Jungtukai, dalelytės bei jų samplaikos sujungiamajame sakinyje

LIETUVIŲ KALBOS GRAMATIKOS TYRINĖJIMAI LIETUVOS TSR MOKSLŲ AKADEMIJA CONJUNCTIONS, PARTICLES, AND THEIR COMBINATIONS IN THE COMPOUND SENTENCE A. VALECKIENĖ § 1. In compound sentences, it is often difficult to distinguish a conjunction from a particle. Neither conjunctions nor particles have any morphological markers. Moreover, the same little words can perform the function of both conjunction and particle (e.g., ir, tik, bet, tai, etc.)1. Conjunctions with particles, sometimes also with certain words possessing independent lexical meaning—for example, adverbs without formal markers, todėl, dėlto, modal words gana, negana, impersonal verbs reikėti, užtekti, and so on—often form certain combinations. In these cases, it is important to determine the degree of grammaticalization of minimal combinations. This article sets out to examine these questions. Conjunction or Particle § 2. Particles and conjunctions have already been studied separately in Lithuanian linguistics2. Here, only cases of conjunction and particle usage in which it is difficult to determine their function will be discussed. It is beyond dispute that particles carry a far greater semantic load than conjunctions. The specific meaning of conjunctions has already become very attenuated. While particles emphasize and modify individual words or an entire sentence (clause), conjunctions merely indicate the syntactic-semantic relation between clauses, without changing their content at all. Nevertheless, a certain meaning can also be discerned in some conjunctions. Just as the meanings of case forms are divided into concrete and syntactic ones3, so too conjunctions, on the one hand 1 Conjunctions are historically related to particles. As the synthetic (conjunctional) sentence structure developed alongside the asyndetic (conjunctionless) one, many conjunctions evolved from particles. Some conjunctions may later also have acquired a particle function. This development has not come to an end in various languages even today. See Я. Бауэр, К вопросу о происхождении союзов, „Sbornik prací Filosofické fakulty Brněnské university“, IX, A8, Brno, 1960, p. 9 t.t.; К вопросу о возникновении и развитии типов сложного предложения, „Вопросы славянского языкознания“, вып. 6, Москва, 1962, p. 94 t.t.; J. Bauer, Spojky a částice, „Sborník prací Filosofické fakulty Brněnské university“, XIII, A 12, 1964, p. 131 t.t. 2 See V. Labutis, Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos dalelytės (candidate dissertation), Vilnius, 1965; Dalelytės ir jų vieta kalbos dalių tarpe, „Literatūra ir kalba“, VI, Vilnius, 1962, p. 354—370; J. Žukauskaitė, Prijungiamųjų jungtukų vartojimas lietuvių literatūrinėje kalboje (candidate dissertation), Vilnius, 1962. 3 Е. Курилович, Очерки по лингвистике, Москва, 1962, p. 184. 69 may be more semantic, while others are merely syntactic4. Semantic conjunctions indicate certain relations of meaning between the clauses they connect, whereas syntactic conjunctions have a purely syntactic meaning, indicating only that one clause depends on another. All coordinating conjunctions, except perhaps one and, are semantic5. In connecting sentence clauses, they do indicate a very general syntactic-semantic relation between them. In practice, it is often difficult to distinguish when a certain little word has a connective function (the syntactic plane) and when it is a semantic modifier of a clause (the semantic-lexical plane). There are also transitional cases in which the two functions are closely related. Distinguishing a particle from a conjunction is further complicated by the fact that particles, when modifying a sentence, do not function as parts of the sentence. When distinguishing a conjunction from a particle, it is useful to rely on the differential features of these categories, namely: particles emphasize and modify the content of the clause they form part of; conjunctions, when connecting two clauses in sentences of closed structure6, are attached to the second clause only intonationally, and do not alter the syntactic-semantic content of the clauses or belong to either of them7. They indicate only the syntactic-semantic relation between the clauses. The position of a little word may also serve as a distinguishing feature of its function8. In a compound sentence, a conjunction usually occurs at the beginning of a clause. Particles can occur both at the beginning and in the middle of a clause. When a little word stands at the beginning of a clause, its position has no differential significance. However, when a particular little word is not at the beginning of a clause, one can conclude that it does not function as a conjunction9. § 3. In Lithuanian, the words ir, tik. often function as both conjunctions and particles. Let us take examples with the word ir, which occupies not the first position in the second clause, but the second or a later position. 1) Both the father and the Papieviai, the hosts, were delighted, and Kirstukas himself grew conceited. Vien IMA 19. 2) All the gentlemen will laugh, and the lady, too, will rejoice. ŽemR IV 391. 3) Skylarks were trilling all around, and the little birds were already trilling in the forest as well— 4 Cf. Основы построения описательной грамматики современного русского литературного языка, Москва, 1966, p. 183. 5 Cf. ibid. 6 Sentences of closed structure are coordinating sentences that have one conjunction before the final clause. They cannot be continued. The conjunction before the final clause signals that the sentence is complete. 7 The syntactic-semantic isolation of the conjunction from the clauses in sentences of closed structure is also shown by the fact that, in certain cases, depending on the content of the clauses, the two clauses of a compound sentence can be switched without changing the conjunction’s position. When the clauses are switched, the conjunction does not move with the second clause to the first position (as, for example, in a subordinate sentence, along with the subordinate clause), but remains in its original position, that is, once again before the second clause. Cf.: The gentleman is just walking around, looking and laughing, while the machine is even roaring as it is turned rapidly. LTRn 365 and The machine is even roaring as it is turned rapidly, while the gentleman is just walking around, looking and laughing. In sentences of open structure (which can potentially be continued), a repeated conjunction is more closely connected to the clause. Here, the conjunction, repeated before each clause, emphasizes the clauses’ coordination. For this reason, repeated conjunctions are always close to particles. 8 The significance of a little word’s position for determining whether it functions as a conjunction or a particle is also highlighted in studies of other languages; cf.: В. Г. Адмони, Введение в синтаксис современного немецкого языка, Москва, 1955, p. 217. 9 In certain cases, inversion is possible; cf.: Good-hearted Butkienė alone would remember her neighbor Šervienė, with whom long ago each had carried the other’s little one to holy baptism; back then they were triple godmothers. VaizžgRR I 192. Here, then, it has no function other than that of a conjunction. A coordinating conjunction sometimes occurs in the second clause after an insertion, e.g.: It was long ago, perhaps, and therefore it is no longer pleasant for her to remember it. SimonAŠL 18. 70 sang in various voices. ŽemR II 238. 4) A neighbor’s son got married, and I went along with my parents. LzPR III 20. 