Įterpiniai ir lietuvių kalbos modalinių žodžių klausimas

LITHUANIAN LANGUAGES SANDAROS INVESTIGATIONS LITHUANIAN KALBOTYROS QUESTIONS, XXVI (1987) GINTAUTAS INTEGRATED INTERFACE IR LITHUANIAN LANGUAGES MODAL WORDS QUESTION In the summarizing works of Lithuanian linguistics (academic “Lithuanian grammar”, textbooks of linguistic disciplines for higher schools, etc.) modal words are not distinguished as a phenomenon of the language system. This does not mean that modal words are not characteristic of Lithuanian language or that their interpretation is an obsolete matter. Words with tag modal. (modal word) we find in the Lithuanian language dictionary, e.g.: pagaliau 1X 72, rods XI 810, sakyk, sakysim, sakau, sakytum... XII 34* and so on. ; The concept of modal words is used in several Lithuanian language studies*. Especially modal words of Lithuanian language on the example of Russian language* discussed A. Laigonaitė in her work,,Modal category and modal words in contemporary Lithuanian language“ (V., 1967, pp. 11—16). A. Laigonaitė points out the following characteristics of modal words: a word, passing from an independent part of speech to a group of modal words, loses its nominative meaning and acquires a new syntactic function; from a morphological point of view, modal words are stable, unchanged; modal words do not form part of a sentence, but they can form (in dialogue) an incomplete sentence, can add to a part of a sentence and modify its meaning; Mostly modal Words go in insertions, their additional function —to connect sentences with semantic connections. From the examples given by A. Laigonaitė, it is possible to draw up a list of words that we should consider as the basic modal words of the Lithuanian language: aišku, savaime dišku, aiškus daiktas, aiškus dalykas, be abejo, be abejo, be abejonės, be jokios abejonės, galbūt, galbūt, greičiausiai, galimas daiktas, galimas dalykas, matyt(i), 1 Abbreviation modal. (modal word) in „Lietuvių kalbos žodynas“ (Dictionary of the Lithuanian language), starting with volume X; modal words were also mentioned in previous volumes. 2 The volume and page of the Lithuanian Language Dictionary are indicated after the example. 3 Lithuanian Grammar /Vyr. red. K. Ulvydas. —V., 1971, t. 2, p. 425—542; Jakaitienė E., Laigonaitė A.,Paulauskienė A. Morphology of Lithuanian language. —V., 1976, p. 198; Valeckienė A. Grammatical system of Lithuanian language- /Genitive category. —V., 1984, p. 171. 4 Consideration of the question of modal words in Lithuanian language was encouraged and is still encouraged by the unrelenting attention to this language phenomenon in Soviet, especially Russian, linguistics. This attention, as is known, was greatly activated by Vinogradov’s works: the chapter on modal words and modal particles in kn. I'pammaTiueckoe yuenune O cose” (1947) and a particularly distinct work “O kareropuu MOJIAJILHOCTH H MOJAJbHBIX CJIOBAX B pycckoM si351Ke” (1950). In the last two or three years, the following two monographs on modal words have been published: Baynep A. SI. Yactu peun — -CTDYKTYDHO-CEMAHTHYECKHE KJIACCHI CJIOB B COBPEMEHHOM DpYycCKOM si3bike. —Tarsi, 1982; Ilerpos H. E. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. B S3bike. — HosocuGupek, 1984. 77 seemed, seemed(i), seemed, seemingly, truth, truth, surely, probably, indeed, indeed, indeed, indeed, probably, certainly." What has been said, at least in part, shows the tendencies of interpretation of modal words in Lithuanian. Although, as can be seen, modal words are considered to be very diverse elements of the language, the central ones are still the modals that go in insertions (this is recognized by many modal words tyréju)®. What is the relationship between insertive and modal words and, most importantly, do those words that signify modality by being insertive have the status of a separate morphological phenomenon? The relationship between modal words and insertions — insertions and insertion combinations — is established when insertions are perceived as the names of syntactic elements, which are of the same rank as the concepts of sentence parts?. Modal words in this case are treated as morphological (morphological) means of insertion expression. A lot of very different words that are inserted do not differ from each other in the degree of conjugation, e.g.: matyt, atrodo ir girdi, žiūrėk arba aišku, tiesa ir liūdna, laimė, etc. Whether we consider all of them modal words or only some of them depends on the understanding of modality. Modalities are usually defined as the subjective objective attitude of the speaker to the relation of the said thought to reality. There are two types of modality: 1) primary modality