ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XLII (2000)

Jurga GIRČIENĖ

Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius

EQUIVALENTS FOR NEW LOANWORDS – NEOLOGISMS

I.

Over the past decade, a particularly large number of loanwords have entered Lithuanian. They are not all evaluated in the same way. Some, usually based on classical languages, are traditionally accepted, e.g., audit, graferis¹. The use of such loanwords is restricted only when they begin to displace from public usage Lithuanian words that name the same thing (e.g., exclusive is proposed as a replacement for distinctive, and distributor for distributorius, etc.). New names for realia from other countries (e.g., nationalities, specific cultural phenomena, national dishes, tropical fruits, spices, etc.) are also left unchanged. These may be loanwords in fairly widespread use (e.g., avocado, curry, spaghetti) or very rare, so-called exoticisms (e.g., chuño, hadji: On the day journalists visited, a Bolivian-Lithuanian family ate for lunch a traditional Bolivian dish made of crushed and dried potatoes—chuño LR 97 05 03. Muslims honor those who have visited the Prophet’s city of Mecca and call them hadjis R 96 01 06). Loanwords denoting phenomena of modern culture, especially those naming contemporary music and art movements and styles, should apparently also be classified as loanwords that are left unchanged, e.g.: happening, rave, rap. Lithuanian equivalents are sought for other loanwords.

Loanwords considered in need of replacement are generally called new foreign words. This is not a very precise term², but it is apparently used to distinguish, at least provisionally, between accepted loanwords and those to be avoided and replaced.

The phenomenon denoted by the phrase new foreign words can be regarded as twofold, encompassing borrowing and the emergence of new formations³. Borrowing and word formation are the main ways in which new words (or, in other words, neologisms) arise in a language (Urbutis 1978: 28–29). So-called foreign words (because of the aforementioned imprecision of this term, this article will use the term loanwords) and their Lithuanian equivalents are manifestations of competition between these processes.

1 Only the English suffix is replaced in graferis: the form grafitininkas is recommended for use.

2 In some language-standardizing publications, a foreign word is simply defined as a word of foreign origin (without prior evaluation), while in others it is regarded as the Lithuanian equivalent or synonym of “barbarism.” Given the latter approach, it is not very accurate to call loanwords that are not prohibited but merely discouraged, and for which equivalents are proposed, foreign words (e.g., distributorius, lopas, etc.).

3 Equivalents for loanwords arising through language contact may also be treated as a particular type of loanword (Haugen 1972: 352–354, 365–372; Pažūsis 1975: 33).

33

As already mentioned, equivalents for recent borrowings are certain new formations. These may be genuine derivational neologisms (derivatives, compounds), semantic neologisms⁴, or nominative word combinations.

New things can be named using combinations of existing words, but multiword names are not always convenient, and a language cannot make do with them alone. A tendency to avoid homonyms and unlimited polysemy is also evident in language. Thus, word formation plays the most important role in enriching the Lithuanian lexicon (Urbutis 1978: 27–29).

It would seem that word formation should also be the main source of equivalents for borrowings. This is because it is most often asserted that recent borrowings enter the language as words naming new things (modern technologies, new equipment, devices, and the like). It would seem that the Lithuanian equivalents proposed to replace them should likewise be new words—neologisms. However, this is not entirely the case.

This becomes clear upon examining the equivalents for recent borrowings presented to the public. This article draws on two sources: 1) the official document approved by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, “Unacceptable Recent Foreign Words” (LKKN 130–132); 2) the recommendatory list “Proposed Equivalents for Recent Foreign Words” (KK 71, 84–95). These sources do not cover all the equivalents proposed for recent borrowings, but they are lists that have undergone a degree of linguistic and public scrutiny (cf. individual proposals); therefore, they may be regarded as a kind of model for all recommended equivalents.

Neologisms in the first list (hereafter the NS list) account for only about a quarter of all equivalents for borrowings, while those in the second (hereafter the SA list) make up approximately a third (see the full list of neologisms examined at the end of the article).

Why are recent borrowings so rarely replaced by new Lithuanian words? Several reasons account for this ratio (some linguistic, others extralinguistic).

1. The thing named by a recent borrowing is not always truly new, so there is no need to coin a new Lithuanian word for it. For example: šopas = shop, store; vykendas = weekend; tyneidžeris = teenager; presa = press; hotelis = hotel; polisменas = police officer, and so on.

2. Sometimes a borrowing is replaced by existing Lithuanian words whose shades of meaning differ somewhat from that of the word being replaced (e.g., pabas = tavern, beer hall, pub; imidžas = image), but it is doubtful whether such equivalents could be considered even semantic neologisms.

3. Another reason is the frequent use of multiword (compound) equivalents, almost all of which are combinations of several common words or their forms, for example: arm wrestling; cornflakes, flakes with additives; hostels; alternative music, culture; best-selling album, a much-sought-after book; firming cream, and so on.

⁴ Semantiniais neologizmais laikomos naujos žodžių reikšmės (Jakaitienė 1986: 102).

34

Nominative phrases denoting a new reality or concept can be regarded as certain neologisms (Gaivenis 1980: 31), but their constituent elements are very rarely new words—ad hoc coinages, which are precisely the subject of this study.

4. There are also equivalents whose written form coincides with that of words found in dictionaries (often historicisms, archaisms, or dialect words), but whose lexical meaning is remote or entirely different. From the aforementioned NS list, the following can be considered such examples: šūrainį, glaustinį, (dokumentų) naikiklį, (kokteilių) plaktuvę, dėstą, tampres, timpes, dėklę, suvaztinį, smigę; from the SA list: gruzdes, iešką (masc.), ausinuką, šveitalą. Some (perhaps even most) of these may be newly coined words⁵. For example, the equivalent čyzburgerio, šūrainis (“a certain kind of sandwich with cheese”), recalls the archaism šūrainis (“salty seawater; salty (of seawater)” (LKŽ XIV 207), but is in fact a newly coined, systematic derivative with the suffix -ainis (cf. mėsainis, žuvainis). That these are two separate words is also indicated by their different derivational bases. One is derived from the adjective sūrus, the other from the noun sūris. From the perspective of synchronic word formation, these words are linked only by the derivational formant—the suffix -ainis.

Given that many equivalents are proposed by non-linguists, the likelihood of finding the words in dictionaries is low. Cases in which a newly coined word turns out to have already existed in the language are not uncommon (such as J. Jablonskis’s neologisms, later found in dialects). The fact that the formation of almost all the suspected neologisms (apart from the already-mentioned clear ad hoc homonym šūrainis) seems to replicate the word formation of the living language should be regarded as positive: it is natural and traditional.

II.

Having reviewed the overall picture of the equivalents, it is appropriate to focus on the most interesting ones—neologisms.

It is quite difficult to determine whether an equivalent is a neologism. In addition to the circumstances already listed (when an equivalent has the same phonetic form but a different lexical meaning from the word given in LKŽ), other factors are also important—the search sources and the time limit⁶.

⁵ Terminologists encounter a similar problem when examining the formation of terms in contemporary language (Keinys 1975: 8).

⁶ If a Lithuanian equivalent of a loanword is attested in usage before it was included in one dictionary or another, it is undoubtedly considered a neologism (e.g., vaizdajuostė, used instead of videjuostos, was included in volume XVII of LKŽ (LKŽ XVII 971). When a loanword is replaced by a word coined earlier, the latter is not considered a neologism (e.g., riedlentininku (DŽ, 658) replaces the loanword skeiteris (LKKN 132)). Unfortunately, it is not always possible to determine whether a loanword is replaced by a word coined specifically for that purpose, or whether the latter was already in use before the loanword appeared and was only later chosen as its replacement. Thus, the boundary between a neologism and a non-neologism is not very clear even from the perspective of word formation (let alone semantics), but this formal approach is necessary if we are to discuss derivational tendencies (especially at the initial stage).

35

Tokių sunkumų kyla ir kitiems naujadarų tyrėjams (plg. Urbutis 1961: 66; Kėzytė 1973: 37–38; Keinys 1975: 8).

New coinages are usually selected on the basis of dictionaries. Various models of modern terminology formation have thus been examined (Keinys 1975: 7–56; 1979: 155–183; 1983: 70–123). From this perspective, the common lexicon has been studied, for example, compound nouns (Urbutis 1961: 65–121). Larger samples of new coinages have also begun to be studied: based on corpora and the computerized DŽ₃, neologisms are recorded and further divided into two subgroups by origin—borrowings and new coinages (Mikelionienė 1998: 11).

