Combination of past participles functioning as adverbials with main verbs in Lithuanian: Aspect and transitivity

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LIX (2008), 81 - 107 Combination of past participles functioning as adverbials with main verbs in Lithuanian: Aspect and transitivity’ EIko SAKURAI Unuwersity of Tokyo This paper is aimed at providing some observations about certain constraints which determine how past participles, functioning as adverbials (in semi-predicative usage), combine with main verbs in Lithuanian. In previous studies (Sakurai 2000; 2003) I presented some remarks on the semantic constraints, in particular those looked upon from the angle of aspect, under which past participles, functioning as adverbials, combine with main verbs. This issue has not yet been addressed to date either in traditional Lithuanian grammar (LKG, DLKG) or in other studies about Lithuanian. Here, by adding to this analysis the viewpoint on transitivity, I am going to emphasize the close linkage between aspect and transitivity in this problem: in <state> type predicate sentences, adjectival past participles and main verbs construct one predicate as a single entity where the combinatory possibilities are strictly constrained by the principle of semantic consistency in stativity and intransitivity. 1] wish to thank Tasaku Tsunoda (Tokyo) and Tamio Yanagisawa (Nagoya) for their detailed and valuable comments on earlier versions of the present paper. This is part of the results of my research in Lithuania which is founded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) and by the Japanese Ministry of Education. I am grateful to all my Lithuanian consultants, especially, Dalia Svambaryté (Vilnius), Ramuté Bingeliené (Vilnius), and English consultant Mark Roza (Tokyo) for their help, and to two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. I am also much obliged to Aldona Paulauskiené (Vilnius) for providing for my research in Lithuania. My deepest heartfelt thanks go to Renata Petroskevitiené (Tokyo) who always offers me a lot of information on Lithuanian and knowledge about English. All errors and shortcomings are of course my own. 81 Eiko Sakurar 1. INTRODUCTION Two types of past participles are distinguished in Lithuanian — adjectival participles (dalyviai) and adverbial participles, or gerunds (padalyviai): (a) adjectival past participles are declinable according to gender, number, and case, and agree grammatically with the subject. They have active and passive voice. In the active voice, they are divided into past participles and past habitual participles. (b) adverbial past participles are indeclinable. They have only active voice and no passive voice. The semantic subject is indicated by the dative case. As arule, all past participles in Lithuanian have the property of functioning as adverbials. However, as the frequency of usage of past habitual participles of type (a) in adverbial function is very low, they will be left out of consideration in this paper. Also, compared to their active forms, the passive forms of past participles are rarely used in this function. Depending on the type of time relation they have with main verbs, or predicates, past participles functioning as adverbials have been distinguished so far in Lithuanian studies as possessing the following property: (i) past participles functioning as adverbials indicate relative <anteriority> in their relation to the predicate verb. In this regard, Sakurai (2003) refers to the Russian language for a comparative analysis in an attempt to make the following affirmations: (ii) past participles functioning as adverbials may indicate not only <anteriority> in relation to the predicate verb but also relative time <simultaneity >. The temporal meanings and functions of these past participles are built and determined by the whole of the sentence; (iii) not only in their forms, but also in their meanings, Lithuanian adjectival past participles show astronger dependence on the predicate verb as compared both to Russian adverbial past participles with similar properties and to Lithuanian adverbial past participles. On the other hand, with regard to transitivity, Sakurai (2003) follows traditional grammar when giving definitions of ‘transitive’ and ‘intransitive’ verbs: a verb is defined as ‘transitive’ if it requires adirect object (typically in the accusative case) or ‘intransitive’ if it does not, with neutral verbs not being distinguished. Therefore, in order to give a proper explanation of the 82 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity constraints on the combination of past participles functioning as