing. In contrast, the preferred pattern of instruction for relaxing yoga asanas in Savasana is the imperative, irrespective of the language, as in the sequences below:

We shall seek the motivation for the attested distribution of the imperative in Savasana in the following aspects of construal evoked by the construction: (i) a relatively weak impact, leaving the Hearer a conceived degree of optionality needed for performing the activity; (ii) the type of activity, whereby some mental effort is required to complete the activity A that cannot be done instantly and automatically; and (iii) the speaker-exclusive construal of the addressees of the directive, who are left lying on their backs with their eyes closed, remaining the sole agents performing the activity A.

It may come as a surprise that in Russian no uses of the past indicative were attested in the examined suryas. In the main corpus of the data, the increased use of the indicative past construction was noted in contexts in which the instructions apparently signal some changes in the dynamicity of the exercise. For illustration, in (15) below, in the initial posture, following the directive in the imperfective non-past indicative, the practitioner remains stationary. The series of postures that follow require relatively more energy and the yoga teacher selects the perfective past construction in order to issue a more forceful directive for a more dynamic phase.

We consider the use of the construction in (15) as representative of the contexts in which instructions in the past indicative are most likely to occur in Russian.