The author of this article consulted volumes I–XIX of LKŽ, all editions of DŽ and TŽ, and various terminology dictionaries (a computerized terminology bank is still being developed, so errors are possible). However, even with a computerized database of all dictionaries, it would be impossible to guarantee absolutely that a given word is a new coinage. As K. Gaivenis points out, words can be lost and fail to make it into dictionaries (Gaivenis 1987: 41–51). This is particularly true of potential new coinages: researchers cannot say precisely which of them should be considered new formations and which should not (Gaivenis 1987: 33–34; Urbutis 1978: 269).

In this article, new coinages are defined as words specially created to replace a borrowing—formations not previously recorded in dictionaries. Nominative word combinations (which, as already mentioned, may also be considered native new coinages) and possible semantic neologisms are excluded.

New coinages can be studied from various perspectives—semantic, stylistic-connotative, and morphological. This article examines their formation: it seeks to determine whether the new coinages follow typical formation patterns and to identify their formation tendencies (comparing them with standard language, whose terminology has been thoroughly studied from this perspective⁷). It examines whether Lithuanian word formation is adversely influenced by other languages, and whether they are followed blindly when naming real-world objects and phenomena⁸. “When evaluating any new coinage, one must ascertain not only its morphological typology, but also other things,” for example, “whether it has other Lithuanian or international substitutes and what the semantic relations between them are” (Gaivenis 1974: 30). Thus, it would be inaccurate to examine equivalents for borrowings separately from the reason for their emergence—the borrowings themselves: it is necessary to discuss not only new coinages—equivalents—that augment the Lithuanian lexicon, but also their relation-

⁷ The lists of new foreignisms include a considerable number of terms or terminologized equivalents (so-called nomenclature words) characteristic of public usage (e.g., computer terms valdytuvas, spausdintuvas, and so on), so this comparison is appropriate.

⁸ Most new borrowings come from English or via English, whose word-formation system differs substantially from Lithuanian (cf. Russian, through which many concepts previously entered Lithuanian: the word-formation systems of the two languages have many features in common (Kaulakienė 1974: 32)); therefore, comparing a borrowing’s formation with that of its equivalent may seem rather formal (except in the case of compounds), but is presumably still appropriate at the initial stage, especially from a semantic perspective. The most promising approach would presumably be to study the derivational meaning of a borrowing and its equivalent (Pažūsis 1989: 58–71), but this is not the aim of this article. Here, the discussion is limited to a brief comparison of the motivation and method of formation of a borrowing and its equivalent.

36

and their other relations with the borrowings they replace (at the time under discussion, it is not yet possible to say precisely which of them—borrowed or native words—will in fact take hold and become established in actual usage).

Where possible, an attempt is also made to review, at least fragmentarily, the usage of the equivalents⁹. This is appropriate and even necessary, since word formation should be regarded as the initial criterion for selecting equivalents (this is the traditional view, already held by J. Jablonskis), and usage as the final criterion¹⁰. It is therefore useful to consider the relationship between the two.

III.

Almost all newly coined equivalents for loanwords included in the NS and SA lists (except for the adjectives žingsninė and ritininė, which form part of a compound equivalent) are nouns. Three of the four main methods of Lithuanian word formation were used to form them: suffixation (suffixal derivatives), inflectional derivation (ending derivatives), and composition, or compounding (compound words).

Distribution of neologisms by word-formation method (%)

⁹ The New Loanwords and Their Equivalents card index is used (compiled by the author of this article). ¹⁰ The latter criterion is not explicitly identified, but the need to take public opinion and usage into account has been mentioned for some time (e.g., Skardžius 1997: 77, 79; Kniūkšta 1979: 90; Simonaitytė 1979: 102); this is particularly emphasized in discussions of equivalents for new foreign words (D. Mikulėnienė, J. Klimavičius et al.; see Girčienė 1997: 111–117). And this is indisputable: even highly successful neologisms that are not actually used will remain merely lifeless facts of language.

37

Suffixal derivatives

Suffixal derivatives are the most popular type among all neologisms. The aforementioned NS list contains fourteen of them, and the SA list eleven, making a total of twenty-five neologisms formed with suffixes.

According to their derivational bases, these neologisms are divided into verb-based and nominal derivatives, which are further grouped by derivational meaning. This classification raises problems, since “there are generally no strict boundaries between individual derivational categories, so there is often disagreement about broader or narrower interpretations of a derivational category and about the very reality of one or another” (LKE 142). The classification presented in LKG and DLKG is followed here.

1. Verb-based derivatives

Twelve suffixal neologisms are derived from verbs. Most of them are names of tools.

Names of tools

-tuvas. This is the most productive suffix in this category (LKG I 381). Two new equivalents have also been formed with it: skrudintuvas ‘an appliance for toasting slices of bread’ and valdytuvas ‘a functional device that serves (controls) the nodes of a local computer network’. These are proposed as replacements for the borrowings tosteris¹¹ (English toaster < toast ‘to toast, brown with heat’) and serveris (English server < serve ‘to serve, manage’). The similarities in the derivational motivation of these borrowings and their equivalents are quite obvious: derivatives with the suffix -er are replaced by derivatives with the suffix -tuvas; the base words were chosen on the basis of the same or similar features.

The choice of suffixal derivation is entirely understandable, since in Lithuanian most names of tools are formed with suffixes (for example, there are five times as many terms of this kind as tool names derived with endings or formed as compounds (Keinys 1983: 107)). The choice of the specific suffix -tuvas was undoubtedly determined solely by the derivational system of Lithuanian. English derivatives with the suffix -er designate not only various tools and other objects, but also subjects (Beard 1990: 123–129), whereas in Lithuanian these may be named by derivatives with different suffixes. Cf. pairs of borrowings and their equivalents: šrederis – (document) shredder, šeikeris – (cocktail) shaker, burgeris – burger, bestseleris – bestseller, blisteris – (medicine) blister pack, plejeris – headphones, dileris – dealer, referis – referee, kileris – killer, menedžeris – manager, and so on. Semantic motivation is somewhat more complicated. But perhaps what matters more-

¹¹ Skolinių reikšmės nustatytos remiantis šiais žodynais: ALŽ 1997, ED 1995, CID 1995, PLŽ 1997, VLŽ 1997.

38

is not whether the borrowing influenced the formation of the equivalent, but what kind of influence it had. Few new realities or concepts arise on purely Lithuanian soil (Gaivenis 1980: 31), so it is natural that many Lithuanian neologisms naming them “are entirely Lithuanian in form […], but in meaning, in their conceptual content, are adapted to designate common, international concepts.” It is only necessary to ensure that they “in their derivational structure and content are not alien to our linguistic way of thinking, […] and that they are organically integrated into our usage” (Skardžius 1997: 280–281).

The neologisms under discussion are undoubtedly systematic, typical, semantically “transparent” derivatives formed with a productive suffix (derivatives with the suffix -tuvas can be formed from transitive verbs of various structures (LKG I 381; DLKG 129). As is usual for such derivatives, their base form is the infinitive).

-iklis. Derivatives with this suffix, the second most productive one (LKG I 383), include three tool names: segiklis ‘a tool for fastening sheets of paper together’, (pranešimų gaviklis) ‘a device for receiving messages’, spalviklis ‘a colored pen for marking a desired part of a text’. They replace the borrowings steipleris (English stapler < staple ‘to fasten together’), peidžeris (English pager < page ‘to summon, call someone’), and markeris (English marker < mark ‘to mark’). As with the group discussed above, the borrowings and their equivalents in this group are suffixal derivatives, but in this case the semantic motivation of the equivalents is much more original than that of the first group. The motivation is somewhat more similar only in the case of steiplerio and segiklio (a tool for fastening/stapling together; derivatives of the verb sukabinti were also proposed to replace this borrowing, e.g. sankabė, sukabukas). Markeris and spalviklis differ fundamentally from the other pairs in this group. Spalviklis is merely one of the meanings of markerio; equivalents with similar motivation, žymiklis, žymeklis, are proposed for its other, more general meanings.

Derivatives with the suffix -iklis are formed from both primary and other verbs. They are usually based on past-tense stems (LKG I 383; DLKG 129); this also applies to the equivalents under discussion (cf. the forms gauti, gauna, gavo).

Comparing derivatives with the suffixes -tuvas and -iklis, which replace English derivatives with the suffix -er, one can discern the reasons for choosing a particular suffix. Derivatives with the suffix -tuvas designate larger devices, while those with -iklis designate smaller devices or tools. This distinction is not accidental. Although there are no major differences between these suffixes, nowadays there is nevertheless a stronger tendency to form names of more complex appliances and equipment with the suffix -tuvas, while -iklis is used for simpler devices, their parts, and tools, and less often for equipment (Keinys 1975: 20–21).