adverbials with main verbs, it is important (1) to approach transitivity not only as a structure of grammatical participants but as a semantic structure as well; (2) instead of drawing clear-cut line between transitive and intransitive verbs, to aim at viewing them as presenting a matter of continuum/scale, which defines the degree of transitivity. In this regard, by following Hopper & Thompson’s (1980) and Tsunoda’s (1985) approach, I introduce the idea of the ‘prototype’ when dealing with the issue of transitivity. The semantic definition of prototypical transitive verbs is adopted from Tsunoda (1985: 387) as follows: ‘those verbs which describe an action that not only impinges on the patient but necessarily creates a change in it’ (e.g. uZmusti, nuzudyti ‘kill’, sulauzyti ‘break’, susaldyti ‘freeze’). Thus, prototypical transitive predicates are defined as ‘those predicates which have 2 or more participants, agent and object, and describe an action that not only impinges on the object but necessarily creates a change in it’. Even if there is a grammatical structure of a verb requiring a transitive object, the verb (or verb phrase) will be considered as non-prototypical if the condition stated above has not been met (e.g. turéti ‘have’, myléti ‘love’, Zinoti ‘know’, Zidréti ‘look (at)’, prarasti samone ‘loose consciousness’). 2. ADVERBIAL FUNCTION OF PARTICIPLES It is assumed in this study that the basic adverbial function of participles is ‘to express the secondary situation that accompanies the main situation expressed by the main verb (or finite verb predicate)’, i. e., to act in the function of secondary predicates in a sentence. In the system of Lithuanian past participles, adjectival participles functioning as adverbials have the same subject (in the nominative case) as the main verb of the sentence (same subject use) and agree with that subject both in case and in number and gender (see ex. (1)). On the other hand, as has been stated above, adverbial participles are indeclinable. They do not have the same subject as the main verb (different-subject use). The semantic subject is used in the dative case? (see ex. (2)). 2 The abbreviations in this paper are used in the following way: ACC accusative; ACT active; ADJ. adjectival; ADV. adverbial; DAT dative; F feminine; GEN genitive; 83 Erxo SAKURAI (1) Perskaites knyga, having finished reading-ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM_ the book-ACC jis iséjo pasivaiks¢ioti. he-3M-SG-NOM went out-V-PAST-3 for a walk-INF ‘Having finished reading the book, he went out for a walk.’ (2) Man perskaicius knyga, jis I-DAT finished reading-ADV.PP the book-ACC he-3M-SG-NOM. tuojau (pat) atéjo jos pasiskolinti. immediately came in-V-PAST-3 it-GEN to borrow-INF ‘When I finished reading the book, he immediately came in to borrow it.’ 3. VERBAL ASPECTS IN LITHUANIAN Before making further observations, we first need to briefly touch upon the aspectual properties of Lithuanian verbs. It is assumed that a system of verbal aspect that employs prefixes and suffixes to serve as markers of aspect has developed in Lithuanian in a similar way as in Russian and in other Slavic languages. However, despite the similarities in the forms of verbs, there are marked differences between Lithuanian and Russian that can be formulated as follows’. INF infinitive; IPFV. imperfective; M masculine; NOM nominative; O object; PASS passive; PFV. perfective; PL plural; PP past participle; PRES present; PRES.P present participle; S subject; SG singular; V verb. The example sentences have been checked by native informants. The symbols (?), (??), (*) indicate the evaluation of the sentences by the informants as being “unnatural”, “very unnatural”, or “grammatically incorrect”. ° [use the term ‘aspect’ in a wider sense, which covers not only grammatical but also lexical semantic-notional categories. I hold on to the most general definition of ‘perfective’ as a reference to a situation without regard to internal temporal structure, viewing a situation in its entirety, as a single whole and ‘imperfective’ — as a reference to the internal temporal structure of a situation, viewing a situation as part of its entirety (see Comrie 1976). In this paper I use the abbreviations <PFV.> and <IPFV.> to refer to the semantic definition of perfective and imperfective, whereas use the terms ‘perfective verb’ and ‘imperfective verb’ to refer to the aspectual pair of verbs in Russian (or other Slavic languages). This is largely in order to avoid confusion about the semantic and the grammatical-morphological categories. ‘For more detailed observations see in particular Dambritinas (1960), Galnaityté 84 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity In Russian, verbs basically form aspectual pairs of perfective and imperfective, which are regarded as sufficiently matching the definition of the <PFV./IPFV.