5) And Bintakiai’s little hut, with scarcely any room. SimonAŠL 273. 6) The Šimoniai write to nobody, and nobody sends letters to the Šimoniai either. SimonAŠL 197. 7) If you do not help others, nobody will help you either. PP 120. 8) The hedgehog shoved the rooster, and it carried him to the other side of the ditch. CvR V 72. 9) Come next year and tell me about the biggest fool,... then I will repay you what I owe. CvR V 157. In these sentences, the little word and, which enters the second clause, is also syntactically and semantically related to that clause. It emphasizes and modifies the words immediately following it. These may be subjects, objects, adverbials, or predicates; cf.: and Kirstukas himself, and the lady, and the birds in the forest, and I, and room, and the Šimoniams, and you, and carried, and I will repay. By emphasizing and modifying the indicated words, the little word and supplements the emotional and communicative content of the entire clause. Because of this function, and must here be regarded as a particle. It is connected with the conjunction only by a certain similarity of meaning. The little word and, when modifying and emphasizing a noun or a nominal pronoun, acquires the meaning nuance “also” and indirectly associates the concept denoted by the emphasized word with concepts denoted by similar words in the first clause or in the preceding context; cf.:... and the father, and the Papieviai householders,... and Kirstukas himself (1),...everyone...,...and the lady... (2), larks all around..., and birds in the forest (3), (the others went)...and I... (4),...nobody...,...and the Šimoniams... (6), others...,...and you (7). However, this juxtaposition does not go beyond the bounds of the semantic-lexical plane. It is determined by the meaning “also” acquired by the little word and. The word and does not become a conjunction here, because syntactically and semantically it modifies a clause. The indicated words in the sentences merely interact with one another; the other words in the clause remain neutral. By contrast, when functioning as a conjunction, the word and connects the entire clause as a whole to another entire clause and does not modify the content of those clauses; cf.: For a long time still, daughter and father talked, and both felt like exiles, driven into a distant, unknown land. VencIЯ III 152. The little word only has a function similar to and when it occurs in second position in the second clause. It may emphasize and modify not only the words immediately following it (1—3), but also those preceding it (4—7), e.g.: 1) Ponaitis will study at the institute all week; he will eat there too, and I only need to bring Ponaitis home on Saturday afternoon. ŽemR IV 392. 2) I was completely numb; my heart only beats. ŽemR IV 384. 3) When I swing an axe at that dog, the dog just goes “woof, woof, woof” and runs off. CvR V 77. 4) All the pupils are last year’s; I’m the only new, foolish one. ŽemR IV 324. 5) — Your children are already grown; you’ll just hire a farmhand and get the land worked... ŽemR IV 419. 6) They told no one; only in the morning did the neighbors find out that he was already dead. ŽemR IV 420. 7) The stubble fields and spring-sown fields have been cleared; only the un-dug potatoes remain. BaltPV₁ 113. Here the little word only, which has entered the second clause, is more closely associated with the emphasized words alone. It gives the emphasized words an exceptive nuance. The emphasis and exception are especially strong when only follows the emphasized word (4—7). Because of this function, the little word only in the sentences cited must, like the word and in corresponding cases, be regarded as a particle. Like the emphasized words with the particle and, words emphasized by the particle only in the second clause may be related in meaning to words in the first clause; cf.:... all week... 71 …only on Saturday… (1), all the pupils…, only I (4), etc. However, this relation between the words also remains within the bounds of the semantic-lexical sphere. § 4. In the sentences discussed, and, only are semantic modifiers of the second clause, essentially by virtue of their position. When the position of the particles and, only is changed—that is, when they are moved to the initial position in the clause—the function of these particles usually changes as well, although the meaning of the sentence essentially remains the same. The particle only separates more easily from the word it emphasizes, especially in sentences where it follows that word; cf.: Ponaitis will study at the institute all week; I only need to take Ponaitis home on Saturday afternoon. I was completely numb, only my heart was beating. When I raise the axe against that dog, only the dog goes “bow-wow, bow-wow, bow-wow…” All the pupils are from last year; only I am new… Your children have already grown up; you’ll only need to hire a farmhand… He told no one; only the neighbors found out in the morning… The stubble fields and spring-crop fields have been cleared; only the potatoes remain unharvested. The position of the particle and can often be changed as well, although this sometimes somewhat disrupts the rhythm of the sentence, making it less natural. Cf.: All the gentlemen will laugh, and the lady will rejoice at the same time. A neighbor’s son got married, and I went with my parents. The hedgehog goaded the rooster, and it carried him across… Tell me about the biggest fool, and then I’ll repay you. The Šimoniai write to no one, and no one sends letters to the Šimoniai. After all, you can’t be careless now, and there’s no time. In sentences transformed in this way, the particles and, only (when moved to the initial position) no longer emphasize the words they previously emphasized or modified. Apparently, without special intonation, they neither emphasize nor modify the new words they now precede. Thus, these particles are no longer syntactically and semantically connected with the second clause. They indicate only the relationship between the clauses and therefore perform the function of a conjunction. The particles and, only can be moved to the initial position in the clause together with the words they emphasized and modified while in the preposed position. In such cases, the function of the particle and changes less than when it is moved to the initial position without the emphasized word. Cf.: All the gentlemen will laugh, and the lady will rejoice at the same time. The Šimoniai write to no one, and no one sends letters to the Šimoniai. Here, the particle and, moved to the initial position but left immediately before the same words, remains syntactically and semantically connected with them just as before, when it stood in the middle of the clause before those same words. Of course, this connection is somewhat weaker, since the particle and, having entered a position characteristic of a conjunction, is already beginning to develop into one, although in the sentences given here the particle’s emphatic and modifying function is more or less retained. It should be noted that in certain sentences, depending on the structure of the clauses, moving the particle and to the initial position without the word it stood before and emphasized or otherwise modified would be entirely unnatural and practically impossible. In such cases, the particle and can be moved to the initial position only together with the word that follows it. Cf.: Both the father and the Papieviai hosts rejoiced; K and stukas himself also became conceited. …and K and stukas himself became conceited. But not: …and himself became conceited, K and stukas. 