-tuvė. The derivative with this suffix, gruzdintuvė, belongs to the category of tool names and means ‘an appliance in which culinary products—potatoes, doughnuts, fish, and so on—are cooked immersed in fat’. Based on the established formal criteria, it should also be regarded as a neologism¹². This derivative is proposed as a replacement for the hybrid fritiūrinė (French

¹² This word is found in usage as early as 1987 (e.g.: Fritiūrinė (gruzdintuvė) – a special vessel for <…> frying in hot fat – in a deep fryer (NŪE 118), but it did not make it into dictionaries. Despite when it arose, it is appropriate to classify it as a neologism because, as the example given shows, it was coined specifically to replace a borrowing.

39

friture ‘frying; fat for frying’). Gruzdintuvės motivating basis is undoubtedly authentic (see Klimavičius 1997: 12–14). Like the derivatives with the suffix -tuvas described above, gruzdintuvė denotes a larger appliance than equivalents with the suffix -iklis. Derivatives with the suffix -tuvė usually denote tools, simple appliances, or vessels (LKG I 386; DLKG 130). In this respect, gruzdintuvė differs somewhat: nevertheless, it is a fairly complex appliance (cf. trintuvė, grūstuvė); it cannot be considered a vessel either, although such associations may arise (cf. gruzdintuvę and keptuvę). The same dishes can be prepared in both “objects,” yielding a similar result (e.g., bulvės fri are often even called keptomis bulvėmis, ‘fried potatoes’). Such an analogy may have prompted the choice of the suffix -tuvė. Other factors may, of course, also have played a role. It is worth noting that a feminine-gender hybrid¹³ is replaced by a feminine-gender equivalent. This is an interesting fact, since most tool names are masculine. The suffix -tuvas is the most widespread affix for forming tool names, while there are considerably fewer derivatives with the suffix -tuvė (Keinys 1975: 20; Ambrazas 1993: 180). Thus, DŽ₃ lists about two hundred and fifty derivatives with the suffix -tuvas, but only about fifty with the suffix -tuvė (ALKŽ 103; 415–418). Quite a few derivatives with the latter suffix are no longer used, or are not used with the meanings specified, e.g., the aforementioned equivalent of the loanword šeikeris, (cocktail) plaktuvė ‘a beater; a grooved board for levelling straw when thatching a roof; a fulling bat’ (DŽ₃ 562). These facts suggest that the gender of the hybrid being replaced may have influenced the choice of gender for its equivalent¹⁴.

Derivatives with the suffix -tuvė are usually formed from primary verbs, but other cases occur as well, e.g., minkytuvė, brandintuvė, perplautuvė (LKG I 386; DLKG 130; Keinys 1975: 24), so gruzdintuvė is not an atypical derivative.

Most tool names are formed with the suffixes -tuvas and -iklis. The abundance of their derivatives accords with the general, observable tendency in word formation: both are the most productive suffixes in this category (LKG I 381; DLKG 129; Keinys 1975: 20–21).

Usage. The usage of equivalents naming tools is best discussed together. Among derivatives with the suffix -iklis, the most frequently used is (pranešimų) gaviklis. It has completely displaced the loanword peidžeris from public usage. Valdytuvas is a more recent recommendation (included in some of the latest computing dictionaries, e.g., KTŽ 198), with a shorter history of use (the previously proposed compound equivalent for the same loanword, valdantysis kompiuteris, is still in use). The equivalents skrudintuvas and gruzdintuvė, too, are in the process of displacing them from public usage

¹³ TŽ (p. 169) gives the masculine form of the loanword, fritūŕas. In addition to the meanings “fat for frying; frying,” it also gives the meaning “an appliance for frying in fat.” The article’s author does not know how the loanword form fritūrinė came about, but the reason may have been that the French noun friture is feminine.

¹⁴ It is difficult to say whether the gender category of a loanword would be an important factor in recommending equivalents, since English—the language from which (and through which) most borrowing now takes place—does not mark gender morphologically.

40

loanwords being replaced. Spalviklis is more of a colloquial term, popular among those who know it, but not found in public usage. This is because, as already noted, it is only one of the equivalents of markerio.

In general, these equivalents can be said to take root easily, being typical derivatives formed with productive suffixes. This is not at all surprising: they can be regarded as potential neologisms, which are the easiest of all neologisms for users to accept. They look like familiar words and do not provoke psychological resistance.

Names of actions and their results

-ionė. A rather unexpected derivative with the suffix -(i)onė is dėlionė ‘a game in which a picture is assembled from interlocking pieces’. Derivatives with this suffix have traditionally been few. They are usually formed from verbs ending in -(i)oti (LKG I 297, DLKG 97), in this case dėlioti. Traditionally (formally), this derivative can only be assigned to the category of action nouns (verbal abstracts), but it is clearly felt that the neologism also names the result of the action (the assembled picture) and the object (the picture to be assembled). This is not accidental. Many action nouns, especially those formed from transitive verbs, denote not only the action but also its result and object (LKG I 317; Ambrazas 1993: 108).

The origin of this neologism is interesting. It was proposed by children and chosen by them as one of the most popular equivalents for the borrowing puzlis (English puzzle ‘puzzle’). The derivational motivation of Dėlionės is authentic (cf. the meaning and form of the equivalent and the borrowing). The children’s neologism (other recommended equivalents for this borrowing are dėstas, dėstinis, galvosūkis) began to spread rapidly in public usage, e.g.: people who enjoy doing a dėlionė (“Puzzle”) LR 96 09 06; the competition winners will be given dėlionių LR 98 02 21; children like dėlionė (puzlis) TV 98 12; the various cubes of this dėlionė—the ocean currents, winds and rains—interlock V 98 01 29. Such examples, in which several publications choose the same equivalent and even use it figuratively, demonstrate the vitality of this neologism and the likelihood that it will take root in the language.

What might have contributed to the popularity of dėlionės? There are not many derivatives with the suffix -ionė (DŽ₃ lists only 38 – ALKŽ 87–88). Among them, very few of those stressed on the suffix (and thus sounding similar, especially to children) are popular. These include kelionė, svajonė, abejonė, vakarone, and, among the stylistically marked forms, teplionė, keverzonė, terlionė (the latter may be associated with the game under discussion, which requires a lot of “fiddling about”). One possible explanation is that its motivation is apt. That this game is associated specifically with the verb dėlioti is shown by examples of usage: the celebration “Put together your dream ‘Puzzle’” LR 96 09 06; it will be very difficult to assemble your painted “Puzzle”; children also like so-called “puzzles” (a little toy in which a large picture has to be assembled from many small pictures) D 95 01 06. The suffix -(i)onė most often expresses an action of fairly long duration, so it is very apt in this case: assembling a dėlionė is a long and painstaking task, sometimes lasting even months (depending on the number of pieces in the dėlionė).

41

-(t)inis. Another equivalent for the borrowing puzlis, the synonym of the aforementioned dėlionės, dėstinis, should probably be assigned to the category of names for the results of actions (which also includes nouns denoting the object of an action). It would lie at the periphery of this category, since derivatives of this category with the suffix -(t)inis are simply not formed in contemporary Lithuanian. It is true that derivatives with the suffix -(t)inis and similar meanings are in some accounts treated as names for entities possessing a verbal property (e.g., megztinis, muštinis), while also emphasizing that they, especially “names of inanimate things”, are close to names for the result and object of an action (LKG I 323; DLKG 107); elsewhere, they are treated as names for the results of actions (Ambrazas 1993: 96). The lexical meaning of dėstinio (something intended to be assembled (the object) and something assembled (the result of the action)) would nevertheless provide grounds for assigning it to the category of names for the results of actions. The formal aspect is also important: it is claimed that, in contemporary Lithuanian, the suffix -(t)inis in names for entities possessing a verbal property is attached to the infinitive stem of a verb, e.g., kinky­tinis, raliuotinė (LKG I 323; DLKG 107–108)¹⁵. Consequently, a systematic derivative would be dėstytinis. Thus, in either case, whether dėstinis is regarded as a name for an entity possessing a verbal property or as a name for the result of an action, it lies at the periphery of the category as a non-systematic derivative with the suffix -(t)inis. Of course, formally this neologism can also be regarded as a noun-based derivative with the suffix -inis (formed from puzlis’s other equivalent, the ending-derived form dėstas), but it is doubtful that a semantic derivation can be discerned here.