> opposition found in the general theory of aspect (general aspectology). In this regard it should be said of Lithuanian that when prefixes and suffixes, which carry the feature of aspect, are attached to a verb, in many cases its lexical meaning is changed and a group of derivative verbs with a fixed semantic feature is formed. Without forming a complete <PFV./ IPFV.> opposition, like in Russian, verbal aspect in Lithuanian takes position in between a lexical-semantic category and a grammatical category®. In my opinion, as I have already pointed out (Sakurai 1997, 1999, 2002), in many cases in Lithuanian, the aspectual pairs which are traditionally interpreted as ‘perfective/imperfective’, should rather be defined as pairs of ‘telic/atelic’, or ‘bounded/nonbounded”, That is the reason why the <PFV./ (1963), Safarewicz (1967), Musteikis (1972), Paulauskiené (1979), GeniuSiene (1990), Wiemer (2001) and Holvoet & Cizik (2004). * regard that aspect 1s also a matter of continuum rather than a clear-cut dichotomy, and that aspectual pairs of verbs can be ranked on the aspectual scale. From this point of view, verbal aspect in Lithuanian cannot be classified as typical Aktionsart, as it includes both pairs that have more high-aspectual features and pairs that have fewer high-aspectual features, I will discuss this problem in other papers, as it is beyond the scope of the present paper. ° Dahl (1981) provided an important contribution on the theory of aspect by introducing the definition of ‘telic (bounded) verb’ as a verb conveying in itself the notion of boundaries and revealing the situation as moving towards those boundaries; while defining the ‘atelic (nonbounded) verb’ as a verb not conveying such notion and revealing the situation that doesn’t have any boundaries, In our terminology, the terms of ‘telic/atelic’ are used in a wider sense: telic verbs may denote a situation which is bounded at the start (ingressive, i.e. inchoative), at the end (terminative), or both at the start and at the end (deliminative or punctual); atelic verbs denote a situation which 1s open at both sides (See Lehman 1994). The terms telic/atelic are used similarly as Russian terms predel’ny)/nepredel’nyj here. Note that according to this terminology non-prefixed Lithuanian verbs such as skaityti (knygq) ‘read (a book)’, rasyti (laiskq) ‘write (a letter)’ are regarded as atelic, because they do not mean either a terminative process or an event, which should be expressed by prefixed telic verbs such as per-skaitytt ‘read through, finish reading’, pa-raiyti ‘write, finish writing’. Thus, I consider that Lithuanian verbs which are traditionally interpreted as ‘neutral’ or ‘biaspectual’ and which express both perfective and imperfective aspect should be regarded as telic verbs. Among them, prefixed verbs such as at-eiti ‘come’, 1S-vaziuoti ‘leave (by transport)’, uz-mesti ‘throw over’ are formally marked members, i.e. their telic meaning is added by prefixes, while non-prefixed (simple) verbs such 85 E1xo SakurRAl IPFV. > meanings and functions are more obvious in the tense-aspect system in Lithuanian, where the tense forms have a larger functional load. That is, the semantic distinction of <PFV./IPFV.> usually becomes evident just through the combination of aspectual meanings of verbs and their tense forms’. 4. CLASSIFICATION OF BASIC TYPES OF PREDICATES ACCORDING TO THEIR ASPECTUAL MEANING On the premise that was stated above, in this study the classification of predicates is based on their aspectual meaning, with three basic types of predicates, i.e. <PFV. action>, <IPFV. action> and <state> being distinguished. The example sentences to illustrate the observations stated here are mostly used in the past tense because it best reveals the differences that exist in the aspectual meaning of verbs. <PFV. action> type predicate (3) Tévas tuojau (pat) {atsigulé / father-M-SG-NOM immediately lay down / atsisédo ant sofos / perskaité knygq / sat down on the sofa/ finished reading the book / atidaré duris}. opened the door-V-PAST-3 (telic verb) ‘Father immediately {lay down /sat down on the sofa/finished reading the book/opened the door}’. (4) Knyga tuojau (pat) buvo the book-F-SG-NOM immediately was-be-PAST-3 perskaityta Algio. read until the end-PASS.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM (telic verb) by Algis- -GEN ‘The book was immediately read until the end by Algis.’ as baigti ‘finish’, rasti ‘find’, gauti ‘get’, mirti ‘die’ are unmarked members, i.e. they are inherently telic verbs. 7 Main tense forms 1n Lithuanian are basic simple forms of present, past, past frequentative, i. e. past habitual, and future. Also, there are traditionally called compound forms of each tense in Lithuanian, i.e. analytic forms, be-verb bati + adjectival participle in nominative case. 86 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity <IPFV. action> type predicate (5) (6) Ji létai {bégo / skaité knygq / she-3F-SG-NOM slowly was running / was reading a book / rové Zole}. was pulling the grass-V-PAST-3 (atelic verb) ‘She {was slowly running / was slowly reading a book / was slowly pulling the grass}.’ Knyga létai buvo the book-F-SG-NOM slowly was-be-PAST-3 skaitoma Algio (being) read-PASS.ADJ.PRES.P-F-SG-NOM (atelic verb) by Algis- -GEN ‘The book was slowly being read by Algis.’ <State> type predicate (7) (8) Berniukas visq laikq {guléjo / the boy-M-SG-NOM ll the time lay (was lying) / sédéjo ant sofos / turéjo laivelj} was sitting on the sofa / had the toy ship-V-PAST-3 (atelic verb) ‘The boy {lay (was lying) / was sitting on the sofa / had the toy ship} all the time.’ Durys visq laikq buvo the door-F-PL-NOM all the time was-be-PAST-3 atidarytos. opened-PASS.ADJ.PP-F-PL-NOM (telic verb) ‘The door was opened (left open) all the time.’ In my view, this kind of classification of basic types’of predicates and the transitivity of verbs are related in the following way. As is shown in ex. (3) and (5), in the active voice, a verb that represents an <action> type predicate can be either intransitive, non-prototypical transitive, or prototypical transitive. Yet, as can be seen in ex. (7), a verb that represents a <state> type predicate can be either intransitive or non-prototypical transitive with a low degree of transitivity (behaving more like intransitive), yet it cannot be prototypical transitive. Now, in the passive voice, a verb that represents an <action> type predicate can also be non-prototypical transitive as in ex. 87 Eiko Saxurar (4) and (6), yet it can only be prototypical transitive with a <state> type predicate, as shown in ex. (8). 5. WORD ORDER BETWEEN ADVERBIAL PAST PARTICIPLES AND MAIN VERBS® When the connection between past participles and main verbs is brought into the focus of consideration, it becomes clear that the pattern of the predominant word order changes depending on the type of predicate used. In the following paragraphs (a) and (b) the patterns of word order will be summed up in connection with the relative time reference of past participles. (a) Adjectival past participles: (a-i) in <PFV. action> type predicate sentences, these participles refer to <anteriority > of the secondary situation. As is shown in examples (9a, b), the past participle usually stands before the main verb (PP-V), while the reverse order (V-PP) is unnatural in a minimal context, unless used in a particular context. (a-ii) in <IPFV. action> type predicate sentences, these participles can refer both to <anteriority> of the preceding secondary situation and to <simultaneity> of the resultative state. As in examples (10a, a’, b, b’), both PP-V and V-PP are natural. (a-iii) in <state> type predicate sentences, these participles refer to <simultaneity> of the resultative state of the preceding secondary situation. As in examples (11a, b), the past participle usually comes after the main verb (V-PP)°. The reverse order (PP-V) is unnatural in a minimal context, unless used in a particular context. ® Basic word order in Lithuanian is SVO, modifier-modified. Usually, participle functioning as an attributive goes before the noun in the same way as adjective does, whereas participle functioning as a predicate follows the subject. Now, the participles under consideration here, 1. ., past participles functioning as adverbials, can either precede or follow the main verb. Moreover, when used together with subordinate words or when preceding the main verb, these participles are often separated by intonation or a pause (by a comma in a written text) and become more independent. Now, according to the orthography, in single occurrence cases when past participles do not have any subordinate words, a comma is not used. ° The combination of an adjectival past participle functioning as an adverbial with a <state> type predicate is similar in structure to the analytic form (be-verb + ad88 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity (b) Adverbial past participles: (b-i) in <PFV. action> type predicate sentences, these participles refer to <anteriority > of the secondary situation, as is the case with adjectival past