72 The timid one is frightened by a leaf; the brave one is not afraid even of a wolf....and the brave one is not afraid of a wolf. But this is not possible: and the brave one is not afraid of a wolf. When it occurs at the beginning of the second clause, but emphasizes and modifies the words that follow it in that clause, the little word and often retains the function of a particle; compare further sentences of this kind: “What can you do? Even good fortune does not last forever!” said the flax. BalčAP 25. “Well, there you have it—and one cannot even say a word to the hired man.” BaltPV₁ 40. “Don’t put it in his pocket: it won’t even make it into the bag.” PP 390. “Everyone knows a hen’s sense: even when let in, she’s a fox. What a mind, to invent such birds!” LzPR II 8. “What wonders, great wonders there were: even the lake froze in summer.” LTRn 91. “Don’t ask the hedgehog into the garden: it will come even uninvited.” PP 218¹⁰. The little word and partly retains its emphatic particle function in sentences of the following structure, in which after and, which stands in the first position of the second clause, comes the demonstrative pronoun that or that same, referring to an object named by a noun in the first clause, for example: “Just look, everything is broken, all the harnesses are made of string, and those are rotten already.” Vaižg RR I 48. – “I saw that the millstones were laid on the stone too, and those are floating.” CvR V 154. – “There was one good man there, and they drove him out too.” CvR V 31. “They have few animals, and those same ones are no good.” JablRR I 533. “They bring in groats, and those too are barely gray.” ŽemR II 239. Compare sentences of the same structure in which and clearly functions as a conjunction: “In town I happened to meet an acquaintance from Būdviečiai, and he agreed to drive me home.” VenclPU 293. “The younger brother stayed at home with his father; he was still very small, and the king loved him very much.” BsRP 106. In its function, the little word and is still more like a particle, although in sentences where identical or same-kind actions and properties are contrasted it comes closer to a conjunction. In such cases, the predicates of the clauses are the same words or words and phrases of similar meaning. The subject in the second clause usually comes immediately after the little word and, which stands at the beginning of the second clause, and is contrasted with the subject of the first clause. It is therefore emphasized and brought to the fore. Compare: “Don’t be angry! You are a mother, and so am I…” LzPR III 83. “Everyone was pleased with her, and she herself was pleased.” VienAŠ 8. “Then they clapped their hands—and we clapped too; they raised their hands—and we raised ours too.” ŽemR IV 15. “Give to the earth, and the earth will give to you.” PP 34. “Respect yourself, and others will respect you.” PP 111. “Look, those people are singing, and he can’t resist the urge to sing.” DaukŽP 19. “Gražina, I’m already past thirty-five, and you’re no longer in your first youth either.” VienAŠ 90. “Neither Father nor Mother nor my brothers will ever see me again, and I will never see them again either…” VenclPU 234. “…the village children ride horses, and he would very much like to ride too.” BilR 121. “The boy fell ill, and the old woman is now dying.” Vencl PU 332. “The old gentleman was Mykolas, and the young master was named after his father.” ŽemR IV 381. “I was ill for a long time, they say, and Benis and the other children fell ill too.” ŽemR IV 377. 10 In such cases, V. Labutis treats the little word and as a conjunction that has a particle meaning in a particular context; compare his example: One minute, and the car arrived, see Б. Лабутис, Частицы современного литовского языка (автор. дисс. к. ф. н.), Вильнюс, 1965, p. 14. In our view, if the little word and has a particle meaning, then it and is a particle. After all, a conjunction and a particle differ only in their function; neither serves as a sentence constituent. See: V. Sirtautas, Jungtukai ir jungiamieji žodžiai, “Tarybinė mokykla”, 1958, 7, p. 38; J. Žukauskaitė, Jungtukas ir jo išskyrimo iš kitų tarnybinių kalbos dalių kriterijai, p. 13. 73 The particle tik, unlike ir, when moved to the initial position together with the word it stood before and emphasized and modified, usually comes very close to functioning as a conjunction, especially in cases where it retains an exceptive meaning. This can be seen by replacing (transforming) the sentences mentioned above with tik tik as follows: Ponaitis will study at the institute all week; only on Saturday afternoon do I need to drive Mr. Ponaitis back. I was completely numb; only my heart was beating. That I’ll take an axe to that dog—only “au, au, au,” the dog. Cf. also sentences of this kind, where the particle tik functions as a conjunction and expresses contrast between the clauses as well as comparison with an exceptive nuance11. And freedom is near, so near — just to flap one’s wings... SNėrP I 236. Nothing of the sort, only my heart still beats so restlessly. Simon AŠL 241. Everyone was as before: just one variety. VaižgRR I 54. As though no one else were there, only Uncle Šiukšta was tilling the soil for the whole village. VaižgRR I 101. The particle tik, when standing at the beginning of the second clause, functions as a particle, often with a meaning other than an exceptive one; cf.: In his utterly gaunt face inspiration shone forth; only just (= almost) could one no longer see the horns of Moses on his forehead. VaižgRR I 92. (Here, too, the repetition shows that tik tik is a particle.) I’ll take the hide to the tanner, only (= just) a few coins will slip into my pocket. ŽemR IV 449. After wiping himself, he stifled the wet spot with the dry hem of his shirt so that the old woman would not get angry, and dashed out of the room; only the yard rumbled. KrėvŠP₁ 97. § 5. Besides be and ir, the Lithuanian words bet and tai can serve as both a coordinating conjunction and a particle. Bet, in its function as a conjunction, expresses adversative relations, whereas tai most often expresses explanatory relations of cause and condition; cf.: bet tai It was still winter, but the slushy thaw foretold an early spring. CvR VIII 222. But you are bigger, so you need to build a bigger house. LTt III 71. Tell me a tale I have never heard or seen, and I’ll give you fire. JablRR I 538. The particle bet is used comparatively rarely and does not express opposition; instead, it has other meanings, so it is readily distinguished from the conjunction; cf.: I’ve made some beer—bet (=still) it’ll be merrier. Grž(LKŽ I 642). Better to go without profit, just so bet tik (=if only) no one cries. PP 111. ...so that she might contrive to crawl into the chest herself, bet tik (=if only) the pots would boil sooner. KrėvŠP₁ 93. In the latter case, bet has a meaning close to “kad” (‘that/so that’), but the two are not equivalent in the sentence. Bet here gives the second clause considerable emotional force (and, incidentally, bet also bears logical stress), which the clause loses if bet is replaced by kad. With kad, such a sentence comes to express a causal relation and becomes subordinate. In this sentence with bet, the causal relation is very faint. The word tai, occurring at the beginning of the second clause, is to be regarded as a particle when it does not express explanatory relations of cause and condition (as it does when functioning as a conjunction), but merely gives the second clause a new emotional coloring; cf.: – Don’t worry, little bee, don’t worry; tai my little darlings will be sewn. LTRn 35. 