As already mentioned, of all the equivalents for the borrowing puzlis, dėlionė is the most popular. No examples of the use of its synonym dėstinis have been found.

-inis.

Similar problems are raised by another neologism: smiginis ‘a game in which darts are thrown at a circular, numbered target’. It is an equivalent for the borrowing dartas (dart­sas) (English darts < dart ‘dart’). The derivational motivation of this neologism is also original. Formally, like the aforementioned dėstinį, it could be regarded as a derivative with the suffix -inis from the noun smigis (another recommended equivalent to replace this borrowing) or smigė (the proposed name for the equipment used in this game—a dart). But the connection between smiginio and smigti is much more obvious than that between smiginio and smigės. Apparently, like the aforementioned dėstinį, this neologism would most logically be assigned to the category of names for the results of actions; cf. derivatives with the suffix -inis found in old writings, e.g., apsukinìs, atplėšinìs, and the like (Ambrazas 1993: 95). In that case, like the aforementioned dėstinis, it lies at the very periphery of the category.

For the use of smiginio, see p. 52.

-inys. The neologism graibstyns ‘the best-selling item (usually said of a book, but possibly of something else)’ should be regarded as a deverbal derivative with the suffix -inys and likewise assigned to the category of names for the results of actions. Like many other similar derivatives, it can also be interpreted as an object of the action: a book to be bought (snapped up).

¹⁵ The same source also notes that some such derivatives may be formed from past active participles (cf. Skardžius 1996: 258).

42

Derivatives with the suffix -inys are morphologically most often related to primary verbs, less often to mixed-type verbs (LKG I 369); thus, in this case, it would not be the most typical formation. What is typical is that the neologism is based not on the infinitive stem. The equivalent graibstinys is proposed as a replacement for the borrowing bestseleris (English best ‘good’, sell ‘buy, sell, trade’)—thus, a one-word suffixal derivative is proposed instead of a compound borrowing (other proposed equivalents are two-word expressions: perkamiausia (cf. bestselerio one possible literal translation, gerai perkama), graibstoma knyga (‘a much-sought-after book’) (albumas ‘album’).

It is too early to discuss the use of the neologism, since it is a relatively new proposal (no instances of use have been recorded). The borrowing for which the equivalent graibstinys is proposed is popular and frequently found in the press; only occasionally, in a more serious publication, is one of the compound equivalents chosen instead of bestselerio—perkamiausia knyga ‘best-selling book’. Sometimes, probably for stylistic reasons, descriptive variants are used alongside the borrowing: labiausiai, geriausiai, labai gerai perkama, populiariausia (and so on) knyga ‘book’. Thus, language users choose either the borrowing or a phrase with the more neutral verb pirkti ‘to buy’. Graibstyti (and therefore graibstinys), it seems, has too strong a stylistic coloring.

Names for bearers of verbal properties

-utis (-učiai). The plural derivative with the suffix -utis, kibučiai, is to be regarded as a name for bearers of a verbal property. This word is proposed as a name for the component pieces of the dėlionės discussed above. Thus, instead of the single borrowing puzlis, three possible Lithuanian equivalents are proposed: dėlionė, dėstas, dėstinis (to name the game), plus a separate name for the game pieces. This is hardly advisable. No examples of use of this neologism have been recorded (usually the previously discussed equivalent dėlionė is used instead of the borrowing, and there is little need, at least in public usage, to distinguish a general name for the game from one for its pieces).

-ukas. The derivative with the suffix -ukas, užkandukas, also belongs to this category. It cannot be called a typical derivative with this suffix, since such derivatives are most often formed from verbs without prefixes (LKG I 328). Užkanduką, like its doublet užkandis, is recommended for use instead of the borrowing snekas (English snack ‘snack’).

2. Denominal derivatives

There is one more denominal suffix derivative than verbal suffix derivatives—thirteen neologisms.

Names for bearers of nominal properties

-ainis. The largest group of denominal derivatives consists of names for bearers of nominal properties. The most productive suffix is -ainis: besides the aforementioned siūrainio

43

(see p. 35), also include mėsainis ‘a hot sandwich made with a round bun cut in half and ground meat’, žuvainis ‘a hot sandwich made with a round bun cut in half and fish’, dešrainis ‘a hot sandwich made with a long bun slit open and a sausage’, javainiai ‘flakes of various grains (toasted, crushed) with dried fruit, chopped nuts, and other additions, usually eaten with milk, yogurt, juice, or the like’. These suffix derivatives, except for the noun javainiai, replace compound loanwords: čyzburgeris (English cheese ‘cheese’ + burger ‘bun’), hamburgeris (English ham ‘ham’ + burger ‘bun’)¹⁶, fišburgeris (English fish ‘fish’ + burger ‘bun’) and hotdogas (English hot ‘hot’ + dog ‘dog’). Thus, the word-formation methods of the loanwords and their equivalents differ, but the semantic motivation of some pairs is partly similar. The lexical meanings of the base words of the neologisms širainis, mėsainis and žuvainis are the same as those of the first constituents of the loanwords they replace. This correspondence was apparently determined not by blind imitation of another language, but by objective reality: the base words mėsa, sūris and žuvis name the sole distinguishing features of these sandwiches (cf. other compound equivalents proposed for the same loanwords: mėsos (sūrio, žuvies) suvožtiniai). The derivational motivation of dešrainis and hotdogo is entirely different. This is understandable: the loanword has a figurative meaning. The similarities in the motivation of the equivalent javainiai and the loanword it replaces, miusliai (German Müsli ‘porridge, gruel’), are not readily apparent (cf. the language enthusiasts’ suggestion košiai). All the equivalents mentioned are typical derivatives with the suffix -ainis: they are formed from nouns and denote foods. Cf.: DŽ₃ lists over fifty derivatives with this suffix in all (ALKŽ 464), nearly half of which denote foods. There are not many more popular, frequently used names among them: saldainis, sausainis, tešlainis, riestainis. In the past, many more derivatives with this suffix were used to name foods, e.g., avižainis, miežainis, medainis, uogainis, kopūstainis, aguonainis, and so on (LKG I 347). Thus, the new formations not only make a fine addition to the traditional group of derivatives with the suffix -ainis, but also ‘revitalize’ this suffix.

Usage. The growing popularity of the suffix -ainis is indicated not only by the five officially proposed equivalents, but also by other derivatives suggested by language enthusiasts (kramtainis, grūdainiai, sviestainis, and so on). Most importantly, however, neologisms with this suffix are gradually displacing loanwords in usage. For example, the earliest derivative proposed with this suffix, dešrainis (instead of the popular hotdogo), initially met with considerable hostility from part of the public, is gradually taking hold. One of the equivalents for hamburgerio, mėsainis, is also becoming widespread (the compound equivalent mentioned is not used). The proposed equivalent širainis for čyzburgerio will apparently be replaced by the currently used mėsainis su sūriu. The latter is more precise: širainis is the same mėsainis, but with cheese as well. It is difficult to say whether the compound name is chosen for its precision or simply because people do not want to let go of yet another neologism.

¹⁶ Hamburgeris derives from the name of the city of Hamburg, but in the United States, where such sandwiches became widespread on a mass scale, the word part burger was understood to mean bandelė ‘bun’ (this word is now defined as such in dictionaries), while the beginning of the word, ham, was understood as kumpis ‘ham’; later, čyzburgeris, fišburgeris were formed according to the same pattern. Thus, from a synchronic point of view, all the loanwords mentioned are to be considered compounds.

44

one more neologism. In any case, such a choice would indicate that language users are not blindly following a foreign language. Žuvainis cannot spread, since there is nothing left for it to replace: the generic name for the sandwich formerly used, fišburgeris, was replaced by the trademarked (and therefore untranslated) “Fishmac”. The neologism javainiai competes successfully with the proposed compound equivalent dribsniai su priedais (this food is also called sausais pusryčiais, ‘dry breakfast’). Without doubt, in public usage (the press, TV, and so on), the aforementioned equivalents have completely displaced the loanwords they replace. In actual speech, the latter are still used quite actively, but observations allow us to assume that derivatives with the suffix -ainis are gradually penetrating colloquial speech as well.

