Das Prädikativum im Litauischen

vVIV KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAL II vos TSR MOKSLUY AKADEMIJA LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE P. TROST I. We do not yet have a sufficient explanation for the decline of the neutrum in the Baltic languages. Inspired by Endzelin! teaches, for example, Vaillant? : The decline of the neutrum must be related to a characteristic feature of the Baltic languages, the complete mixing of the third person of the singular and plural of the verbs; it must have started from the nominative of the plural. In a sentence like vartd at-sivéré, now vartai atsivėrė, it was not possible to discern whether varıd was a neutral plural or a feminine singular, the neutral plural had assumed the appearance of a feminine collective in the singular, but with plural masculine inflexion of the oblique case. This resulted in a double normalization: the neutral plural was converted into a feminine singular, apr. warto, wartin, or into a masculine plural, lit. vertai. Soweit Brave. Es it is certainly one um Normalization, but why did it take place here at the right time? Whether a nominative form is a feminine in the singular or a Neutrum im Plural was, resulted from the Paradigm class of the Wortes. Die Form was a neutral Plural, if this Word a neutral Singular besass. Der Shrinkage of the Neutrums is several in idg. Languages in of historical time entered, many others have the Neutrum to this day®. Die Homonymy of the endings cannot therefore be considered as a sufficient explanation for the decline of the neutrum, because it does not in any way lead to homonymy from the point of view of the Word of mouth led. II. 1998-1999 After the elimination of the neutrum in the noun, Lithuanian preserved the singular neutral form, except for the demonstrative pronoun, for adjectives and all participles that can be used predicatively. This form is now used exclusively in a predicative function, so it should be referred to here as a predicative. 1 J. Rozwadowski, Symbolae grammaticae, 1, S. 11 f., Warszawa, 1928. * A. Vaillant, Grammaire comparée des langues slaves, 2, S. 15 f., Lyon, 1958. 3 On the decline of the neutral in the so-called. Lithuanian Yiddish can only be said that the explanation by Lithuanian language influence is doubtful with regard to the cultural-historical prerequisites and the lack of other, secure influences of Lithuanian on Lithuanian Yiddish. Yiddish, and 219 participative predicative appears both in member sentences, d. h. without nominative subject, as well as bilingual in sentences, d. h. with Nominative subject. Im Lithuanians can the finite Verb sentences, at least all two-membered, basically in Participle sentences are converted. And consistently both active and in passive. in As passive are considered the Phrases with and mtParticipium, or the Participles themselves. The passive Participles are used by both transitive and intransitive verbs Verbs formed and the Transformation of the finite Verbalsatzes in einen Participle sentence is consistent. D. h.if the Verb is transitive, is so used in the Conversion of Nominativum Genitive and the Accusative zum Nominative; if the Verb is intransitive, also the so Nominativ zum Genitive, whilein The accusative is missing. The active Participles congrue, but the passives can be Presence of a Nominative subjects have the incongruous predicative form. Es wonders which Purpose the double Participial sentences and the incongruous Predictive forms in two-membered to serve sentences. Es is no doubt that the active Partizipia als Modus relativus and the and t-participia mof the transitive Verb as Passive serving. Problematic are, on the other hand, the and t-participia mof the intransitive Verbs that cannot be considered as passive, as well as the incongruous Forms of the same Participles of transitive Verbs that have to be considered passive. Jablonskis had the Disgruenz of the and mt-participia also as Funds for Identification of indirect speech, in addition as Expression “not just one fact, rather the Discovery of a fact” presented*. Er but was not very clear and eventually had to admit that the Disgruenz also more in direct Speech occurs and in general where it should not occur. If a Language in Assets and an possesses a so passive, the Do not justify the use of one or the other in each individual case. Der Field of application of the Liability is im Lithuanian wider than others in languages, because even the intransitive Passive verb Form a participle. Deren Semantics must be clarified. Die Propositions with and mt-participle of intransitive Verbs have at least to Part of impersonal Character. How do impersonal and passive characters relate to each other? The passive indicates that given im Satz das Nominative subject of the passive Pol (der Target, not starting point) of one Action is. Semantically can from Liability only when Presence of a Nominativsubjektes die Be a word. Passive and impersonal character act together in Appearance when the Agents in the passive is not mentioned. But as in other languages, in Lithuanian the Agents in the be mentioned as a liability; the However, mention is made im Genitive in place im Nominative, i.e. not im Center of the of the sentence, but in Marginalization. This results in Sentences of relatively impersonal character. All sentences with the mund t-participle, whether with or without a passive character, have an impersonal or relatively impersonal character. 4 J. Jablonskis, Selected Writings, 1, S. 465 f., Vilnius, 1957, 220 A passive of intransitive verbs is used in Lithuanian as well as in other languages, e.g. lat. irur as agitur, nhd. it is raised as the thing is done, but peculiar is there the generalization of the sentence type of relatively impersonal without passive character as well as the incongruence in sentences of passive character. Whereas there the particularity of the sentence is given by the marginal position of the agent, here it is given by the formal independence of the predicate. Both types are in contrast to the “normal” sentence model, which is characterized by the dominance of nominative subject and predicate- ®. The incongruence ensures the expression action character, as opposed to property and state character. It is true that the discrepancy usually comes together with the Name of the Agents occurs. III. Not all adjectives are used in the pıädikative form, but quite a few in formal and semantic restriction. They are adjectives that do not express properties of objects, but opinion; there are those who have a so-called. Allow dative subject. Adjectives in predicative form appear in single-membered and double-membered sentences; they appear alone with an infinitive and also together with a nominative that joins the infinitive. Z. B. hard to say und hay hard to plough. —Here there is the same inconsistency as with the mand t-participles in semantically passive sentences. In this way, sensations and evaluations are separated from the determination of characteristics. IV. Is the formation of the peculiar sentence types of Lithuanian due to the presence of the predicative form? Or, conversely, is the predicative form present because of these types of sentences? Are these types of sentences handed down from earlier times or are they tied to the particular type of Lithuanian? The peculiarity of Lithuanian lies not only in the expansion of the member sentences, but also in the existence of a type between the member and the bi-member sentence. These are the types in detail and as a whole: 1. The beer is delicious. 2. Hay is difficult to mow. 3. In our country people work and want to work. 4. Whose day is dark? 5.Old forests loved. Some of these types are also represented in other languages, whereby the Lithuanian predicative form corresponds to the singular neutre form from which the predicative emerged: 1. Griech. (hom.) vdx &yatov molvxogavin; ‘russ. (17th century) epbxo caadko u venoebKa nadko. 2. Water. uisse in boill do dss on chiunn “it is right that the limbs grow at the head”; ® full. It's time to go. 3. Ahd. iz is written fona thir. Types 4 and 5 are hardly identical in other idg. Languages to prove, they join 3. 3 to 5 are based on an impersonal verbal form, which is formed by all verbs and can be used both passively and non-passively. This is far from being an impersonal form, as the agent appears in a marginal position in the sentence when it is named in general. The focus is solely on the process. 5 Vgl. A. Ozols, Scientific papers, Latvian State University, XVI séj., ser. II, 17 £., 1957. * H. Lewis —H, Pedersen, A Concise Comparative Celtic Grammar, $ 457,2, Göttingen, 1957. 221