Lietuvių kalbos intarpinių ir sta-kamienių veiksmažodžių diachroniniai sluoksniai

LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE QUESTIONS XXXVI (1996) LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE: RESEARCHERS AND STUDIES DIACHRONICAL STREETS OF INTERROBUS AND STA-CORE VERBS IN LITHUANIAN Language Interrobus verbs are present in almost all Indo-European languages — in some less, in others more. Their development in individual languages is different: in some languages the interjectional verbs disappeared for phonetic or other reasons (e.g., they passed to the class of adverbial verbs, cf. Armenian lk®anem "leave" and Latin linguo, cf. rinakti), in others they increased. The most abundant interrogative verbs appeared in the eastern Baltic languages, especially Lithuanian. In these languages, the insertion, like the suffix sta, acquired certain functions that were not present in other Indo-European languages. A particularly important role in the formation of interjective and sta stem verbs in Eastern Baltic languages was played by categorical semantics — the emergence of the meaning of self-action, associated with the formation of pairs of diatesis oppositional verbs, e.g., tinka /teikia, rurika /raūkia (Arumaa; Endzelins LVG; Karaliūnas BKSBK; Kazlauskas LKIG; Kglln; Paulauskienė GVK; Stepanov VZP; Temčin RGF and others). Thus, it is important to analyze the relationships of Lithuanian interjective and sta stem verbs with stems of the same root (t)a and some verbs of other structures. According to various sources, in Lithuanian there are 356 oppositions of interjectional and sta stems and (7)a stems and mixed type verbs. The analysis of the genetic and functional relationships of verb-verbal oppositions allows to identify the diachronic layers of interjective and sta stem verbs in Lithuanian language. 1. Praindo-European layer of interjections! the insert usually joined to the roots of the extinct degree (e.g., lat. linguo "leku": skt. line "remain": pr. po-linka "remain"; lat. rumpėo "to crush, to plunder, to destroy”: skr. lumpdti "breaks". Root-end consonantism was rather limited—the root usually ended in a blown consonant, less often in a blown consonant. The meaning of the early Indo-European interjectional verbs was undifferentiated from the point of view of categorical semantics, they meant both active and spontaneous action (it seems that the meaning of active action was more common), e.g., stringo "cut", av. mesti "maišo" (cf. lit. spontaneous action meaning stringa, mysta) and lat. ninguit (=lit. snow). But they were different from the others 1 According to our data, 12 interjective verbs in Lithuanian are inherited from the early Indo-European period (sninga, skinda, limpa, stringa, dial. linka "lieka", mysta, bunda, dunsa, kunka, munka, rumpa, senka (Pečiulevičiūtė VEIK). 83 verbs one of the aspects of categorical semantics —the nature of the action, that is, the terminative action (see. Kuiper IN; Kglln: Marstrander NIC et al. ). 2. The proto-Baltic language must have remained in the same state! This is shown by the interjectional verbs of the Baltic languages with the relative meaning of active action, apparently inherited from the early Indo-European epoch, e.g. pr. po-linka "leave", common Lithuanian and Latvian derivatives brenda and briedu, čiumpa and čūpu, randa and rūodu, etc. ; Lithuanian renda "ridena", brunka "bruka, terpia, spaudžia, kiša“ and others. 3. There are many changes in the Eastern Baltic period. The process of branching of verbal roots with qualitative vowel change begins — the semantic morphological opposition causative/resultative is formed (e.g., kėlia / kijla: la. celu | cilstu, krėčia | krinta: la. krešu /kritu, etc.). This process continues with the exception of the eastern Baltic languages, where many Lithuanian oppositions have no equivalents in Latvian. In the eastern Baltic languages, the sta stem becomes active in addition to the insertion, and the phonetic possibilities of the verbs of the sta and the insertion stems are expanded — the root can end not only with explosive, blowing consonants, but also with sonants, semivowels 4, u. The consonantism of the root end determines the different morphological structure of the present tense in Lithuanian and Latvian, for example, verbs with the sonant ausAaut in Lithuanian have insertion present tense forms (e.g., ljja, griūva, bila), while in Latvian they have sta stems (listu, grūstu, balstu) or a stems (liju). In addition to the interjectional forms of the present tense, sta stems are becoming more and more common in both Lithuanian and Latvian (especially before blowing root-end consonants, \ sonants, e.g. dūžta || dunža, birsta || bjra). The insertion and the sta stem acquire a specific meaning of self-action in connection with the formation of pairs of diatetic oppositional verbs: the Baltic roots with the change of vowels separate into separate lexems, forming a diatezing opposition, e.g., in Belarusian *vert-/*virt-> lie. translate, translate, translate and turn, turns, turned. The formation of the causativa/resultativa opposition inspired other processes of root regrouping: root verbs, having undifferentiated meaning from the point of view of the diathesis, acquired new present tense forms, emphasizing the nature of the action, the activity of the actor and the relationship with the object, for example, the verb dága "burns, heats" in dialects has the root and interjectional present tense forms: dágia, cf. la. dedzu (causative) and deriga (mutative). 