-inys. Another neologism in this group is the derivative with the suffix -inys, skiautininys, ‘a patchwork made of scraps’. It is an equivalent for the loanword kviltas (English quilt ‘quilt; to quilt’). The motivation for this equivalent is authentic. Most derivatives with the suffix -inys are formed from verbs, e.g., other words also related to textiles, siuvinys, mezginys, nėrinys, and so on. Skiautinys could also be grouped with these if it were considered a derivative of the verb skiausti, dialectal ‘to place side by side’ (LKŽ XII 856). But it would hardly be accurate to do so: the verb skiausti is no longer used (it is not included even in DŽ₃). Skiautinys (a noun-derived formation) is not an isolated formation; cf. derivatives of this suffix with similar formation and meaning: drobiny s, žab inys, žirginys (LKG I 346; DLKG 116; Keinys 1975: 45). This equivalent is used in the press.

-inė. The derivative with the suffix -inė, užrašinė, ‘a rather large special “notebook” with a calendar, calculator, inserts for pens and business cards, section and alphabetical indexes, numerous sections, and so on; it may also be electronic’, can apparently also be assigned to the same word-naming property-holder category. A nominal base is characteristic of derivatives with the suffix -inė in this category (nearly all derivatives are of this type: LKG I 343; DLKG 115). Derivatives with this suffix are possible alongside base nouns of various structures (ibid.). There are not many derivatives of suffixed nouns in the standard language, but they are not exceptional either, e.g., užmiestinė (DŽ₃ 888).

Užrašinė is proposed instead of the loanword organizeris (English organizer < organize ‘to organize, plan, arrange, lay out’). Both the loanword and its equivalent are suffix derivatives, but their semantic motivation is fundamentally different. Perhaps the rather imprecise motivation is also what prevents the neologism from spreading (no examples of its use were found).

-ukė. The equivalent glaustinukė, ‘a close-fitting knitted garment, usually made in one piece with panties’, for bodžio (English body ‘body’) can also be assigned to this same category. This is a neologism with authentic motivation. Its base word should be considered glaustinis, which is also proposed as a doublet of glaustinukės. Derivatives with the suffix -ukas, -ė often relate to adjectives with the suffix -inys, which can be used as nouns on their own, without the suffix -ukas, -ė, and may have derivatives with the meaning of -inukas, -ė (LKG I 349; DLKG 118; cf. apatinės, apatinukės ‘underpants worn underneath’ (DŽ₃ 18)). Of course, this neologism may also be considered a derivative of the verb glausti. In LKG and DLKG, similar derivatives are considered names for bearers of a nominal property, e.g.: rauktinukas, rastinukas (349; 118). Glaus-

45

tinukė was chosen as the most suitable of all the proposed equivalents for the quality as it was selected by the company trading in these clothes. Having made its way into advertising, it ousted the loanword from public usage.

-alas. The derivative -alas, maistalas, can also be considered a name for a bearer of a nominal quality: ‘inferior, unhealthy, but quickly and easily eaten food, e.g., hamburgers, hot dogs, popcorn, etc.’ It replaces the expression junk-food (English junk ‘inferior, poor-quality’ + food ‘food’). In this case, a two-word formation is replaced by a single word (the calque menkavertis maistas ‘inferior food’ is also proposed alongside it). Maistalas is stylistically motivated, carrying the pejorative connotation characteristic of some derivatives with this suffix (e.g., niekalas, birzgalas), and is an atypical derivative with the suffix -alas. First, there are very few derivatives with this suffix that are not formed from verbs; second, those that do exist usually relate to adjectives (LKG I 357; DLKG 121), e.g.: baltalas, riebalas. There are only a few derived from nouns: words no longer used in contemporary language, draugalas ‘friend’ and sniegalas ‘hawfinch, oriole’ (Skardžius 1996: 173). Thus, in contemporary language, a noun derivative with the suffix -alas can be considered a unique phenomenon: an atypical, isolated formation, apparently proposed by language enthusiasts on the basis of formal analogy (cf. gėralas, skaitalas, etc.).

Thus, names for bearers of nominal qualities are derivatives formed with the suffixes -ainis, -inys, -inė, -ukė and -alas. The first suffix is the most productive (five neologisms); each of the others yields one. The abundance of derivatives with the suffix -ainis should not be very surprising: it is one of the three most productive suffixes (after -ininkas, -ė and -inis, -ė) used to form such terms (Keinys 1975: 45).

Names of persons by profession (occupation)

These are derivatives with the suffix -ininkas: vadybininkas ‘management specialist’, riedutininkas ‘a person who skates on roller skates’ (included in STŽ, p. 453), and autostopininkas ‘a person who stops passing cars and travels in them for free’. This neologism differs from the others discussed here in that it is formed from a non-Lithuanian compound.

Minėtieji atitikmenys yra daiktavardžių vadyba, riedutis, autostopas (TŽ 1985: 56) vediniai. Jie rekomenduojami vartoti vietoj skolinių skeiteris (angl. skater ‘čiuožėjas’ < angl. skate ‘čiuožti’; plg. angl. roller-skates ‘riedučiai, ratukinės pačiūžos’ < angl. roll ‘riedėti’), menedžeris (angl. manager < manage ‘vadovauti, tvarkyti’) ir neadaptuoto žodžių junginio hitch-hiker (angl. hitch-hike ‘keliauti autostopu’ < hitch ‘sustojimas’, hike ‘kelionė’). Ir skoliniai, ir jų atitikmenys yra priesagų vediniai. Riedutininko ir autostopininko motyvacija iš esmės skiriasi nuo jais keičiamų skolinių, o vadybininko iš dalies panaši; skiriasi tik darybos pamatas: anglų kalbos daiktavardis yra veiksmažodžio vedinys, o lietuvių – daiktavardžio (vadyba angliškai management).

46

The public accepts typical derivatives formed with productive suffixes with little resistance. This also applies to the aforementioned derivatives with the suffix -ininkas. When it was proposed that Menedžerį be replaced by vadybininku, the latter ousted the loanword from public usage in a short time. Of course, both are used in colloquial speech. Riedutininkas and autostopininkas are relatively recent equivalents for loanwords used much less frequently, so it is still too early to discuss their usage.

Names of places

The derivative kėglinė, formed with the suffix -inė, belongs to this category. It is proposed as a replacement for the loanword kėgelbanas (German Kegelbahn <Kegel ‘skittles’ + Bahn ‘path’). STŽ (p. 207) indicates that the loanword mentioned is not recommended and should be replaced by the compound equivalent kėglių takas. This equivalent is also given in the SA list, while the suffixed derivative is proposed because kėgelbanu is also imprecisely used to refer to the place where skittles are played. Thus, once again, a compound word is replaced by a suffixed derivative. Kėglinė, being a typical formation denoting a place (cf. kavinė), should readily take hold (instances of its use in the press have been recorded).

As already mentioned, there are almost equal numbers of nominal and verbal suffix derivatives (13: 12).

It is unclear whether this ratio corresponds to the distribution of derivatives in the standard language, since no statistical data are available. Verbal derivatives are more common in terminology, accounting for more than two-thirds of all suffixal derivatives (Keinys 1975: 8).

The abundance of equivalents formed through suffixation is not unexpected (there are 1.3 times more of them than all other neologisms). Among Lithuanian nouns, suffixal derivatives outnumber all other formations several times over (LKG I 380; DLKG 86).

3. Compounds

The second most frequent type of equivalent formation is compounding. There are fourteen of them: five in the NS list and nine in the SA list. Of these, eleven have a second nominal constituent and three a second verbal constituent.

Compounds with a second nominal constituent

Five compounds with a second nominal constituent belong to the group with both nominal constituents. These are banglentė, ‘a special board for riding waves’, which replaces the loanword serfingas (English surfing < surf ‘breaking of waves, wave motion’¹⁷), burlentė ‘a special board with a sail for gliding over the water’s surface’, which replaces the loanword

¹⁷ The English word surfing is rendered as banglenčių sportas (‘surfing’; banglentė is surfboard in English), but in the NS list both banglentė and banglenčių sportas are given as equivalents of the same loanword, serfingas (cf. Russian серфинг STŽ 59).

47

vindserfingas¹⁸ is the equivalent (English windsurfing ‘windsurfing’ < wind ‘wind’ + surf ‘breaking of waves, wave motion’), garsajuostė ‘magnetic tape for recording and reproducing sound’, which replaces audiokasetė (Latin audio ‘I hear’ + French cassette ‘box’), dantisiūlai ‘special threads for cleaning teeth’, proposed in place of the loanword flosai (English floss ‘raw silk’), and vaizdajuostė ‘magnetic tape for recording and reproducing images and sound’, which replaces the loanword videokasete (Latin video ‘I see’ + French cassette ‘box’).

