Dėl lietuvių kalbos morfologinės sandaros

LEF-E TU Va Oi S T. S R MOKSLU AKADEMI1JA DEL LIETUVOS KALBOS MORFOLOGINES SANDAROS | The Lithuanian Academy of Sciences AND THEIR TRACKS (In the place of the introduction) A. VALECKIENE § 1. The morphological structure of the language is based on word forms. Most words in the language have not one, but several or several dozen forms. The word forms are united by the lexical meaning of the word. Words and their forms also have grammatical meanings, which are very abstract. The same grammatical meaning may be given not to a single word or form, but to a group of words or forms. Grammatical meanings are perceived from the relationship of one Word and form in the language with other words and forms. They are also closely related to the lexical, i.e. specific, meanings of words. Vinogradov emphasizes that the grammatical meaning of the word organically enters into the semantic structure of each word!. Based on the grammatical meanings of words, their morphological characteristics and syntactic functions, traditional linguistics distinguishes certain groups of words, or types, called parts of speech. Parts of speech (noun, adjective, numeral, etc.) form the basic moriological categories. Morphological categories also include general morphological characteristics that are characteristic of a part of the language and include its words (e.g., gender, number, syllable, etc.). The external means of expression of the latter morphological categories, which also determine the morphological structure of word types, are word forms. The grammatical meaning of forms that form a certain morphological category is also the meaning of the moriological category. The two sides of the moriological categories (formal and semantic) form an indivisible whole. $ 2. Word forms usually have external formal categorical indicators. In flexional languages (including Lithuanian), such indicators are usually various affixes (endings, suffixes, prepositions). Sometimes word forms are formed with different vowel changes (so-called "internal flexion"), accent and suffix. The latter forms are usually combined with affixes in Lithuanian. In Lithuanian, as in other related languages, analytical verbs are also used ir | B. B. Bunorpanos, Pyceknū a3bik, Mocksa—Jlenunrpan, forms composed of 1947, p. 33. an independent and an auxiliary word that no longer has its nominal function. The grammatical meaning of analytical forms is formed not by the meaning of the components of the form, but by the semantic synthesis of the whole compound. These are completely new forms with their own specific grammatical meaning. The Lithuanian language is characterized by analytical forms of verbs, called compound forms, which form their own independent system of personification alongside continuous forms (the structure and basic functions of the compound verbs of Lithuanian language, compared with continuous forms, are discussed in the article of this publication, “Conjugated and completed verbs of the tenses and conjunctions in Lithuanian literary language”). § 3. Morphological categories are expressed not by the morphological characteristics of an individual word, but by the set of functionally coincident forms. For example, in Lithuanian, the noun genus category has several formal categorical indicators. Forms of the masculine gender are characterized by the singular noun vowel endings -as, -is, -ys, -us, -uo; feminine forms — endings -a, -ė, -i, -is, -uo. The masculine and feminine forms of the singular noun with the same endings are distinguished by other forms of the conjugation system of the same group of words. For example, masculine nouns with the singular noun ending -is have the singular noun ending -iui (dantis, dančiui), and feminine nouns with the same singular noun ending have the singular noun ending -iai (akis, akiai), etc. Thus, the morphological categories in language usually function as a system of forms. Within the system, the grammatical form and without a separate categorical indicator is sufficiently defined. For example, in Lithuanian, next to the numeral paradigm: dešimtis, dešimtiės, dėšimčiai, dėšimtį, dešimtimi, dešimtyjė, the following paradigm has become established: dėšimt, dešimtiės||dėšimt, dėšimčiai, dėšimt, dešimtimi, dešimtyjė. In the latter system, the form dĕţt, without a verbal category formal indicator, is understood as the singular form of the nominative, adjective, and sometimes adjective. The formal indicators of individual morphological categories may coincide. For example, the ending -as in Lithuanian syncretically denotes the gender, number and verb categories of nouns and pronouns, i.e. words with the ending -as are grammatically described as the forms of the masculine singular noun. ; Some invariant , 10“ words may not have external formal categorical indicators. For example, the characteristics and the grammatical meaning of prepositions as morphological categories emerge from the words with which a certain preposition is connected (for this reason, a distinction is made between genitive, adjective and other prepositions). § 4. In morphology, the study of word forms cannot be separated from the morphological structure of the whole word and the word types. In this way, morphology encompasses the study not only of word forms and their systems, but also of morphological types of words and morphological characteristics of words — of the morphological nature of the whole word, even if morphologically undivided. 