11 The conjunction tik is also used without clear exception, merely contrasting and juxtaposing sentence clauses, e.g.: I know her well, but there’s no need to tell Tyzenhauz that. SruogAD 25. — I’m creeping into the kitchen, when suddenly “ur-ur-ur-ur!” the dogs are on me… LzPR II 79. 74 In certain cases, tai, apart from explanatory relations of cause and condition, can express comparative relations (most often in folklore), much like the conjunction ir. In these cases it functions as a conjunction, but is closer to a particle than when used as a conjunction expressing explanatory relations of cause and condition. Cf.: I’ll give you this little ram, and the two of you will live on a share from that ram. BsRP 61. — It was the same with my husband, and little by little, little by little, it passed. VienAŠ 20. Come here, young maiden, come here, you bride, — and the two of us will speak many tender words. LTRn 60. The lad sat down by my little cheek, laid his hand upon my little shoulder, and it is lighter than a peacock’s little feather. LTRn 73. Now I’ll go to the little room, sit down behind the table — and we’ll exchange gold rings, drink green wine! KrėvŽ 52. Spring will come, my little feathers will grow; — and I’ll dart about, and fly through the green forests. LTRn 126. § 6. Very often the particles bent, dar, juk, net, vis, etc., are used at the beginning of the second clause of a compound sentence. According to our observations, although these particles occupy a position characteristic of conjunctions, they do not perform a conjunction’s function. They continue to emphasize and modify words in the second clause, adding to its communicative and emotional content; that is, syntactically and semantically they are associated with the second clause and therefore remain particles, even when they occur at its beginning. Cf.: No one has strayed in here yet; at least the crested one doesn’t remember it. SimonAŠL 50. Everyone has already eaten their fill, and one barley grain is left. ŽemR IV 433. The skies can’t be any clearer, for everything has already burned down. SimonAŠL 135. The ditches and lanes were snowed over, even the highway was hard to make out12. SimonAŠL 196. Wash the crow or don’t wash it, it’s still black. JabIRR I 536. Combinations of conjunctions and particles or certain adverbs § 7. Very often, conjunctions occur with particles or certain adverbs (todėl, dėlto) at the beginning of the second clause. The question arises whether such words, when placed at the beginning of the second clause, form compound conjunctions. 12J. Žukauskaitė considers the word net, among other things, to be a conjunction (apparently subordinating) when the clause it introduces explains a word functioning as the predicate in the first clause, e.g.: He was so delighted that his eyes even sparkled. She notes that net acquired the function of a conjunction in this case because the conjunction kad, often used together with net, was omitted (see J. Žukauskaitė, cited work, p. 5). It should be said that this developmental sequence (kad net and only then net) is not necessary. When there is no correlative word in the first clause, kad is not always suitable alongside net either; cf.: I cried out in an angry voice and rushed to my mother, and even the lady was frightened. ŽemR IV 374. It was bright outside from the midday sun, so bright that even my eyes grew dim. VencIR III 109. In these sentences, without a correlative word, the subordination is not entirely clear either. For instance, here the second clause cannot be moved, together with the whole net, into the position of the first clause, as is characteristic of a subordinate clause. In our view, in sentences of this kind net is neither a subordinating nor a coordinating conjunction. The sentence itself is asyndetic; net is a clear semantic modifier of the second clause and should be regarded as a particle. One can speak of the word net developing into a subordinating conjunction only in cases where the first clause contains a correlative word; cf.: I was so overcome that even Praniukas was envious. ŽemR IV 378....you weep so bitterly that even stones are moved. BalčGPr 5. As accompaniment to that punishment and admonition, you heard such a crack, that even the loud echo rolled, trembling, through the whole forest. VaižgRR I 96. In these sentences the second clause can be moved, together with the whole net, into the position of the first clause; moreover, the conjunction kad can be inserted before net here. Also compare a sentence with a correlative word in the first clause and kad net at the beginning of the second clause: A gray horse came galloping up, so (such) white that it even illuminated the whole earth (folktale). JabI (LKŽ V 36). 75 a) Conjunction and particle All coordinate conjunctions can be accompanied by various particles. Immediately after a conjunction may come particles that do not themselves perform the function of a conjunction (bent, čia, dar, gal, gi13, jau, kad, na, ne, nė, net, nors, šit, štai, vėl, vis, etc.), as well as words that, besides being particles, also have a conjunction function (ir, tai, tik, užtat, vis tiek, vis dėlto). Particles immediately follow conjunctions or connective words and are intonationally attached to them. In other words, particles together with the conjunction are intonationally attached to the second clause, since in a coordinate sentence even a conjunction on its own is intonationally attached to the second clause. In most cases, however, these words do not form a syntactically and semantically indivisible unit, even though their intonation is unified. The meanings and functions of the words in the combination are usually perceived separately and are not homogeneous. The first word is not syntactically or semantically related to the second clause, before which it stands; it performs only a connective function. By contrast, the word following the conjunction is syntactically and semantically related to the second clause and modifies its communicative and emotional content, i.e. it functions as a particle. In the combinations mentioned, the particles bent, čia, dar, jau, kad, ne, nė, net, nors, šit, štai, vis, etc., clearly retain their independent function (they act as semantic modifiers of the clause introduced by a conjunction). “Load the cart with children for their mother, at least,” father laughed: “then there’ll be guests…” ŽemR III 21. Jurgis stumbled over to Tamošius, while the others here looked to see how much the ditch had been diverted. ŽemR II 253. Someone had persuaded him to do this, so he assigned a fourth job as well. LTRn 327. The whole Tekonis homestead lay buried in snow, the bare poplars at rest, and only the tops of the plum and cherry trees were still visible above the snow along the fences. BaltPV₁₁ 25. Many have come here, but there are very few of those guides. PP 323. A healthy tree will feel the charcoal sooner, — a serpent’s child will not betray his father to you. SNėrP I 281. …everyone was hungry, so there was no need to urge them either. VaižRR I 211. They began chasing one another around a stout pine; not on the ground, but straight upward; one’s eyes are dazzled. VaižgRR I 67—68. We have no kvass left, so at least have some of this mash to drink. VaižgRR I 183. You start listening, and then suddenly — some rough object has fallen onto