and 2) secondary modality (secondary, actual) modality. Inserted words indicate secondary modality. Secondary modality is understood more narrowly and broadly. If it is considered that secondary modality consists only of problematic reliability (doubt, conjecture, uncertainty) and categorical reliability (emphasis on assurance, obviousness, certainty), secondary modality is understood more narrowly; * Laigonaitė A. Category of modality and modal words in contemporary Lithuanian language. — V., 1967, p. 11—16. ® Plg. 1967: B. B. MH36panasire Tpyas: UcciemoBanus ro pycckoif rpaMMaTHKE. — M., 1975, c. 75; Baynep A. AI. There are 3. cou., c. 100; Baynep A. SI. CeMaHTHKO0-CHHTAKCHYUCCKASZ KBanuduKaums SUĮEDHLIX MOJAJIBHLIX CJIOB, —B KH. : 3HauUeHHe S3bIKOBBIX CJIMHHO H KaTerOpHMA. Tarma, 1984, c. 63; IMerpos H. E. Yras. cou., c. 50. 7 Researchers of modal words emphasize: inserted words — a syntactic concept, and modal words — a morphological category, cf. : Laigonaitė A. Min. veik. p. 16, Baynep A. A. Vka3. cou., c. 63. 8 Understanding the concepts in this way, the threefold distinction between interpunctual words, interpunctual combinations of words and interpunctual sentences is in fact dichotomous: interpunctual words and interpunctual combinations of words are “interpunctions corresponding to parts of the sentence”, and interpunctual sentences are “interpunctions corresponding to parts of the sentence” (Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos, 1976, vol. 3, pp. 701-710, terminai- ). This is also the meaning of the dichotomically distinguished concepts of inserted words (individual words and word combinations) and inserted sentences. The concepts of inserted words, inserted word combinations and inserted sentences can be given a structural meaning (see. Mycreiūrene M. CoBpeMennsrit pycckuit s3pik, II. CunTtakcuc. —B., 1984, c. 145). This distribution of inserts is only ternary; Inserted words, combinations of inserted words and inserted sentences thus perceived cannot be associated with modal words. ? * In some way or another, modality is described in Lithuanian linguistics: in the academic “Grammar of the Lithuanian language” and in the works of linguists J. Balkevičius, V. Labutis, A. Laigonaitė, A. Paulauskienė and others. 78 ————— PTFE —€ —— aišku, matyt(i), žinoma ir other words of similar meaning can be considered modal. The modal meanings still suggest to consider the emotional relationship su of the speaker with the said thing, otherwise "statements about statements- ", various statements about the repetition of the subject, the usualness, etc. ir In this broad understanding of secondary modality, can all words that are inserted be considered modal? ?. The broad scope of the mo modalities is rightly criticised: these very different meanings are placed on the same footing. ne In a narrower sense of secondary modality, it is necessary to explain why words that are constantly inserted but do not signify modality do not form any morphological category. It can be argued that such words as sorry, hear, happiness, look, etc., do not have a single generalized meaning. ir Grammatiir cal differences are searched. Some researchers point out that modal wordshave ambiguous syntactic functions: 1) go in insertions, 2) go (especially in dialogue) in incomplete sentences, and non-modal go only in insertions. In fact, words with a modal meaning can form separate sentences, e.g. : "<...> You were at last very conscious yourself in the first forty?" <...>[—Of course. I don't even want to boast<..- .> AvyžKK. What kind of park is this, if in the undergrowth of hundred-- year-old oak trees there are piles of garbage, the grass is mowed, and the inhabitants of the farm let their cattle out at night. Pasture? Maybe. Only not in the park T 1981 276. of course. Perhaps, etc. can be considered only as sentences of the text: although they have the intonation of a one-word sentence, they can function only as “rejects” into the text. Their modal meaning is somewhat faded, secondary: those words first of all mean agreement with what is said, with modal shades of assurance or doubt. They may follow dialogue replies or otherwise phrases, the content of which they confirm. If the lines or phrases were repeated, the structure would become complete, cf. Pasture? Perhaps a pasture; sometimes it happens: —Had no one come?| —Of course, no one. Everywhere there are some sentences, but insertions that have additional functions: they replace a statement, have a conjunctive meaning — they connect dialogue replies or other sentences. The second additional function of these modal insertions is to converge with other insertions having the basic conjunctive function: vice versa, poco di questo, non abbastanza di questo, contrariamente, etc. Incidentally, the latter can also go in separate sentences, cf. : Bitumen perlite is now used for pipe insulation as it is more conductive than mineral wool. It's a good thing. During transport <...