Three of the aforementioned formations are proposed as replacements for compound loanwords (banglentė, garsajuostė, vaizdajuostė). Similarities in the derivational motivation of one of the constituents link two pairs of loanwords and their equivalents: vaizdajuostė and videokasetė (cf. another equivalent in use, vaizdo kasetė), and garsajuostė and audiokasetė (cf. the multiword equivalent garso kasetė).

All these compound nouns can be regarded as determinative: their first constituent defines and narrows the meaning of the second. Nominal compounds of this type are most characteristic of standard language (Urbutis 1961: 68). They are all formed from nouns that have neither suffixes nor prefixes. This also accords with the derivational tendencies of compound nouns with two nominal constituents (Urbutis 1961: 75). Three compounds have a linking vowel and two do not. This accords with standard-language tendencies (see Urbutis 1961: 77). As is usual for such compounds, the linking vowels a and i coincide with the stem-final vowels of the base words of the first constituent (garsas, vaizdas, dantis).

Four neologisms are formed from an adjective and a noun. These are the equivalent sauskelnes ‘waterproof disposable baby pants’, which replaces the loanword pampersai (English pampers < pamper ‘to indulge, spoil’), didkepsnis ‘a large piece of meat for roasting, or a steak’, proposed in place of the loanword steikas (English steak ‘a large piece of meat (or fish) for roasting; such a roast’), didmaišis ‘a large bag for carrying loads’, the equivalent of the loanword bigbegas (English big ‘large’, bag ‘bag, sack, handbag’), greitmaistis ‘food prepared in advance and served very quickly in certain snack bars’, proposed in place of the English word combination fast-food (fast ‘fast’, food ‘food’).

Of the compounds mentioned, two are proposed as replacements for two-constituent loanwords (didmaišis, greitmaistis). The pairs of these equivalents and the loanwords they replace are linked by clear similarities in derivational motivation. Similarities in semantic motivation can also be discerned between didkepsnis and steikas.

These neologisms should also be considered determinative. Their derivational meaning approximately coincides with their lexical meaning. Like those in the first group, all these compounds are formed from base words whose stems are identical to their roots (didkepsnis and didmaišis would be interpreted as ‘large bag’ and ‘roast’, respectively, but are morphologically segmented as didis (adjective ‘large’ DŽ₃ 120) + ‘bag’, ‘roast’; cf. didstintė, didmiestis, and so on).

¹⁸ The English word windsurfing denotes burlenčių sportas (‘windsurfing’), but in the NS list not only burlenčių sportas but also burlentė is given as an equivalent of the loanword vindserfingas.

48

None of the compounds in this group has a linking vowel. This tendency is characteristic of Lithuanian, where more than half of compounds of this type never have a linking vowel or are more often used without one (Urbutis 1961: 87).

Two neologisms are formed from a verb and a noun. These are synonyms with authentic semantic motivation, gruzdataukiai and gruzdintaukiai, ‘fat for deep-frying’, proposed in place of the borrowing fritiūras (French friture ‘a method of cooking in which the food is immersed in fat’). These compounds should also be regarded as determinative. The first constituents of both are most likely associated with the present-tense forms of their base verbs, although another principal form may also have served as the basis for derivation (the form of first verbal constituents unrelated to participles often does not show which of the three base-verb stems such constituents are more closely associated with (Urbutis 1961: 100). Compounds whose first constituent is related to a verb in general or only to one of its base forms are somewhat less common than those related to past participles (Urbutis 1961: 96). As is characteristic of compounds of this type, the first constituents of the equivalents are unprefixed stems, while the second constituent is based on a noun whose stem is identical to its root. The only unconventional feature is that the base verb of the compound gruzdintaukiai is not a primary verb. Gruzdataukiai has the linking vowel a. This is not very characteristic of Lithuanian, since most formations with a first verbal and second nominal constituent are always, or at least more often, used without a linking vowel; nevertheless, it is justified because other formations of this type have precisely this linking vowel (Urbutis 1961: 100).

The distribution of compounds by their first constituent cannot be called entirely conventional. In the standard language, compounds with two nominal constituents make up the larger share (three quarters) of all nouns with a second nominal constituent (approximately 60% in terminology), whereas the equivalents make up slightly less than half. Compounds with a first adjectival constituent account for more than a fifth of nouns of this type in the standard language (approximately 22% in terminology), while the equivalents account for slightly more than a third. Compounds with a first verbal constituent (after those with a numeral constituent) are rare in the standard language (3.4% in terminology), whereas the equivalents make up almost a fifth (DLKG 151; Urbutis 1961: 68; Keinys 1983: 75).

Compounds with a second verbal constituent

The second constituent of the remaining three compounds is verbal, and the first is nominal. These are dažasvydis ‘a game simulating armed combat, played with guns loaded with paint’, which replaces the borrowing peintbolas¹⁹ (English paintball < paint ‘paint’ + ball ‘ball’), rinkodara ‘the organization of product sales, encompassing price setting, demand research, and the preparation of advertising’, which

19 Peintbolas, kitaip dažasvydis (STŽ 1996: 381).

49

is proposed in place of the borrowing marketingas (English marketing < market ‘market’) and odašveitis ‘a cream that removes dead skin cells’, one of the equivalents of the borrowing pilingas (English peeling < peel ‘to peel (of skin)’).

Of the three pairs of borrowings and their equivalents, similarities in their derivational motivation would link only dažasvydis and peintbolas (and only in one of their constituents).

The first nominal constituent in rinkodara, odašveitis, and dažasvydis denotes the object of the action expressed by the verb (this relation is characteristic of most formations of this type (Urbutis 1961: 106): to make a market, to scrub skin, to throw paint. Verbal derivatives with a change in the root vowel are uncommon, but ie: ȳ alternation is common (Urbutis 1961: 109–110). There are several sports terms with the second constituent -svydis, e.g., vandensvydis, orasvydis. All these compounds have a linking vowel (in the standard language, almost half are used without one, and in terminology one third are, see Urbutis 1961: 110; Keinys 1983: 111): two a, one o. In the standard language, compounds of this type most often have the linking vowel a, which typically connects only nouns with a (as in this case) and o stems, whereas the linking vowel o is much rarer and is usually used when the first constituent is a noun with an o stem (Urbutis 1961: 110). Thus rinkodara would be an atypical, but certainly not unique, formation of this type: as Urbutis (1961: 110) states, a-stem nouns (most often neologisms) with other linking vowels (of these, only -o- occurs somewhat more often) should be regarded as exceptions. Examples: dujotekis, naftotekis, kainodara, kraštotyra, miškovtarka, and so on. The frequently used compounds cited here, together with newly coined, uncontroversial and socially accepted “exceptions”, may suggest that the linking vowel o in compounds of this type is no longer considered a major deviation. This tendency is also apparent in term formation, especially with the second constituents -tyra, -skyra and -dara (Keinys 1983: 111).

As noted above, there are eleven compounds with a second nominal constituent, but only three with a second verbal constituent. The fact that the former are almost three times as numerous as the latter is unsurprising: compounds of the first type make up almost three quarters of all compound nouns in contemporary Lithuanian (LKG I 437; DLKG 151).

Compound neologisms are popular. Quite a number are indeed proposed as replacements for borrowings, for example, garsaspynė, telefons pynė, akmenstūmis, dribvaisiai, grūdvaisiai, vaisgrūdžiai, didžprekiai, kritribė, didžturgis, komplaužys, tampkelnės, vaizdaskiautės, and so on.

The use of compounds also attests to their popularity and acceptability. For example, žiniasklaida very quickly displaced the unadapted expression mass-media (it was not included in the lists mentioned above because it is rare in public written language), as well as the multiword equivalents used alongside the foreign expression (mass communication (mass communication, communication) media. The pages of publications and advertisements no longer feature pampers, which has been replaced by sauskelnės; in more serious publications, rinkodara is increasingly preferred to marketingas. Vaizdajuostė and garsajuostė successfully compete with the long-established borrowings video- and audiokasete, while the suitability for users of the sports terms banglentė and burlentė is beyond question (following the same pattern, other neologisms are easily formed and gain acceptance,

50

e.g., orientė). Other compound equivalents are fairly recent coinages that have not yet had time to spread widely (only a few examples of the use of didmašio, odaševičio have been found); most of them have competitors. The spread of Gruzdautaukiams, gruzdintaukiams is apparently hindered by equivalents of fritiūro that came into use earlier: cooking oil, frying oil, oil for deep fryers. Dantisiūliai and greitmaistis also have competitors—equivalents consisting of compounds with the same roots; for example, the forms dantų siūlai, greitas maistas are used. It is not yet clear which of them will become established in the language.