your face. JabIRR I 533. It is gray, dark, wet, damp, dreary and bleak, — and then suddenly a flash of brightness. VaižgRR I 192. They travelled all day, and still there was no end or edge to the forest. CvR V 83. In these sentences, the conjunction can be omitted almost everywhere. The particle, when placed first, remains the same kind of semantic clause modifier (cf. the corresponding examples without a conjunction in § 6), and the sentence becomes asyndetic. Very often the word ir follows various conjunctions, retaining its independent function as a particle (it gives the second clause new communicative and emotional nuances). …a good child, quiet, calm, industrious; what more could one ask for? And our Benis is not, it seems, to be criticized either. ŽemR I 24. It is good in a foreign country, but even there you will not find a mountain of flour. PP 142. One brother was still left, and he too drowned in the lake. BaltPV 39. Jurgis promised to help us haul oats, but we have not seen him even to this day. JabIRR I 536. He did not seem suited to serious hard labor, either to the bailiff Geišė or to his brother Šiukšta; so they kept sending him where he… would do twice, three times as much work. VaižgRR I 39. But this is no longer Aukštujai, so 13 For the inadmissibility of using the word gi with the meaning of an adversative conjunction (instead of o), see V. Labutis, “Kalbos kultūra,” 6, Vilnius, 1964, pp. 28—33. 76 and we will return. Simon AŠL 9. After returning to Povilaičis, I left the work and went on, so let us go to bed too. ValPJ₂ 56. No one had seen Oginskienė at Aukštieji, and that is why all sorts of speculation are going around. SimonAŠL 11. When the conjunction is omitted, the word ir ‘and’, occurring in the first position of the clause, in most cases also remains syntactically and semantically connected with the clause, that is, it remains a particle, although in some cases (where its connection with the clause is less pronounced) it already deteriorates into a conjunction (e.g.: After returning... I went on, and let us go to bed; cf. sentences of this structure in § 4). After various conjunctions, the word tik ‘only’ may also occur while retaining its particle function, e.g.: Another century and a half passed, and only then did people clearly understand the full importance of those finds. JabIŪŽ 15. In summer... the stream would dry up completely, and only here and there, in shaded hollows, would water-filled depressions overgrown with grass and teeming with frogs and tadpoles glimmer. VienUT 81. He is a good man, very good, but only his hands are already like this—wherever they touch, something is left behind. LKŽ IV 294. When the conjunction is omitted, the word tik ‘only’, occurring in the first position, unlike the other words mentioned, mostly deteriorates into a conjunction (cf. § 4). In our view, when occurring after conjunctions, the words užtat ‘therefore’, vis dėlto ‘nevertheless’ (and dėlto ‘therefore’ with the same meaning), vis tiek ‘nevertheless’14 also have an independent particle function, e.g.: Nastutė walked behind the little geese, as if wearing long white trousers, but therefore her calves were protected... VienAŠ 9. The cottage was just a cottage: smoky, and yet there was some extraordinary order to be seen. VaižgRR I 210. He groaned and groaned, but nevertheless did not die. Ds (LKŽ II 270). However dark the night around may be, however fiercely the storms and blizzards may rage, it is still cozy and pleasant because of this closeness of mother and her voice. BaltPV₁ 14. When the conjunction is omitted, užtat ‘therefore’, vis dėlto ‘nevertheless’, vis tiek ‘nevertheless’, when they occur in the first position of the second clause, acquire a conjunction function, much like tik ‘only’; cf.: Her little eyes do not move; instead, her forked tongue just keeps darting out of her mouth. JabIRR I 536. The sun, to be sure, has passed right overhead, yet it is still scorching considerably. VaižgP III 263. You spin and spin, yet you still won’t spin it all. LTRn 329. As many as two particles may occur after various conjunctions. They, too, retain their independent function. Cf.: One would say: such a big gentleman, that Geišys; he must be nearly four years old, and still without trousers! VaižgRR I 124. When Kaziukas was not walking yet, you had to run after him with milk, take him everywhere with you, carry him around, and now my legs are already buckling from exhaustion from work. CvR VIII 81. It is true, there are still Father and one brother at home, but surely they, too, will soon fall victim to the black shadow. SimonAŠL 37. Ilžė chose herself Šimonis Kriza, so let her go ahead and marry him. SimonAŠL 163. The particles mentioned above are also used not immediately after a conjunction, but after another word, e.g.: My friends got across safely, while the ground disappeared from under my feet. SimonAŠL 299. The goat was afraid to run into the woods, but the wolf caught her right out of the garden. PP 315. Aunt Bintakienė had come, so she was the one who lit the lamp. SimonAŠL 328. He lives on someone else’s wits, therefore 14A. Piročkinas likewise calls the words (vis) dėlto ‘nevertheless’ and vis tiek ‘nevertheless’, when occurring after conjunctions, particles; see A. Piročkinas, Logical-semantic relations in compound sentences with the conjunctions ir, o, bet, “Kalbotyra”, X, Vilnius, 1964, p. 96; J. Žukauskaitė takes a different view, cited work, p. 19. 77 stomach and suffers. PP 184. The eyes see, but the teeth have not yet grown accustomed. PP 304. The bear went “au” and stopped, while the wolf carries on too: “ū-ū-ū-ū!” CvR V 25. She sits, seemingly calm, while her little heart beats and beats. LKŽ II 270. Such cases once again show that combinations of conjunctions and particles are, in general, not fixed. In the sentences above, moving the particle to immediately after the conjunction is either entirely impossible or possible only together with the word that the particle emphasizes and modifies. Only with certain particles do conjunctions form syntactically and semantically indivisible combinations. Among these, the particles gi, tai may be mentioned. When they follow conjunctions and are intonationally linked to them, it is difficult to discern any separate function for these little words. These particles merely intensify the relation expressed by the conjunction, and such combinations are treated as separate conjunctions or variants of the original conjunctions. The particle gi is particularly closely associated with conjunctions. For example: The Lizard won’t sneeze, and surely Jonukas is a man, isn’t he... ŽemR I 66. The doors, windows, and thresholds had collapsed; but the whole house seemed crooked everywhere. DonR 22. The Cossacks trampled the grave of the slain; grass grew over it, but a father’s heart did not forget. LzPR II 11. Another time the master himself was preparing to go to a ball, and so he told that incorrigible man to make his children behave properly. BsP III 38 (LKŽ II 270). Here ogi, betgi, dėlto gi differ little in meaning from the conjunctions o, bet, dėlto and should be regarded as variants of the latter. The particle tai most often forms an indivisible syntactic-semantic unit with the conjunctions ir, o. The combination ir tai has a meaning close to that of the little expression “all the same” and expresses a concessive relation. You could heap a mountain of gold before me, and I still won’t sew! LzPR III 15. Until St. John’s Day everyone asks for rain, and still everything dries