>, storage in warehouses and trenches, the insulation coating of pipes T 1981 225 is often damaged. Only conjunctive insertions-sentences are the result of weak parcellation. Other insertions can be parceled, e.g. <...> passengers are polite, helpful<..- .> each other must be everywhere and always. Unfortunately. I often have to be a passenger too, and I take care of everything T 1985 32. Therefore, the ability to go through the text sentence is not a separate syntactic function of modal words, and therefore not a distinctive feature of modal and non-modal words that go through insertions. 10 Plg, Ilerpos H. E. Yxa3. cou., c. 16. 11 Bacunenko JI. H. Crpykrypgo-ceManTrHueckKas pojib MOJAJILHBIX CJIOB B TeKcTe: ABToped. mmc. ... Kam ¢munon. Hayk. — Munck, 1985, c. 16. 79 Modal words, when interpreted as a morphological category, are usually regarded as a separate part of language. It is difficult to answer whether there can be such a part of language as modal words because, as we know, although the parts of language are distinguished according to a single set of criteria (specificity of lexical meaning, morphological characteristics and syntactic functions- ), in one case one criterion is given priority, in another — another. In addition, there are words that do not meet all of these criteria; individual words are in the stage of transition from one part of speech to another. In distinguishing the particles of Lithuanian language, V. Labutis emphasized: “a group of words can be considered a separate part of language when it meets two most general conditions: 1) <...> it must have a common feature (or several features) that unites the words of that group and 2) it must not be a component of any other part of language (or several of them)” **, Let us consider the words regis, rodos(i), atrodo, matyt(i), which could be considered both the most prominent interjectional and the most prominent modal words of Lithuanian language, — whether they, in meaning modality, acquire some specific morphological features and whether they meet the second condition of distinguishing the part of language. According to the verb researcher A. Paulauskienė, recursive verbs (of course, among other forms of the same type) denote spontaneous action and have an indefinite personal meaning; in place of the indefinite personal form of literary language, communicate, cf. matyt(i). The prefix of the verb seems is inextricably attached to the stem (without the prefix this verb —shows—has another meaning). This type of verbs usually denotes an undirected action, an undefined state of the actor!?. The words seem, rodos(i) are actually impersonal forms. Impersonality is determined by the ability of these forms to represent an indefinite person and their lexical meaning (meaning spontaneous, verbal, independent of the actor's will action); moreover, their impersonality is related to the function of the return particle. Like other impersonal verbs-minors, it seems, seems, seems to have defective paradigms — the third-person forms of all times and the third-person forms of the pronoun. In addition to the present tense, there are other forms of the present tense, such as the future tense of the direct tense (regėsis, rodysis, atrodys) and the present tense of the indirect tense (regėtųsi, rodytųsi). Why do not inserts go in the future form? Morphological verb tenses record the relationship of the action to the speaking moment! *, The tenses used in the sentence (and other elements of language denoting time) indicate the syntactic time, which is determined by the speaker's chosen time reference point. This point of reference can only coincide with the moment of speaking.- 12 Laigonaitė A. Min. veik., p. 11; Lietuvių kalbos gramatika, t. 3, p. 484; Anexcannpos H. M. K pompocy 0 kiaccuukanmy 4acTeil peux B MHIOEBPONMEHCKHX s3bIkax, —B KH. : Bompock! Teopun YacTeit peux (Ha MATepHAaJIe 3bIKOB pa3jIiČuuKbIX THOOB). JI., 1968, c. 109—110; Mycreiikene M. Yra3. cou.,c, 145; Ilerpos H. E. Vkas. cou.,c. 16. 13 Labutis V. Dalelytés and their place among the parts of speech. - Kn. : Literature and language. V., 1962, vol. 6, p. 365. 14 Paulauskienė A. Modern Lithuanian Verbs. —V., 1971, p. 21, 25. 15 Paulauskienė A. Grammatical categories of Lithuanian verbs. —V., 1979, jan in domestic situation!*. Inserts are a relatively autonomous element of syntax, the p. 168. 