Compounds may be attractive because of their clear formation and meaning. The problem, however, is that they are often long and unwieldy.

The ratio of compounds to suffix derivatives (14: 25) is atypical. As stated in LKG (I 253) and DLKG (86), in standard Lithuanian there are more suffix derivatives alone than all other types of derivatives, whereas such equivalents are almost twice as numerous as just one type of derivative—compounds. Thus, there are more compounds among the new equivalents under discussion than is usual in the living language.

4. Ending Derivatives

A little-used word-formation method is derivation by endings. The NS list contains only one clear example of such a neologism, smigis (a synonym of the smiginio discussed above; see p. 42); the SA list contains two ending derivatives not recorded in dictionaries: ieška ‘radio paging system’, which replaces the borrowing peidžingas (English paging < page ‘to call someone’), and striksė ‘a girl who dances during breaks in sporting events and supports the team’, proposed in place of the unadapted word cheerleader (English cheer ‘to greet joyfully, approve, encourage’ + leader ‘leader’)²⁰.

An ending derivative replaces a suffix derivative (ieška / paging) and a compound (striksė / cheerleader). Smigis and darts(as) would be closer in terms of word formation. The basis for the equivalents was chosen on the basis of semantic features other than those of the borrowings.

All these equivalents are derived from verbs. This accords with the tendencies of contemporary Lithuanian: about four-fifths of ending derivatives are formed from verbs (Urbutis 1961: 57), and their proportion is even higher in terminology—90.8 percent (Keinys 1979: 155).

Ieška and smigis are to be regarded as verbal abstracts. The former is derived with the most common ending and, in meaning, like most such derivatives, differs little from an abstract noun with the suffix -imas (cf. LKG I 303). Most abstract nouns in -a are formed from basic prefixed verbs, but derivatives that are morphologically related to other (including unprefixed) verbs are also common, although most often they do not have for the latter

²⁰ The possible neologisms mentioned above—smigė, ieškas, tamprės, timpės, gruzdės—may also be included among them.

51

characteristic suffixes, e.g.: ryma (LKG I 304; DLKG 99). The neologism under discussion, ieška, is of this kind.

Smigis is understood not only as the name of an action but also as the name of an object. This kind of derivational meaning is characteristic of some verbal abstracts (Keinys 1979: 157). Derivatives with this ending are also very common in the language. They differ from derivatives with other endings in that they more often tend to denote a single, short-lasting action (LKG I 304–305; DLKG 99–100). This is also clearly evident when the action meaning of smigio is formally distinguished: a dart smigis lasts only an instant. Thus, this neologism can be considered a typical derivative with the ending -is.

Another derivative with an ending, striksė, names an agent. The neologism is rather unexpected, since genuine agent nouns formed with endings are rare (they are usually formed with suffixes) and most often have a pejorative meaning (Keinys 1979: 176). Apparently the pejorative connotation of striksės is also felt, because this neologism, although included in STŽ (p. 533), has not gained currency in usage. People resort to descriptive expressions or words of general meaning. For example: during the breaks between minutes, they admired the dancers’ flexibility R 96 02 03; “support groups” of their own teams—dancers—appeared in the halls. The participants themselves want to be called “professional dance troupe” LR 95 01 06. As the examples show, the derivational meaning of striksės, “one who skips about,” does not convey the essence of the object being named. When offering equivalents, it is important to consider not only functionality (in this case, a short, convenient word), but also derivational meaning, especially the semantics of the base word²¹.

The derivative with an ending smigio has a somewhat different history. Its users did not reject it: only the proposed smigis began to spread in public usage (e.g., on television: don’t touch the smigio board LNK 97 02 24), but the suffix derivative smiginis (p. 496) was included in STŽ as the term and ousted smigį. However, the fact that the derivative with an ending was genuinely appealing and worth recalling is suggested by the official club for this sport named after it: There is one official darts sports club in Vilnius, “Smigis” LR 98 05 05.

As the data presented show, users respond favorably to appropriately motivated derivatives with endings. They are certainly convenient for the language as well—especially in terms of economy. Derivatives with endings are short, clear, and precise (Keinys 1979: 157).

²¹ The fate of the two proposed derivatives with endings, ieško (pager) and the one under discussion, (radio) ieškos (paging), which form a coherent system, would indicate that motivation is an especially important factor. The latter recommendation took root, while peidžeris spontaneously began to be called pranešimų gavikliu (rather than systematically iešku). This selection in usage was apparently determined by the semantic motivation of the equivalents, which the public found unacceptable. Peidžingas is a radio paging system: to transmit information to someone with a pranešimų gaviklį (peidžerį), one calls the radio paging center and relays a message to the operator, who then forwards it to the subscriber. Thus, the subscriber is searched for via radio communication. A peidžeris is a device that receives signals (messages) sent by radio paging—one that receives messages. Although the two borrowed words being replaced share the same root (peidžingas and peidžeris), their equivalents with different roots became established in usage. Such examples once again confirm that borrowed words have almost no influence on the derivational method, type, or motivation of the equivalents proposed to replace them.

52

Derivatives with endings rank second after suffix derivatives (LKG I 251; DLKG 86). The ratio between equivalents of the latter and compounds in the lists mentioned above (3: 14) would suggest a tendency contrary to the traditional distribution of derivatives (nouns) in the language: there may be slightly more derivatives with endings than compound nouns (DLKG 86), or almost the same number (Urbutis 1961: 65). Yet the lists contain almost five times as many compound neologisms as derivatives with endings.

This ratio may partly have been determined by one of the established formal criteria for classifying neologisms: a word, even if listed in LKŽ with a different meaning, is not considered a neologism (as already noted, some such words may have been newly coined, rather than being Lithuanian words revived with a new meaning). But even if such possible neologisms were added, the ratio of compounds to derivatives with endings would still not correspond to the ratio of these formations in standard language.

One might suspect that the surplus of compounds is due to the influence of other languages. But it is doubtful that such a suspicion can be substantiated. There are fourteen compound equivalents, whereas only six of the borrowed compounds they replace. Thus, a non-compound borrowing can also be replaced by a compound equivalent, which is rather unexpected: compounding is less developed in Lithuanian, so in convergent derivation an English compound is more likely to be rendered by a derivative (Pažūsis 1989: 65). Conversely, suffix-derived equivalents and derivatives with endings are proposed for nine compound borrowings. This shows that there is probably no direct connection between the derivational method of the borrowed word being replaced and that of the Lithuanian equivalent proposed for it.

In fact, perhaps there is no need to be surprised by such an abundance of compounds, since one of the observed trends in neologism formation is the relative increase in compound words (compared with suffix and ending derivatives) (Gaivenis 1980: 31).

Research on terminology also suggests that the ratio of derivatives with endings to compounds has tended to shift in favor of compounds in the language of recent decades: compounding ranks second here after suffix derivation (Keinys 1979: 155; 1983: 70). It is also argued, however, that the potential of derivatives with endings has not yet been fully exploited, and that they could—and should—be relied on more in creating terminology in various fields (ibid., 1979). This should apparently also be taken into account when proposing equivalents.

Conclusions

1. Of all the equivalents proposed for new foreign words in the NS and SA lists, neologisms make up about one third and a half. This proportion was determined by several factors: 1) a new foreign word does not always designate a new thing, and is therefore replaced by a Lithuanian word already in use; 2) multi-word (compound) equivalents are frequent, and their components are usually old Lithuanian words or their forms; 3) equivalents whose graphic form coincides with that of Lithuanian words found in dictionaries, but whose lexical meaning is remote or entirely different, are not considered neologisms from the perspective of word formation (except for derivational homonyms), on the basis of the formal criterion (a derivative recorded in a dictionary).

53

2. Almost all neologisms (with the exception of a few adjectives forming part of a compound equivalent) are nouns. Three of the four main methods of Lithuanian word formation have been used to create the equivalents: mostly suffixal derivatives (25), almost half as many compounds (14), and very few inflectional derivatives (3). Prefixation has not been used at all. Traditionally, prefixal derivatives are the rarest of all derivatives (nouns), so this tendency here is probably not very surprising either.

This proportion of derivatives runs counter to their traditional distribution in the language. Only the abundance of suffixal derivatives can be considered traditional: there are 1.3 times more of them than all the other derivatives combined.