out. PP 185. Here ir tai differs little from the conjunction ir, which can also be used to express concessive relations; cf.: I asked him to come, and he didn’t. Grž. Such vast expanses of meadows, forests, and fallow land, and they still aren’t satisfied! LzPR III 15. The combination o tai expresses a cause-and-effect relation. In meaning, o tai is farther removed from the conjunction o than ir tai is from the conjunction ir. — Go into the house, children; I’ll at least give you something to eat, or you’ll starve to death... KrevŠP₁ 104. — Draw the beer, just don’t spill any, or it may well shoot off. BaltPV₁ 70. Early in the morning I went for water, and the mist had covered my wreath. LTRn 59. b) Conjunction and adverb Just as particles užtat, vis dėlto, vis tiek, so adverbs dėlto, todėl, when they occur immediately after a conjunction, retain their independent function. Deep snow made Juras stumble several times, and because of that he was ashamed of himself. CvR VIII 218. That was long ago, perhaps, and therefore it is no longer pleasant for her to remember it. SimonAŠL 18. The other girls pulled up weeds and burned them, and that was because they did not want the weeds to harm the rye and crops. ValPJ₂ 89. Here dėlto, todėl indicate the cause of an action and function as causal adjuncts. The relation between the clauses is sufficiently indicated by the conjunctions ir, o tai. Only when there is no conjunction do the little words 78 dėlto, todėl, when they occur at the beginning of a clause, like the above-mentioned užtat, vis dėlto, vis tiek and tik in the corresponding cases, perform a connective function. Cf.: The hedgehog went to get yeast, so the cakes did not turn out. PP 333. ...the man does not know how to farm, so we cannot grow rich. ŽemR IV 415. c) Two particles After particles dar, net, nors, štai and others, which do not perform a conjunction’s function, although they stand at the beginning of a clause, there sometimes occur little words that can function both as conjunctions and as particles, for example, ir, tik. In such cases, the latter words usually serve as the same kind of semantic modifier as the former, and both function independently, forming merely distinctive combinations of particles linked intonationally15. For example: We open the door—there are men galore in the hall, and more in the yard. ŽemR IV 350. And those shameless flies, swarming over the milk, just keep feeding, just keep eating; not even the bowl’s rim can be seen… KrėvŠP1 97. Housework and chores are all mine alone, even if I tear myself apart. ŽemR IV 413. Grain by grain—and there’s your little pile. PP 185. Here the particle function of the little words ir, tik is determined by their position. The role of position in determining the function of these words is less apparent in cases where the first particle is morphologically connected with words in the second clause. For example, if the particle tegu stands at the beginning of the second clause, also serving as a morphological affix, then the tik that follows it shifts somewhat further toward a conjunction, since the position of the first particle (tegu) in the sentence is unusual; cf.: Now he did not want to eat—let him just not be restrained. MontvR I 289. d) Two conjunctions In certain cases, two conjunctions with the same meaning (synonymous conjunctions) are used together, for example: and yet, and nevertheless, and meanwhile. Both the conjunction and and the following yet, nevertheless, meanwhile express contrast. The latter, being unambiguous (used only in a contrastive sense), further intensify the meaning of the conjunction and, which is used not only contrastively but also comparatively (similarly to and). Two synonymous conjunctions used consistently form syntactically and semantically indivisible combinations. However, they are used relatively rarely and irregularly, only when one wishes to intensify the relation being expressed. In meaning, they do not differ at all from the separately used and, but, yet, meanwhile and should be considered variants of the latter. For example: Urtė knows his voice, and yet she cannot and does not want to believe her own ears. SimonAŠL 282. There were more boys of the same age in Puzionys, and nevertheless only Jonas and Kazys had gathered in the threshing floor. VaižgRR I 181. After receiving such a blow, the oxen should have jumped as if stung, and meanwhile they did not move a muscle. VaižgRR I 197. The relation of conjunctions and the particles that follow them to the particles or other words in the first clause § 8. Sentences in which coordinating conjunctions and the particles that follow them have a syntactic-lexical relationship with particles in the first clause or with certain words possessing independent lexical meaning are quite common. These words 15 Cf. V. Labutis, Compound Particles in the Lithuanian Language, in: The Morphological Structure of the Lithuanian Language and Its Development, Vilnius, 1964, p. 129. 79 are a kind of correlatives to conjunctions. They often stand at the beginning of the first clause, although their position has not yet become firmly established (they may also occur in the middle of the clause, though this is less common). Such words highlight the contrast and comparison between clauses expressed by conjunctions. The clauses are more closely connected to one another, although it is difficult to say which clause depends more on the other. Such sentences have features of both compound and complex sentences. a) Particles and conjunctions Quite often, the particle only serves as the correlative word of the aforementioned type in the first clause. At the beginning of the second clause stands the conjunction and, or, so, etc., often accompanied by a particle which, together with the conjunction, has a syntactic-lexical relationship with only in the first clause. Just start threshing, and there you have mountains of straw, chaff, and threshings... BaltPV1As soon as she [Katrė] turned and glanced at her husband, her eyes filled with tears again. ŽemR I 87. ...but as soon as a person falls a little ill, one already thinks: now I shall die. KrėvŠP 11. Just fail to look after yourself, and you go around with your backside shining. BaltR IV 120. The same relationship is also possible without a conjunction. In a verbless sentence, only has a relationship with a particle in the second clause or with a certain word possessing independent lexical meaning that occurs in initial position. The next time, the mistress failed to protect the father; the father was already sitting on the rung of Krizas’s dovecote. CvMS 44. Just mention money to a man, and he immediately starts asking: what for? why?... KrėvŽ 76. As soon as sunlight shone into the hazelnut shell, the carriage and horses vanished in an instant—they curled up inside the shell. CvR V 152. She just pecked at one ox’s eye with her little beak, then the other—and the ox went blind. CvR V 116. The corresponding words may also be absent from the second clause, while the relationship between the clauses remains the same; cf.: Kalvaitis need only have beckoned with his finger, and he would have led his son to him by the reins. KrėvŽ 71. In the latter case, the relationship between the predicate forms is particularly important. The particle not only, formed with the negation ne, is also quite often used in the first clause: not only. In such cases, but (also) often occurs in the second clause. ...not only we, the children, shuddered, but the adults too, having stopped chewing, froze. VienIMA 