6 Morphology is also used to study the construction of words. In addition to word forming as a specific way of word formation, other basic means of word formation and word forms coincide (conjugations, endings, prepositions). In Lithuanian, the same ending can be both a constructor and a form indicator, e.g. jaūnis (brother) is a derivative of the ending -is from jdunas; the ending -is also describes this derivative as the vowel of a masculine singular noun. (The field of word formation is represented in this publication by the articles: “On the examination of the formation of hydronyms” and “Compound particles of the Lithuanian language- ”). The syntactic function of words is one of the criteria for distinguishing language parts. The syntactic function of words, their relationship with other words in the sentence, also highlights the grammatical meaning of words. The grammatical meaning of some moriological categories is not clear otherwise than from their syntactic analysis. For example, the grammatical meaning of a preposition is perceived in the combinations of those words whose syntactic relationships it denotes (mostly a verb and a noun). (See the article of this publication “Meanings and use of the prefix in in contemporary Lithuanian language- ”). On the other hand, the laws of word joining in a sentence sometimes also depend on the peculiarities of the morphological structure of those words. A vivid example of participants in this case. Participants have both verb and adjective morphological features. As a result, they can perform both attributive and predicative functions (the latter function they have in narrative language). In addition, some participants perform a kind of intermediate function between predicative and attributive. In such cases, they represent a secondary action or state in the sentence and have double syntactic relationships with other words; In terms of function, such participants are associated with the word denoting the main action (usually a verb) and the word denoting the subject of the action (usually a noun), cf. : The child stopped running because he was tired. The latter function of participants is discussed in the article “Atributive-predikative use of Lithuanian language participants”. The morphological structure of the category of participants itself is also revealed here in all its brightness. $ 5. Language is constantly changing. “Each period of language development creates something new, and this, as language gradually changes, forms the basis for its further development”2. The vocabulary and the grammatical structure change in the language, but not equally. There are some more noticeable changes in the lexicon. With each new change in the social order, the language is replenished with new words, and some words go out of circulation. The grammatical and especially morphological structure of the language changes very slowly, slightly. However, over a longer period of time, certain changes can be observed here as well: the system of word forms and forms changes, the grammatical meaning of words and forms and the nature of morphological categories changes, and even new morphological categories are formed. ? M. A. Bonysu ae Kyprensa, Ha36panunbie Tpyjbi no OOILEMY S3bIKO3HAHHIO, 1. 1, Mocksa, 1963, p. 67. In Lithuanian, one of the most characteristic disappearing forms is the double form, which still occurs in fictional literature and in some dialects. As a system, the two-numbered forms are used only in the western part of the Žemaičių dialektas. In other dialects, the plural forms are no longer used for all words (usually only for some older ones, whose meaning is related to the person himself or his daily life). There are also two different forms of the name, the masculine form of the name (for example, the name of the father) and the feminine form (for example, the name of the mother). The plural forms of nouns usually go with the numerals da, dve, abū, oba. (See the article,,Lietuvių kalbos žodžių dviskaita“ in this publication.) Apparently, the binary forms of these nouns, established as normative, help the corresponding binary forms of nouns to survive for some time due to the principle of word combination in the sentence. Archaic in Lithuanian are also postpositional pronouns, composed of various verbs with postpositions, especially the adhesive and the aliative. In the present-- day Lithuanian language, the latter two forms are only found in individually fixed forms (e.g. velniop, vakarop, namiépi, etc.). These funny things are known from the old writings. The Iliative is still alive in the eastern Altay dialects and is used after the inflection verbs (exit miskan). In some places this verb already shows signs of decay: it is mixed with the internal present participle (Foresta) (This publication includes an article on the history of the plural forms of the internal present participle (insensitive).) The extinct word forms are isolated in the language and exist for some time as some kind of relic. Sometimes they remain in phraseological combinations for a very long time. However, when some forms disappear, other forms with the same function appear. As a result, the grammatical system of the language remains intact, and the language performs its communicative function without any interference. For example, in Lithuanian literary language, instead of postpositional pronouns, prepositional constructions have taken hold (važiuoja į miestą, eina į namusl||link namų, gyvena pas mus, etc.). The function of the disappearing forms can also be taken over by other forms in the language. For example, the function of binary forms is taken over by plural forms®. Therefore, the grammatical meaning of the plural form and the nature of the number category itself change slightly. $6. One of the most obvious processes of the development of the grammar structure of the language is the lexicalization of individual vowel forms, or the adverbization. As language gradually changes, the verb forms of some words break away from their paradigm, lose any grammatical connection with the other verb forms (and thus their previous grammatical meaning) and become independent — lexicalized. They begin to take on new, adverbial, functions. The general formal indicator of the verb (the subjunctive ending), when the form breaks its previous connections with the whole paradigm, no longer has a categorical meaning. In this way, from the point of view of the present language, suprieveiks3 Probably, the plural forms began to disappear because they were opposed to the singular forms according to their grammatical meaning in the language along with the plural forms. 