The high percentage of compounds is not entirely unexpected, since studies over the past decade have revealed a tendency towards an increase in compounds. This process should probably not be attributed solely to external factors: the influence of Germanic languages, in which compounds are particularly popular. A study of the formation of loanwords and their equivalents would suggest that there is probably no direct relationship between the formation method of the loanword being replaced and that of the proposed Lithuanian equivalent.

3. The word-formation motivation of most neologisms is authentic. There are pairs of loanwords and equivalents whose semantic motivation is similar, but whose word-formation method differs. Very few pairs exhibit clear similarities in word-formation motivation (the latter equivalents are systematic, typical, semantically “transparent” derivatives).

4. The use of loanwords and their equivalents must be studied, and, on the basis of those studies, neologisms that are acceptable to the public, more likely to take root, and appropriately motivated should be offered.

Received 1999 05 28

List of neologisms under consideration

hitchhiker (hitch-hiker) SA

surfboard (serfingas) NS

windsurf board (vindserfingas) NS

shoelaces (flosai) SA

paintball (peintbolas) NS

hot dog (hotdogas) NS

jigsaw puzzle (puzlis, pūzlė) NS

assembly (puzlis, pūzlė) NS

steak (steikas) NS

beanbag (bigbegas) SA

audio tape (audiokasetė) SA

pager (peidžeris) SA

bodysuit (bodis) NS

second-hand shop (bests elleris) SA

fast food (fast-food) SA

fried potatoes (fryer) SA

fried-potato makers (fryer) SA

deep fryer (deep fryer) SA

search (paging) SA

oat flakes (muesli) NS

bowling alley (bowling) SA

little bites (puzzle, jigsaw puzzle) NS

food table (junk food) SA

meat patty (hamburger) NS

skin exfoliator (peeling) SA

roller skater (skater) NS

marketing (management) SA

diapers (Pampers) NS

stapler (stapler) NS

patchwork quilt (quilt) SA

54

toaster (toaster) SA

dart player (dart, darts) NS

darts (dart, darts) NS

coloring pen (marker) SA

cheerleader (cheerleader) SA

cheeseburger (cheeseburger) NS

snack (snack) NS

notebook (organizer) NS

manager (manager) SA

video tape (video cassette) SA

cleaner (server) SA

fishburger (fishburger) NS

ABBREVIATIONS

ALKŽ – Reverse Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian / ed. V. Žilinskienė, Vilnius: Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, 1995.

ALŽ – Anglų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas, Vilnius: Žodynas, 1997.

CID – Cambridge International Dictionary of English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

D – the daily newspaper “Diena”.

DLKG – Grammar of Contemporary Lithuanian, Vilnius: Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1994.

DŽ₃ – Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian, Vilnius: Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1993.

ED – English Dictionary, London: HarperCollins Publishers, 1995.

GK – Native Language.

KK – Language Culture.

KTŽ – Explanatory Dictionary of English–Lithuanian Computing Terms, Kaunas: Smaltija, 1997.

LKE – Encyclopedia of the Lithuanian Language, Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing, 1999.

LKG I – Lithuanian Grammar 1, Vilnius: Mintis, 1965.

LKKN – Resolutions of the Lithuanian Language Commission, Vilnius: Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1998.

LKŽ I–XIX – Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language 1–2, Vilnius: Mintis, 1968–1969; 3–6, Vilnius: State Publishing House for Political and Scientific Literature, 1956–1962; 7–9, Vilnius: Mintis, 1966–1973; 10–15, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1976–1991; 16–17, Vilnius: Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing House, 1995–1996; 18–19, Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing, 1997–1999.

LNK – Free Independent Channel (TV).

LR – the daily newspaper “Lietuvos rytas”.

NŪE – Namų ūkio enciklopedija, Vilnius: Vyriausioji enciklopedijų redakcija, 1987.

PLŽ – Prancūzų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas, Vilnius: Margi raštai, 1997.

R – the daily newspaper “Respublika”.

STŽ – Sporto terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Lietuvos kūno kultūros institutas, 1996.

TV – the magazine “Your Child”.

TŽ – Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Vyriausioji enciklopedijų redakcija, 1985.

V – the weekly magazine “Face”.

VLŽ – Vokiečių–lietuvių, lietuvių–vokiečių kalbų žodynas, Vilnius: TEV, 1997.

55

LITERATŪRA

Ambrazas S. 1993: Daiktavardžių darybos raida. Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodiniai vediniai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Beard R. 1990: The Nature and Origins of Derivational polysemy. – Lingua 81, 101–140.

Gaivenis K. 1974: Naujadaras naujadarui nelygu. – Kalbos kultūra 27, 27–30.

Gaivenis K. 1980: Naujadarai ir naujažodžiai. – Mokslas ir gyvenimas 2, 31.

Gaivenis K. 1987: Margas žodžių pasaulis, Vilnius: Mokslas.

Girčienė J. 1997: Seminaras svetimybių tema. – Kalbos kultūra 69, 111–117.

Haugenas E. 1972: Хауген Э. Процесс заимствования. – Новое в лингвистике 6, Москва: Прогресс, 344–382.

Jakaitienė E. 1986: Dėl semantinės motyvacijos, kaip kodifikavimo kriterijaus. – Kalbotyra 37 (1).

Kaulakienė A. 1974: Darybiniai vertiniai tiksliųjų mokslų terminijoje. – Kalbos kultūra 27, 30–32.

Keinys S. 1975: Priesaginė lietuviškų terminų daryba. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 16, 7–56.

Keinys S. 1979: Galūninė terminų daryba. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 19, 155–183.

Keinys S. 1983: Lietuviškų sudurtinių terminų daryba. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 22, 70–123.

Kėzytė S. 1973: „Parduotų vasarų“ nauji žodžiai. – Kalbos kultūra 24, 37–43.

Klimavičius J. 1997: Fritiūrinė – gruzdintuvė, fritiūras – keptaukiai. – Gimtoji kalba 2, 12–14.

Kniūkšta P. 1979: Lingvistinis ir socialinis kodifikacijos santykis su norma. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 19, 85–91.

Mikelionienė J. 1998: Naujažodžiai Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto kompiuteriniame tekste. – Jono Jablonskio konferencija „Nauji kalbos reiškiniai ir jų vertinimas“. Pranešimų tezės. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 11–12.

Pažūsis L. 1975: Vadinamieji tarptautiniai žodžiai Šiaurės Amerikos lietuvių kalboje. – Mūsų kalba 2, 33–39.

Pažūsis L. 1989: Konvergencinė žodžių daryba. – Kalbotyra 40(1), 58–73.

Simonaitytė V. 1979: Socialiniai veiksniai ir žodžių daryba. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 19, 101–109.

Skardžius P. 1996: Rinktiniai raštai 1. Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Skardžius P. 1997₁: Bendrieji sumetimai. 7. Tarmybės, naujadarai ir svetimybės. – Rinktiniai raštai 2, 76–85, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Skardžius P. 1997₂: Verstiniai ir reikšminiai skoliniai. – Rinktiniai raštai 2, 277–281, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Urbutis V. 1961: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos sudurtinių daiktavardžių daryba. – Dabartinė lietuvių kalba, Vilnius: Valstybinės politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, 65–121.

Urbutis V. 1978: Žodžių darybos teorija, Vilnius: Mokslas.

NEOLOGISMS AS EQUIVALENTS OF NEW BORROWINGS

Summary

New borrowings and their Lithuanian equivalents are a two-fold phenomenon covering the process of borrowings and the evolution of new derivatives. It may include semantic neologisms, nominal word-groups and true derivative neologisms. After having investigated the lists of new borrowings and their equivalents submitted to the society, it has turned out that the latter comprise about one third of all equivalents.

56

Almost all newly-made equivalents are nouns. They have been produced on the basis of three out of four modes of derivation of the Lithuanian language; the majority of them are suffixation derivatives (25), about half as many are compounds (14) and just a few inflexional derivatives (3). Prefixation has not been employed at all.

The proportion of inflexional derivatives to compounds (3: 14) would testify to a tendency that is contrary to the traditional distribution of derivatives in a language where compounds are nearly as numerous as inflexional derivatives. However, the proportion is not completely unexpected. One of the tendencies of the evolution of neologisms is a relative increase of compounds (as compared to prefixation and inflexional derivatives).

It is only the high number of suffixation derivatives that can be attributed to the traditional modes of derivation – there are 1.3 times as many suffixation derivatives as there are other derivatives. Traditionally, the prefixation derivatives are the least productive, therefore the tendency is not surprising.

Most borrowings are systemic and belong to the neologisms of typical derivation. No negative influence of other languages has been observed.

57