21. During those three months, not only did Georgians travel in groups along every path to the convent of Saint Nina, but people from other Christian countries also visited it. VienUT 19. Not only does the family work in the field, but the parents themselves, you see, are not idle either. JablRR I 533. Other particles may also combine with not only, for example, that, just, and so on. Not only can you see nothing of what is happening around you, but soap gets into your eyes and they begin to sting. VencĮPU 20. Not only have the wells dried up, but the Įsra itself is dry in places. SimonAŠL 29. In the first clause, the particle not occurs quite often; in the second, the conjunctions and, or, but, and so on, are used. Indeed, he is not the only one to blame; I am to blame too. SimonAŠL 267. It is not a man who is a bast shoe, but a bast shoe that is for a man. PP 214. It is not the nose for the tobacco, but the tobacco for the nose. PP 212. The particle not may occur in the first clause with the verb, while the conjunctions but, only, so, and others are used in the second clause (some on their own, some with particles). 80 Kazys, it seemed, did not even think of thinking about it, whereas from that hour on he began to think and look around. VaižgRR I 201. Ten minutes had not even passed, and already those leaving were whispering in the little town. VaižgRR I 164. The bear had not yet managed to curl up properly when—crack!—the little branches broke. LTRn 292. Sometimes the bull would dislike the hay or other fodder, and then it would eat with its horns—swish. CvR V 113. And before you knew it, the whole house had burned down. VaižgRR I 72. The first clause may contain the particles still (often with the particle not-), after all, barely (just), and others. At the beginning of the second clause come conjunctions, either alone or with particles, or particles on their own. The bear is still in the forest, while they are already tanning its hide. PP 322. A person sees it—it is a misfortune: it is still summer itself, and already frost is beginning. CvR V 124. The child has not even warmed his feet, and here you all are already: er-r, er-r! BaltPV1 39. The squirrel is still in the tree, and she is already heating the pot. PP 323. Grandfather had not yet managed to get home, and the sow had already given birth to eleven piglets. CvR V 69. After all, your life is worth more than Driežas’s, and you are as naked as a dog because of that damned stench! ŽemR I 67. He had barely made it through the gate home when the old man came rumbling back. ŽemR I 153. I had barely reached the edge of the forest when it already began to drizzle. BaltPV1 78. In sentences of this type, the particles and conjunctions that are syntactically and lexically related to one another, as well as words with independent lexical meaning, are not fully grammaticalized. Here, the functions of the conjunction and the particles are still clearly distinguishable. Sentences of the corresponding structure with the same particles but without conjunctions are also possible (see the examples above). The related particles, which reinforce the relationship expressed by the conjunction, are essentially associated each with the words in its own clause: particles occurring in the first clause emphasize and modify the words of the first clause, while particles occurring in the second clause, as well as certain words with independent lexical meaning (at once, immediately, etc.), are associated with the words of the second clause. Incidentally, the particles can also often be omitted; cf.: (Just) turning around to glance at the man, [Katrė] burst into tears again. ŽemR I 87. A person sees it—it is a misfortune: it is (still) summer itself, and (already) frost is beginning. CvR V 124. It is only possible to speak of some syntactically and lexically related words as being more or less close to conjunctions. For example, combinations with the negative particle not in the first clause are somewhat closer-knit (not only—but also, not—and, not—or, not—but, etc.)16, especially not only—but also. Because of the lexical contrast (negation—affirmation), the related words are more closely associated with one another: one conditions the other. Moreover, in the combination not only—but also, the conjunction but is somewhat more fixed. In combinations with not, the conjunctions vary even more (cf. not—and, not—or, not—but, etc.). Furthermore, not, when related to conjunctions, can occur not only independently but also with a verb as its prefix (see the examples above). 16 Cf. J. Žukauskaitė, cited work, p. 19, where the paired coordinating conjunctions are considered to include not only—but (also), not only that—but, not—but (other combinations with not, e.g., not—and, not—but also, and the like, are not mentioned). The paired coordinating conjunctions listed here also include the more—the more (also), as—the same (also). However, these latter words express a clearer coordinating relationship only when connecting homogeneous sentence parts. In compound sentences containing these words, the subordinating relationship is still very evident. Cf.: As Kazys was once a member of the Butkus family, so now Jonas has become a member of the Šnerai family. VaižgRR I 228. These latter combinations are also structurally closer to a subordinate sentence (a connective word and its correlative word). 6. Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos tyrinėjimai 81 Nevertheless, these combinations are more tightly integrated only when homogeneous sentence constituents are joined. In such cases, the respective words in the combinations *tik* and *santykiauja* only with the coordinated homogeneous sentence constituents. Cf.: They are noticed not only by the enemy, but also by a friend. SimonAŠL 18. …From the very first day, the Geišiai became the foremost in the manor’s servants’ quarters not only through their higher standing, but also through their personal qualities. VaižgRR I 112. Avoid the manure not out of fear, but because of the stench. PP 210. The fingers curl not away from oneself, but toward oneself. Lp. The children, like the grown-ups, had grown accustomed to expecting from Mykoliukas not a favor, but the performance of “uncle’s” duties. VaižgRR I 55. In a compound sentence, a conjunction links entire clauses, whereas particles usually modify only particular words. As a result, in many cases clauses still contain words that are not within the scope of the particles’ function. Therefore, in a compound sentence, the functions of the conjunction *ir* and the particles that stand in a syntactic-lexical relationship with it are more distinct than in a simple sentence, where homogeneous sentence constituents are joined. Cf.: Not only the roofs of the granaries, stables, and barns had fallen into disrepair…, but the former manor owners’ residence, too, required extensive and urgent repairs. VienR V 10. It is not the manger that goes to the horse, but the horse to the manger. PP 270. Here the particles single out only the subjects from among the other constituents. b) Words with independent lexical meaning and conjunctions In sentences of similar structure, words with independent lexical meaning are also used instead of the particles mentioned above. The first clause (usually at its beginning) contains the modal words gana, negana. After gana, the conjunction ir often occurs before the second clause (alone or together with particles). It is enough sometimes to hear a song, and you never forget it. LKŽ III 95. The