participles. As in examples (12a, b), normally they precede the main verb (PP-V). The reverse word order (V-PP) is unnatural in a minimal context, unless used in a particular context. (b-ii) in <IPFV. action> type predicate sentences, these participles refer to both <anteriority> of the preceding secondary situation and <simultaneity> of the resultative state, as is the case with adjectival past participles. As is shown in examples (13a, b), normally they stand before the main verb (PP-V). The reverse word order (V-PP) is unnatural in a minimal context, unless used in a particular context. (b-iii) in <state> type predicate sentences, these participles refer to <simultaneity > of the secondary situation. Contrary to the case with adjectival past participles, this type of secondary situation usually coincides with the stative main situation and does not imply any <anteriority >. As is seen in examples (14a, a’, b, b’) they always stand before the main verb (PP-V). The reverse word order (V-PP) is grammatically incorrect. (9) a. Tévas griges father-M-SG-NOM having come back-ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM iskart atsigulé. (PP-V) at once lay down-V-PAST-3 ‘Having come back, father lay down at once.’ b. Uggesines lempa, having switched off-ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM_ the lamp-ACC jis uimigo. (PP-V) jectival past participle in nominative case) which has a meaning of so-called stative perfect, or resultative (see Geniugiené & Nedjalkov 1988). cf.) a. Ji ilgai buvo praradusi she-3F-SG-NOM for long time had lost-be-PAST-3 + ACT.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM sqmone. consciousness-ACC ‘She was unconscious (lit. had lost consciousness) for a long time.’ b. Motina nuo ryto [yra] siltai apsirengusi. mother-F-SG-NOM since morning has warmly dressed-herself-be-PRES-3 + + ACT.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM ‘Mother has been dressed in warm clothes (lit. has warmly dressed-herself) since morning.’ 89 Erko Sakurat having lost-ACT.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM _consciousness-ACC ‘She was lying ror A LonG TIME unconscious (lit. having lost consciousness).’ Motina NUO RYTO guli lovoje mother-F-SG-NOM since morning is lying-V-PAST-3 in bed Siltai apsirengusi. (V-PP) warmly having dressed-herself-ACT.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM “Mother is lying in bed since Morninc dressed in warm clothes (lit. having warmly dressed-herself).’ 6.1.2. <IPFV. action> predicate sentences In case of <IPFV. action> type predicate sentences, co-occurring adjectival past participles functioning as adverbials are formed only from telic verbs. Even though their lexical-semantic constraints are somewhat looser than in <state> type predicate sentences, in general they have in many cases similar meanings as described in paragraphs I and II of section 6.1.1 in connection with <state> predicate sentences. Following below in (22a, b) are example sentences with adjectival past participles in the active voice formed from intransitive verbs, and in (23a, b) from transitive verbs, (24a, b) are example sentences with adjectival past participles in the passive voice. (22) a. Padavéja pasistiebusi the waitress-F-SG-NOM_ having stood on tiptoe-ACT.ADJ.PP-F- -SG-NOM servetéle Sluosté Jo veidq. (PP-V) 96 with a napkin was wiping-V-PAST-3 _ his face-ACC ‘Standing (lit. Having stood) on tiptoe, the waitress was wiping his face with a napkin.’ . Susimastes, Jis having become lost in thought_he-3M-SG-NOM ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM glosté vaikui galvq. (PP-V) was stroking-V-PAST-3 child-DAT head-ACC ‘Thoughtfully (lit. Having become lost in thought), he was stroking the child’s head.’ Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity (23) a. Jis bégo he-3M-SG-NOM _ was running-V-PAST-3 iskéles uodegg. (V-PP) having raised up-ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM his tail-ACC ‘He was running with his tail raised up (lit. having raised up his tail).’ b. Ji éjo gatve she-3F-SG-NOM was walking down-V-PAST-3 _ the street sugniauzusi kumstyje having clenched-ACT.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM __ in her fist popierélj. (V-PP) a small piece of paper-ACC ‘She was walking down the street clenching (lit. having clenched) in her fist a small piece of paper.’ (24) a. Jjungtas nuo pat ryto having been turned on-PASS.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM since morning radijas skleidé the radio-M-SG-NOM __ was emitting-V-PAST-3 keistus garsus. (PP-V) strange sounds ‘Having been turned on since morning, the radio was emitting strange sounds.’ b. Jos burna drebéjo her mouth-F-SG-NOM was quivering-V-PAST-3 uzspausta jo kita ranka. (V-PP) pressed tightly-PASS.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM under his hand ‘Her mouth was quivering pressed tightly under his hand.’ The examples below show the types of co-occurring aspectual adverbials of duration, or continuity: (25) a. Mergina ILGAL sitirejo the young woman-F-SG-NOM for a long time was staring-V- -PAST-3 iia iSsigandusi. (V-PP) at her having frightened-herself-ACT.ADJ.PP-F-SG-NOM 97 Eriko Sakurat ‘The young woman was staring at her For A LONG TIME frightened (lit. having frightened-herself).’ b. Nuo ryto ugsiglaudes Sesélyje since morning _ having hidden-himselfin the shadow -ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM jis lauké traukinio. (PP-V) he-3M-SG-NOM was waiting for-V-PAST-3 the train-GEN ‘Hiding (lit. Having hidden-himself) in the shadow sinck MornING, he was waiting for the train.’ 6.1.3. <PFV. action> predicate sentences In case of <PFV. action> type predicate sentences lexical-semantic constraints are looser than in all other cases. To begin with, the fact that adjectival past participles functioning as adverbials can be formed from atelic verbs makes these sentences very different from <state> type predicate sentences, Further, while they can be formed from prototypical transitive verbs in the active voice, they can also be formed from non-prototypical transitive verbs in the passive voice. However, the condition should be met that the contents expressed by past participles and main verbs have some kind of logical link and have no split, or gap, in time. Following below are example sentences with adjectival past participles in the active voice formed from intransitive verbs (26a, b) and transitive verbs (27a, b), Examples (28a, b) are sentences with adjectival past participles in passive voice. (26) a. Zmogus, staiga isibégéjes, the man-M-SG-NOM unexpectedly having dashed- -ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM. trenké galvq i sieng. (PP-V) slammed-V-PAST-3 head-ACC against the wall ‘Dashing off (lit. Having dashed) unexpectedly, the man slammed his head against the wall.’ b. Ejes per beriynélj having walked-ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM in the grove of birch trees 98 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity dvi valandas, jis staiga nusimeté for two hours he-3M-SG-NOM suddenly tore off-V-PAST-3 kauke. (PP-V) the mask-ACC ‘Having walked into the grove of birch trees for two hours, he suddenly tore off the mask.’ (27) a. Geografas, atsivertes the geographer-M-SG-NOM having opened-ACT.ADJ.PP-M- -SG-NOM ugrasy knyga, pasidrozée piestukq. (PP-V) the notebook-ACC sharpened-V-PAST-3 the pencil-ACC ‘The geographer, having opened the notebook, sharpened the pencil.’ b. Pamates senute, having seen-ACT,ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM the old lady-ACC jis nubégo jai padeti. (PP-V) he-3M-SG-NOM dashed out-V-PAST-3 to help her ‘When he saw (lit. Having seen) the old lady, he dashed out to help her.’ (28) a. Suo, stipriai__mustas the dog-M-SG-NOM strongly beaten-PASS.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM vaiko, nutraukes virve, by the child-GEN having broken-ACT.ADJ.PPthe string-ACC -M-SG-NOM pabégo. (PP-V) ran away-V-PAST-3 lit. ‘The dog, strongly beaten by the child, having broken the string, ran away.” b. Apgautas pardavéjos, cheated-PASS.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM_ by a saleswoman-GEN jis parasé skundg. (PP-V) he-3M-SG-NOM__ wrote-V-PAST-3_ a complaint-ACC ‘Cheated by a saleswoman, he wrote a complaint.’ When these participles are formed from telic verbs, the co-occurring aspectual adverbials usually express punctual time (ex. (29)). When they are formed from atelic verbs, the co-occurring aspectual adverbials are those of 99 EIKo SAKURAI the duration or continuity type, whereas the main verbs can be used with co-occurring adverbial words expressing punctual time (ex. (30)). (29) Pamastes AKIMIRKA, having thought-ACT.ADJ.PP-M-SG-NOM for a split second jis atsaké, (PP-V) he-3M-SG-NOM answered-V-PAST-3 ‘After thinking (lit. Having thought) ror a spur secon, he gave the answer.’ (30) a. [near Zygiave per smélj, for a long time having walked-ACT.ADJ.PPon the sand -M-PL-NOM Jie PAGALIAU PO PENKIU VALANDU they-3M-PL-NOM finally after five hours atrado kelig. (PP-V) found-V-PAST-3_ the way-ACC ‘Having walked ror aLone tive on the sand, they FINALLY AFTER FIVE Hours found the way.’ b. Nuo ryro éjes, jis since morning having walked-ACT.ADJ.PPhe-3M-SG-NOM -M-SG-NOM priéjo trobele TRECIA VALANDA. (PP-V) reached-V-PAST-3 a wooden cabin-ACC at three ‘Having walked since morning, he reached a wooden cabin ar THREE.’ 