80 time value is set separately. "What is the difference between the moment of ir jų perception and the moment of thought?". Usually, the thought arises in the moment of speech, so the most common present tense form of words with a modal doubting meaning is su seemed, seemed(i), seemed; it does not matter, the event mentioned in the ir statement, the truth of which is doubted, is happening, has happened yet to happen. ar ar Plg. It seems that the whole sky is reddened (reddened, reddened, will redden). If the speaker has previously understood the said thing, the said thought has previously arisen, the doubting word may have the past tense (occasional or frequent) form. Plg. Rodės |showed, reddened (reddened, reddened, will redden) the whole sky. Modal doubt and the meaning of the future time ir are incompatible things, because the moment in question cannot be in the future. Thus, forms with a modal meaning in relation to the category of time are the real verb forms. They have a modal meaning not because they have become a new morphological category of modal words, but because they go in — insertions. It should o be added that the use of formos atrodytų, like other forms of the pronoun that are inserts (manyčiau, sakyčiau), is motivated more stylistically than grammatically: the doubt expressed in the pronoun form (parodytų) has shades of reduced categoricity, caution, sometimes modesty. The volume of the article does not allow to examine other elements of language considered as modal words, especially those having the form of adverbs, and what has been said is not sufficient for general conclusions about all modal words. However, one more consequential thing can be said. The individual lexical meaning of words that, when inserted, mean modality, fades away and the modal one forms in its place. In addition, the words that do not acquire a modal meaning also undergo such a change in lexical meaning when they become inserts. The forms of individual words that go in insertions usually have the weakest categorical characteristics of the corresponding part of the language. Because of their constant syntactic function and automated use, they can be shortened, but they do not stagnate in the special morphological stage of modal words, but go directly to particles, e.g.: berods, esą, rasi, tarsi, tartum, etc., partly maybe, probably, but, usually losing the function of insertions. And insertions are not a syntactic “space” in which a special morphological category (part of language) — modal words — could be formed. The modal words of Lithuanian language, it seems, would be better to distinguish as a semantic or functional semantic group, which, without morphological limitation, would include modal particles, modal verbs, adverbs having the meaning of modality and, of course, the forms of various parts of the language, which denotes modality, being inserted. 16 3onorosBa T. A. Ouepx QyHKUMOHAJBHOIO CHHTAKCHCA pyccKoro s351Ka. —M., 1973, «.- 173. 17 See the three differently determined meanings of the present tense in the sentence Rodos, nem a tejét, hanem a vért 4sz éntől adja el, kisasszony CvR V 100. The form subtracts (without a sentence) indicates that the action coincides with the speech moment. The present tense of the sentence, although it does not coincide with the speaking moment; time:the starting point is not strictly fixed: it is about an unfinished past event. It seems that the present tense coincides with the moment of speech, because the thought arises and is said in the moment of speech. 81 BOYHbIE NON-COMPLETE H BOMPOC O MOJAJIbHBIX CJIOBAX B JIHTOBCKOM SI3bIKE Pe31oMe \ - Yes, sir. Sister. OCHOBHEIM KDHTEPHEM IUIst BBIIC/ICHHS MOJIQJIbHBIX CJIOB SABJISIETCS MX CHHTAKCHYECKas QYHKIHS — YnoTpeOjieHHe B KAUeCTBE BBOIHELX €JMEMI, — B cTaTLe OOcyxIraeTCA MOpijOJIOTHYECKHH CTATYC CJIOB, KOTODBIEC IIDHHHMAIOTCH KaK LEHTPAJIbHBIC BBO/HbIC, TaK H HEHTDAJILHEIC MOJIAJIbHBIe CJIOBA JIMTOBCKOTO SI3bIKA: regis, rodos(i), atrodo, matyt(i) x np. IlyreM ananu3a moKa3BIBaeTCsH, ITO (POPMBI ITHX H MM HOAOGHBIX CJIOB, YNOTDpeOJISCMEIX B KAa9eCTBE BBOJHBIX €IHHHI, COXPaHSIOT CBOH MOP(hOIOrHYeckre XapaKTepHCTHKH. MopansHOCTE Y 3THX CJIOB 3aKperuiseTCs B chepe MX JISKCHYECKOTO 3HAYEHHS: STH CJIOBA MEASURES MHIHBHIYAJIBHOE JIEKCHYECKOE 3HaYeHEE, APO HO 0600NIeHHOr0 3HaYe Ns COXPAHSIOT. B TATOBCKOM SI3BIKE, BEPOSTHO, LieJieco06pasHee MOJZIaJIbHBIE CJIOBA CYMTATh He OCcOGOH Mopdonormyeckoii kaTeropueii (ocoboii 4acTeio peun), CEMAHTHYECKOH a I'PYIIIOH CJIOB, B KOTOPYIO BKJIIOYATHCEH ObI ECB CJIOBA, HMEIONIHE MOJIAJILHOE 3HA4EHME: MONAJIbHBIC YACTHIbI, MONAJIBHBIE TIVIATOJILI, MOJIAJISHLIE Hape, you're H, not alone. MOJIAJIbHLIMH SBIAIOTCHA MPH YNOTDEeOJIEHHH B KAYeCTBE BBOJIMHEIX €MHHAILL.