4.1 In Lithuanian language, in addition to the processes mentioned above, which began and continue in the Eastern Baltic epoch, a new semantic action opposition durativa /terminativ a is formed on the basis of the causativa /resultativa opposition, the categorical semantics of the members of which have been differentiated according to the nature of the action (verbs of indefinite and definite duration). Earlier, it appears, a constructive opposition of the interjectional or sta stems and the root ia stems of the verbs was formed, formally adequate to the resultative /causati84 ve opposition, e.g., spiriga | spiégia, -virksta | verkia, -šurika /šaūkia. Later, interjections and sta stems are formed from mixed verbs, e.g. tjla / tyli, -ėti; kvimpa | breathe, breathing. The semantics of these interjections and sta stem verbs become very definite — they all denote a transition from one state to another. Most terminatives are used with prepositions, acquiring the meaning of the beginning of the action. : The connection between two different types of oppositions (resultativa /causativa and terminativa /durativa), apparently, could be shown by certain verbs "bridges- ", whose categorical semantic relations are as if intermediate between both types of oppositions, such as: švirita /šviččia, rykšta | réiskia, gilsta | gėlia. From the point of view of contemporary language, these verbs form the opposition terminativa / durativa, but we can easily see the causative connection between the opposite lexical units (šviesti causes the verb švisti, etc.). 4.2 After present tense formants acquired a differentiated categorical meaning, direct imitative forms, denoting sound or change in structure, began to appear in Lithuanian. Imitative roots acquire a corresponding morphological structure, which realizes the categorical and specific semantics of verbs, e.g. bliurbti, -ia, -ė (durative, sound meaning) — bliurbėti, bliūrba, bliurbėjo (vibrative with a shade of iteration, sound meaning) —bliūrbti, -sta, -o (mutative, meaning of structure change). The categorical semantics of the self-insertive and sta stem imitative is undefined — they are all mutatives, usually denoting a change in structure (decay, weakening, contraction or expansion), sometimes passing into the sphere of physiological or mental processes. The phonetic possibilities of imitations are essentially unlimited — the root can begin and end with any consonant or their combination, the vocalism is very varied, but usually of a diminished degree (e.g., pluurti, bliūkti, čipti, etc.). Arumaa P. 1957: On the Inherent Hardness of the Ablaut and the Diathesis in the Baltic Languages. —Journal of Slavic Philology 26, Heidelberg, 118—149. DLKZ —Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian Language /Ats. red. J. Kruopas. Vilnius: Vilnius University Press, 1972. Endzelins J. 1951: Grammar of the Latvian language, Riga. Karaliūnas S. 1987: Structural similarities and their origin in the Baltic languages, Vilnius. Kazlauskas J. 1968: Historical grammar of Lithuanian language, Vilnius. Kglln H. 1969: Oppositions of voice in Greek, Slavic and Baltic. —The Royal Danish Society of Sciences Historisk —filosofiske Meddelelser 43, 4. Kgbenhavn. į Kuiper F.B. J. 1937: Die Indogermanischen Nasalprasentia, Amsterdam. LKZ 1 —Dictionary of Lithuanian Language I, Vilnius, 1968. LLKZ —Balkevičius J., Kabelka J. Latvian-- Lithuanian Dictionary. Vilnius, 1977. Marstrander Carl J. S. 1924: Observations on the Indo-European presents a nasal infected in Celtic, Christiania. Z It is hardly possible that such a cross-linking of intarsia and sta stems could have begun in the common epoch of the eastern Baltic languages. In Latvian, there are several pairs of verbs of this type, but not only do they not form the operative opposition terminativa/durativa, but there seems to be no significant semantic difference between them, cf. check || - You're out. 85 Paulauskienė A. 1979: Grammatical categories of the verb in Lithuanian language, Vilnius. ; Peciuleviciute V. 1994: The etymology of interjectional and sta stem verbs in Lithuanian in Indo-European languages (dipl. work, manuscript), Klaipėda. Stepanov J. S: —Crenanos O. C. Bua, 3ajstor, nepexoanocts (Baaro-caaBanckas npo6aema). —Hssecmus AH CCCP. Cep. gold. ux A3BIKA. 1976, 35. P. 408—420 (1 1977, 36. P: 135—152'(2 1978, 37. P. 344-355 (4). "Temunn C. Ji". O pacnpenesenun raaoabHbX GOPMaHTOB -nu -sta B npaGaatuiickom. —Works of young philologists, Vilnius. DIACHRONIC LAYERS OF INFIX AND STA-ROD VERBS IM LITHUANIAN Summary In this article it is established that the meaning of infix verbs in terms of category semantics in Urbaltic as well as in Indo-European was initially undifferentiated. These verbs meant both active action (cf. apreu. polinka “remains”, lat. linguo ”remain”, ai. rindkii "delay"), as well as independent action (cf. lit. sniiga "it snows" and lat. ninguit). In Urbaltic, a morphological opposition of the causative /resultative forms (cf. lit. kélia /kila "raises", lit. celu /cilstu). In eastern Baltic languages the word formation opposition of the durativa /terminativa is formed (cf. spiriga /spiegia “screams / screams”). ks raidai are only peculiar to the Lithuanian language (cf. lit. bliurbsta "annoys himself"). 86