6.2. Adverbial past participles Both from the standpoint of aspect and transitivity, the combination of adverbial past participles with main verbs is not subject to the constraints observed with adjectival past participles (refer to examples (2), (12a, b), (13a, b), (14a, a’, b, b’)). Moreover, in contrast to adjectival past participles, adverbial past participles can have co-occurring adverbials expressing punctual time even in cases of <state> predicate. (31) a. Jam atskridus LYGIAI TRECIA VALANDA, he-DAT arrived by plane-ADV.PP at three o’clock sharp 100 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity jo tévas buvo oro uoste. (PP-V) his father-M-SG-NOM was-V-PAST-3 at the airport. ‘When he arrived by plane ar THREE o’cLock sHaRP, his father was at the airport.’ b. Po PENKIV VALANDU STAIGA sutemus, after five hours suddenly the twilight fell-ADV.PP mes dar buvome miske. (PP-V) we-1PL-NOM still were-V-PAST-1PL in the forest ‘When the twilight fell suppenty arrer Five HOURS, we were still in the forest.’ 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In the present paper I have attempted to prove that: (i) the combination of past participles functioning as adverbials with main verbs is subject to certain constraints which depend on various conditions contained in the semantic structure of the sentence, where aspect and transitivity play a central role. (ii) in <state> type predicate sentences, adjectival past participles and main verbs construct one predicate as a single entity where the combinatory possibilities are most strictly constrained by the principle of semantic consistency in stativity and intransitivity. Meanwhile, in <PFV. action> type predicate sentences, the adjectival past participles form another, more independent predicate in addition to that of the main verb, and the semantic constraints are most loose. <IPFV. action> type predicate sentences take the position in between the other two types of predicate sentences summarized above. (ii) in the case of adverbial past participles, the constraints that are observed with adjectival past participles do not apply in their combination with main verbs, neither from the perspective of aspect nor from that of transitivity. The observations in this paper are summarized in Table 1 below. (‘+’ means that the formation is possible; ’ means that the formation is impossible). 101 EIKO SAKURAI Table 1: The semantic dependency of past participles functioning as adverbials on main verbs in Lithuanian Degree of high (tight constraints) <—» low (loose constraints) dependency: Adjectival past participles Adverbial past (active/passive voice) | participles (same-subject use) (different-subject use) Types of <state> <IPEV. <PFV. predicates action> action> (a) relative time <simultaneity> «> <anteriority> (same as adjectival reference past participles) (b) predominant V-PP V-PP / PP-V PP-V PP-V word order (c) atelic - = ae + (nonbounded) verbs (d) active voice: prototypical - oO + + transitive verbs (e) passive voice. non-prototyp- - oO + (no passive voice) ical transitive verbs The close link between aspect and transitivity is already suggested in Hopper & Thompson’s transitivity hypothesis (1980). However, the problem of participles functioning as adverbials has not yet been discussed from that point of view to date. So it is predicted that my interpretation can give a new perspective on the issue of correlation between aspect and transitivity. REFERENCES Asranam, W. & L. Ku.ixov, eds., 1999: Tense-Aspect, Transitivity and Causativity: Essays in Honor of Vladimir Nedjalkov. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 102 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity Amsrazas, V., 1966: Dalyviniy, pusdalyviniu ir padalyviniy konstrukcijy skyrybos klausimu. Kalbos kultiira 11: 64-68. Amsrazas, V. 1984: Del lietuviy kalbos veiksmazodzio morfologiniy kategoriju. Baltistica 20.2, 100-110. Amprazas, V. 1990: Sravnitel’nyj sintaksis pricastij baltijskix jazykov. Vilnius: Mokslas. Amprazas, V., ed., 1997: Lithuanian grammar. Vilnius: Baltos lankos. Bonpvarko, A, V. 1987: Vvedenie. Osnovanija funkcional’noj grammatiki. In: Id., Teorija funkcional’noj grammatiki. Vvedenie. Aspektual’nost’. Vremennaja lokalizovannost’. Taksis. Leningrad: Nauka. Bonparko, A. V. 1996: Problemy grammaticeskoj semantiki i russkoj aspektologii. St Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Ceremisina, M. I. 1977: Deepriéastie kak klass form glagola v jazykax raznyx sistem. In: M. I. Crremisina, ed., SloZnoe predlogenie v jazykax raznyx sistem, Novosibirsk: Nauka, 3-28. Comrir, B. 1976: Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Compiz, B. & G. G. Corserr, eds., 1993: The Slavonic languages. London/New York: Routledge. Daut, O. 1981: On the definition of the telic-atelic (bounded-nonbounded) distinction. In: Ph. J. Trprscui & A. Zarnen, eds., Tense and aspect. Syntax and Semantics 14. New York: Academic Press, 79-90... Dant, 0. 