slightest carelessness was enough, and the unfortunate ones slid down the steep mountainside. BilR 108. It is enough to look into their eyes, and at once some reach out their hands to take them, while others shrink away and cry out. VaižgRR I 142. After *negana*, the second clause begins with *dar*, *dargi*, *bet ir*, *bet dar ir*, and so on. …Not only do you fail to get up on time, but, you see, we both have to waste a whole day on this. ŽemR I 89. Not only do wars and hard work weigh on life…, but also heartache. ŽemR IV 411. Not only is the air in the forest full of all kinds of chirping and whistling, but even the little creatures of the earth finally made themselves heard in whatever voices they could. ŽemR I 195. Not only is there housework, but one must also drive the family around. ŽemR I 191. The first clause also contains third-person forms of the present or simple past tense of the verbs reikėti, užtekti, which stand in a relationship with the conjunction ir. One need only walk a little, and a light will appear. BilR 75. All that was needed was to draw two walls across the gap between them, and you have a third granary. VaižgRR I 102. Just one hour is all that is needed, and there will be brothers too. LTRn 302. All I had to do was return home and gather the people, and I immediately saw… VencIGD 291. All it took was for Rudžius to mention Raul’s surname, and everyone stood by him like a wall. AvyžŽLŽ 30. In these sentences, the words that stand in a syntactic-lexical relationship with conjunctions (*gana*, *negana*, *reikėti*, *užtekti*, and others) have a fairly general, yet clearly independent, lexical meaning. Moreover, these words form the predicate, or part of the predicate, of the first clause. Consequently, the combinations mentioned here are even less grammaticalized than combinations containing particles. 82 Conclusions 1. The function of a conjunction or particle in a compound sentence can be determined on the basis of the differential features of these words: the position of the word and its relation to the clause. A conjunction usually stands at the beginning of the second clause, but is not syntactically and semantically related to the clause itself (it does not change its content, but merely indicates the relationship between the two clauses). A particle may occur both at the beginning and in the middle of a clause, but is syntactically and semantically related to the clause—it modifies the communicative and emotional content of the clause. 2. When placed in the position of a conjunction, the word tik is more likely to acquire a conjunction function, especially when it has an exclusive meaning. The word ir, when placed at the beginning of the second clause, often also performs the function of a semantic modifier (particle). The words bet, tai, when performing different functions, generally also have different meanings. The words bent, dar, juk, net, vis and others always remain semantic modifiers of the clause, even when they occur in the position of a conjunction. 3. Intonational combinations of conjunctions and particles, or of adverbs without formal markers (o ir, bet tik, dar ir, ir vis dėlto, ir todėl, ir dėlto and others), have not yet become syntactically and semantically fused. In them, individual words generally retain their independent functions. More syntactically and semantically fused combinations are formed only by conjunctions with the particles gi, tai (ogi, betgi, ir tai, o tai and others). In these cases, it is difficult to discern a separate function for the particle accompanying the conjunction. Close combinations are also formed by two conjunctions with the same meaning (o tačiau, o betgi, o tuo tarpu and others). 4. The meaning of conjunctions (contrast or juxtaposition) can be reinforced by particles or words with independent lexical meaning in the first clause, but such words, which are syntactically and lexically related to one another, likewise do not form grammaticalized combinations (tik — ir vėl, dar — o jau, vos — ir, gana — ir, negana — bet ir, reikia — ir and others). Both particles and other words retain independent functions here. Moreover, such combinations are not regular: the conjunctions in them vary greatly, and the latter can even be omitted altogether; particles can also generally be omitted. Only combinations with the negative particle ne, especially ne tik — bet ir, come somewhat closer to conjunctions. However, even the latter are more closely fused only when connecting homogeneous sentence parts. In a compound sentence, when particles modify individual words while a conjunction connects entire clauses, the functions of syntactically and lexically related words remain clearly distinct. CONJUNCTIONS, PARTICLES, AND THEIR COMBINATIONS IN A COMPOUND SENTENCE А. ВАЛЯЦКЕНЕ Abstract 1. The article distinguishes the functions of particles and conjunctions in a compound sentence on the basis of the differential features of these words, i.e. according to their position and relation to a component of the complex sentence. A particle modifies the communicative or emotional content of a sentence component, whereas a conjunction is syntactically and semantically 6* 83 isolated from the components of the sentence, i.e. it does not change the content of the components, but only indicates the relationship between them. Transitional cases are also possible. 2. The word tik “only,” when used in the position of a conjunction, performs the function of a conjunction, especially in cases when it has an emphatic meaning. The word ir “and,” occurring at the beginning of the second component, still quite often performs the function of a semantic modifier, i.e. a particle. The words bet “but,” “all,” tai “that,” when used in different functions, usually also have different meanings. The words bent “at least,” dar “still,” juk “after all,” net “even,” vis “all,” etc., are always semantic modifiers. 3. Particles and adverbs that lack formal markers, when combined intonationally with conjunctions, usually do not form a single unit with them (o ir “but also,” bet tik “but only,” dar ir “also,” ir vis dėlto “and nevertheless,” ir todėl, ir dėlto “and therefore,” etc.). In such combinations, individual words retain their independent functions. Only conjunctions with the particles gi “indeed,” tai “that” form an indivisible syntactic unit (ogi “but,” betgi “but,” ir tai “and that,” o tai “or else,” etc.), as well as two synonymous conjunctions (o tačiau, o betgi “but,” o tuo tarpu “whereas,” etc.). 4. In certain cases, particles, as well as some modal and other words that had independent lexical meaning, used in the first component (usually at its beginning), strengthen the function of conjunctions (comparison or opposition): (tik — ir vēl “just — and again,” dar — o jau “still — but already,” vos — ir “barely — and,” gana — ir, užteko ir “enough — and,” reikia — ir “it is necessary — and,” etc.). Such syntactic-lexical combinations are almost always non-grammaticalized. Only combinations with ne “not” in the first component tend toward conjunctions (ne tik — bet ir “not only — but also,” ne — ir “not — and,” ne — bet “not — but,” etc.). However, even in such combinations, a closer connection is observed only when the words mentioned occur with homogeneous sentence constituents. In a compound sentence, when particles modify only particular words while the conjunction links entire components, the distinct functions of words characterized by syntactic-lexical relations are still fairly clearly differentiated.