8 past participle forms can no longer be compared with other forms that have retained the same ending and have a participle meaning. Not all of the forms of conjugation that perform the function of adverbs are equally detached from their conjugation system. It is generally considered to be the most commonly used form of proof that can be found. In addition, the same forms can be used to form new adverbs with the same formant. In this way, an isolated verb form in another system of grammatical phenomena (in the category of adverbs) can become productive again. (See the article of this publication,,Adverbation of singular noun and adverbs with the formants -(i)os, -ės in contemporary Lithuanian language“. From the category of adverbs in this publication is also printed another article “Adverbs with the formant -(i)ai in the North-West Highland dialects”.) i § 7. The morphological structure of language is a complex system. All phenomena of morphology are related to each other. When one phenomenon changes, the others change slightly. Sometimes a small, minor change in the morphological system can be the cause of other and very large changes. The morphological system of the language is very important for the development of the law of analogy. The forms that make up systems interact with each other. In some cases, the form of a verb of one paradigm is equalized by the form of the corresponding verbs of other paradigms, or by one type of paradigms — entirely different types of paradigms. In some cases, even the lexical morpheme changes. For example, in Lithuanian, as in other Indo-European languages, the paradigms of the 1st and 2nd person pronouns consist of complement forms, i.e. the individual syllables of these paradigms have different roots, cf. p. I, my, mdn, etc., més, our, us, us, etc. In the paradigm of the first-person singular pronoun, the root of the noun I differs from the root of other verbs man-; plural paradigm in literary language is even more diverse. There are four roots (mės, mūs-, mum-, mūs). In dialects, the 1st person plural pronoun paradigm is equalized by analogy. The plural forms of the noun and adjective with the root mumform other indirect nouns with the same root, e.g. kilm. mum, mum, mum, mum, gal. mumys, mums, mums and mumį, mūmi, mum (as kilmininkai), loc. mumysė, mumisė, mumės, mumy (near us); it. mumysna. A similar analogy occurs in the 2nd person plural pronoun paradigm. The singular and plural paradigms of first and second person pronouns, depending on their roots, are less related to each other than the corresponding paradigms of other pronouns or nouns. In terms of meaning, the forms of the pronouns I and més, ti and you can also be treated as independent words. Therefore, between the pronouns I and mės, tú and vy paradigms, there is an analogy of form-making. Singular forms affect plural forms. For example, many of the above-mentioned and other plural forms of verbs have the singular endings of the corresponding verbs, e.g.: dgs. kilm. mumį (according to vns. kilm. dialekt. manį, having a nose in the singular noun final vowels example), mumės (according to vns. kilm. manės with ė stem noun ending), mum (tur 9 be, according to similar structure (from one lexical morpheme) vns. kilm. mad, which is phonetically abbreviated from manė), mūso (according to my); dgs. caud. mūmienai (according to the singular noun mūnienai with the old ending -ie<ei, cf. pr. mennei), dgs. gal. mūmi (according to singular mani) and mumį, mum, as plural ancestors, dgs. viet. mumy, mūsyje (according to vns. viet. many (jé)), mumės (pagal vns. viet. munė (zem.) with the old i stem noun ending -ė, with the addition of the plural characteristic -s), dgs. ad. mūsip (according to vns. ad. manip) and others. The conjugation of 1st and 2nd person pronouns in Lithuanian has been greatly influenced by the conjugation of nouns and relative pronouns; 1st person pronoun forms, formed by the corresponding vowel forms of i-root nouns: vns. kilm. muniės (Zem.), vnt. J.N. manim(i), vns. viet. manyjė, munė (žem.), dgs. viet. us; according to the corresponding vowel forms of the relative pronouns: dgs. 2000) and D.G. (b. viet. Ours (by stripe), dgs. caud. mummies (must be, according to them) and others. There are many different crossing analogies in the conjugation of non-verbal pronouns, and to investigate them is the task of a separate article. It should be said that changes in one area of speech often pass to another, for example, from phonetics to morphology. Due to phonetic overlap of some consonant endings in individual paradigms, conjugation of u-root nouns and adjectives, as well as consonant conjugation of nouns, is disappearing in Lithuanian, and conjugation of i-root nouns has also suffered significantly. This increases the strength and width of the a and ia stems. § 8. As the morphological structure of the language develops, over a certain period of time, some forms or systems of them emerge as productive, while others remain next to the productive as secondary adjacent forms or as exceptions. Thus, all the time in the moriological system of the language there are so-called duplicates of some forms. The productive and most widely used forms are usually recorded in grammar as normative. However, the productivity of forms, and with it some grammatical norms, also changes. In each period of speech development there are more stable and more changing morphological phenomena. In the area where changes are taking place, grammatical norms can also change over a short period of language development. For example, in comparison with the grammar of J. Jablonski in 1901, different forms of certain vowels of some u, i and consonant conjugated nouns are now considered to be normative, cf. "Jablonski's Grammar". ward. akmens, sėsers, dūkters, bet mėnesiai (now ūkmenys, sėserys, dūktegujė, vaisiuje, puodžiuje), vns. int. patimi (now pačiū), vns. viet. patimė (now pačiamė) and others. When studying the morphological structure of language and its development, it is important to identify productive and non-productive forms in each period of language development, to determine the direction of development of certain morphological phenomena and the entire morphological system. 10