1985: Tense and Aspect systems. Oxford/New York: Basil Blackwell. Dant, O. 1994: Aspect. In: R. E. Asner et al., eds., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 1, 240-247. Damarionas, L. 1960: Lietuviy kalbos veiksmazodziy aspektai. Boston: Lietuviy enciklopedijos leidykla. Damaritnas, L. 1962: Glagol’nye vidy v litovskom jazyke. In: Mastov, ed., 1962, 365-381. Damarionas, L. 1975: Kelios pastabos dél veiksly sampratos. Baltistica 11.2, 171180. 103 E1rko SakurRAl DLKG — V. Amprazas, ed., Dabartinés lietuviy kalbos gramatika. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijy leidykla, 1994. Enpzeuin, J. 1971: Comparative Phonology and Morphology of Baltic Languages, trans. W. R. Scuatsrizc & B. Jecers. The Hague/Paris: Mouton. Gatnaityté, E. 1966: K voprosu ob imperfektivacii glagolov v litovskom jazyke. Baltistica 2, 147-158. Ga.naityte, E. 1963: Osobennosti kategorii vida glagolov v litovskom jazyke (v sopostavlenii s russkim jazykom). Kalbotyra 7, 123-143. Gentusiene, E. 1987: The Typology of Reflexives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Gentustene, E. 8. 1974: Diatezy i zalogi v sovremennom litovskom jazyke. In: A. A. Cuotonovié, ed., Tipologija passivnyx konctrukcij. Diatezy i zalogi. Leningrad: Nauka, 203-230. Geniusteng, E. §. 1990: Perfekt i vid v litovskom jazyke. V. S. Xrakovsku, ed., Tipologija i grammatika. Moscow: Nauka, 135-140. Geniusienr, E. $8. & V. P. NepsaLKov 1988: Resultative, passive, and perfect in Lithuanian. In: Nepsatkov, ed., 1988, 369-386. Hewson, J. & V. Busenix 1997: Tense and aspect in Indo-European languages (Theory, typology, diachrony). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Hotvoet, A. 1991: Transitivity and Clause Structure in Polish: A Study in Case Marking. Warszawa: Slawistyczny OSrodek Wydawniczy. Houvoet, A. & V. Gizik 2004: Veikslo prieSprieSos tipai. In Hotvorr & SEMENIENE, eds., 2004, 141-162. Hotvoet, A. & A. Jupzentis, eds., 2003: Sintaksiniy rysiy tyrimai. Vilnius: Lietuviy kalbos institutas. (Lietuviy kalbos gramatikos darbai, 1.) Hotvoet, A. & L. Sementene, eds., 2004: Gramatiniy kategorijy tyrimai. Vilnius: Lietuviu kalbos institutas. (Lietuviu kalbos gramatikos darbai, 2.) Hopper, P. J. & S. A. THompson 1980: Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56, 251-299, 104 Combination of participles and main verbs: aspect and transitivity Jakosson, R. 1957: Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. In: Id., Selected writings vol. 2, The Hague/Paris: Mouton, 130-147. Joxosama, O. 1983: V za8titu zapretnyx deepriéastij. American Contributions to the Ninth International Congress of Slavists, vol.1, Linguistics, 373-381. Slavica: Columbus, OH. Konic, E. & J. vAN peR Auwera 1990: Adverbial participles, gerunds and absolute constructions in the languages of Europe. In: J. Becuert, G. Bernint & C. Buripant, eds., Toward a Typology of European languages. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 337-355.. Leuman, Ch. 1994: Predicates: aspectual types. In: R. E. Asner et al., eds., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 6. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 3297-3302. LKG — K. Utvypas, ed., Lietuviy kalbos gramatika. Vol. 2. Vilnius: Mintis, 1971. Mastov, Ju. S. 1962: Voprosy glagol’nogo vida v sovremennom zarubeZnom jazykoznanii. In: Masiov, ed., 1962, 7-32. Mastov, Ju. S., ed., 1962. Voprosy glagol’nogo vida. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo inostrannoj literatury. Mastoy, Ju. S, 1978: K osnovanijam sopostavitel’noj aspektologii. In: Ju. S. Mastov, ed., Voprosy sopostavitel’noj aspektologii. Leningrad: Nauka, 4-44. Mastov, Ju. S. 1984: Ob osnovnyx ponjatijax aspektologii. In: Id., O¢erki po aspektologii. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Leningradskogo universiteta, 5-47. Musteikis, K. 1972: Sopostavitel’naja morfologija russkogo i litovskogo jazykov. Vilnius: Mintis. Nepsatkov, V. P., ed., 1988: Typology of resultative constructions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Papuceva, E. V. 1996: Semantiéeskie issledovanija (Semantika vremeni i vida v russkom jazyke; Semantika narrativa). Moscow: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury. Pautauskiene, A. 1979: Gramatinés lietuviy kalbos veiksmazodiio kategorijos. Vilnius: Mokslas. 105,