Go to originalLocalized version was produced by AI. It may contain inaccuracies.
Preparing document pages…
1 short passage of this localized version is shown in the original language because it could not be localized reliably.
Page 1
Daiva Šveikauskienė
Institute of the Lithuanian Language
USAGE OF VERB FORMS REVEALED DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INFORMATION SYSTEM OF LITHUANIAN GRAMMAR
KEYWORDS: grammar, morphology, paradigms, inflected forms of words, semantics.
ANNOTATION
Inflected parts of speech have paradigms. During the development of the Information System of Lithuanian Grammar (LIGIS), it was observed that not all inflected forms listed in paradigms can be used. The article discusses cases in which certain inflected forms of particular words cannot be used. Three types of such forms are presented, along with groups of words characterized by inflection with exceptions. The reasons why unusable forms arise are indicated.
ABSTRACT
Every inflectional part of speech has its paradigms. While creating the Lithuanian Grammar Information System (LIGIS), we noticed that not every inflectional form possible in theory can be used practically. Some cases in verb paradigms of Lithuanian language are discussed in the article, namely, when certain part of inflectional forms may not be used. We present three cases of unusable forms and provide reasoning behind word groups, covering such inflection with exception, for each case.
INTRODUCTION
Until the beginning of the 21st century, all issues related to grammar were analyzed from the perspective of humans as language users, i.e., only those aspects relevant to people were described, and matters that were “self-evident” to people were not even mentioned. Recently, as linguistic phenomena have begun to be computerized, problems have emerged that ordinary language users generally do not even notice. However, they are encountered by specialists in computational linguistics,
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351–7204
Page 2
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 2
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
when performing computational language-processing tasks. It should also be noted that, when processing language by computer, the information found in printed dictionaries and grammars is insufficient, since they present only the most general regularities of the Lithuanian language. Similar claims can also be found in the work of other scholars, for example: “However, dictionaries intended for people are difficult to adapt for developing language-processing programs” (Rimkutė, Kovalevskaitė 2008: 3). The inadequacy of dictionary information for computer-based language processing was also observed during corpus annotation at the Centre of Computational Linguistics of Vytautas Magnus University. When morphologically annotating the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (hereinafter DLKT), the word’s citation form (lemma) is indicated alongside other data (gender, number, case, tense, person, degree, etc.). Dictionaries “most often provide only base words” (Rimkutė 2006: 38), that is, not all derived forms are included; consequently, a considerable portion of Lithuanian words is left out, and if software is developed using only dictionary data, many corpus words remain unrecognized.
When morphological categories are described in grammars, several examples of words that have a particular morphological category are provided, but not all Lithuanian words characterized by that category are listed. For example, Dabartinėje lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje (hereinafter DLKG), four examples each of masculine and feminine nouns are given when defining grammatical gender (DLKG 2006: 62). For native speakers, determining the gender of all other Lithuanian words not mentioned in the grammar is not difficult. A computer cannot come up with or decide anything on its own; all grammatical data for each word, including its gender, must be specified very precisely.
In computerizing Lithuanian, a morphological phenomenon was observed for which no description could be found in the publications consulted. It is the mismatch between inflectional forms listed in paradigms and the possibility of using them. This problem became apparent only during computational language processing and had not previously been noticed by linguists. In morphology, the term paradigma denotes “a system of endings for a particular type of word inflection, or the set of individual inflected forms of a word, regarded as an example of the corresponding inflectional type” (Gaivenis, Keinys 1990: 143). For example, present-tense verb forms are formed from the present-tense stem and personal endings. Present-tense verbs are conjugated according to three paradigms, corresponding to three conjugation classes (DLKG 2006: 337), while one noun declension (i)a comprises three paradigms that differ from one another in the forms of some cases (LKE 1999: 462).
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 3
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 3
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
Thus, inflecting parts of speech have their own paradigms. This article examines only problematic cases involving verb paradigms.
The aim of this article is to discuss cases in which certain forms of individual words are not used, as observed during the development of the Lithuanian Language Grammar Information System (LIGIS). To achieve this aim, the article first reviews the main publications addressing the use of grammatical forms and natural morphology theory, which is used to provide a basis for the subsequent study; it then presents the idea behind the creation of LIGIS, the work carried out, and the problems encountered, before examining cases in which forms that are theoretically possible are not used. It emerged that not all forms theoretically listed in paradigms are possible for some words. A selective methodology was used: the study selected those problematic cases that came to light in the computerization of language.
1. ISSUES IN THE USE OF WORD FORMS DESCRIBED IN PUBLICATIONS
This section discusses information on the admissibility of forms presented in Lithuanian grammars and language-culture handbooks, and reviews several articles examining problems with word forms from different perspectives. Unfortunately, no publications could be found describing studies of the use of forms listed in paradigms that were conducted to determine whether all theoretically existing forms can be used in language.
1.1. Unused forms discussed in grammars
Tiek vienatomėje (DLKG 2006), tiek tritomėje (LKG II 1971) lietuvių kalbos gramatikose aptariami tam tikrų veiksmažodžio formų nevartojimo atvejai. Kaip rodiklis čia gali būti laikomas ir semantinis požymis – tai vadinamieji beasmeniai veiksmažodžiai. Beasmeniai veiksmažodžiai nusako nuo veikėjo valios nepriklausančius gamtos reiškinius ar kitus stichinius procesus ir turi tik trečiojo asmens formas. Beasmenių veiksmažodžių paradigmą sudaro tiesioginės, tariamosios ir netiesioginės nuosakų trečiojo asmens formos, bendratis, padalyviai, kai kurių veiksmažodžių ir neveikiamųjų dalyvių bevardė giminė (DLKG 2006: 315–316). Panašiai rašoma ir akademinėje gramatikoje: „Beasmeniai veiksmažodžiai <...> nekaitomi nei asmenimis, nei skaičiais ir savo forma sutampa su
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 4
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 4
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
asmeninių veiksmažodžių trečiuoju asmeniu“ (LKG II 1971: 213). Tačiau daugumos išvardytų žodžių, kurie pateikiami kaip beasmenių veiksmažodžių pavyzdžiai, beasmeniškumas yra labai sąlygiškas, t. y. beasmeniai jie būna tik tam tikrame kontekste, kai sakinyje nėra veiksnio. Kai kurie gramatikoje paminėti beasmeniai veiksmažodžiai gali būti vartojami su tautologiniu veiksniu: lietus lyja, sninga sniegas ir t. t. Be to, ir dainos žodžiuose sakoma: Ar diena dienos, ar naktelė tems. Tada ir teiginiai, kad šių veiksmažodžių liepiamosios nuosakos formos negalimos, nėra visiškai tikslūs, plg., Lyk, lietuti, lyk. Net ir tais atvejais, kai veiksmažodis negali turėti veiksnio, pavyzdžiui, reikėti, taip pat vartojamos kai kurios liepiamosios nuosakos formos, pavyzdžiui, vienaskaitos antrasis asmuo. Jis pasitaiko įvairiuose posakiuose, pavyzdžiui, DLKT: Reikėk šitaip atsitikti. Interneto įrašai: Dingo. Viskas dingo. Ir reikėk tu man. Vėl ten pasirodyti. Panašių pavyzdžių galima rasti ir grožinėje literatūroje, pavyzdžiui: Reikėk tu man Polonijos seseriai sykį išsižioti apie tą vokietuką (Aputis 1977: 32).
In discussing the usage of impersonal verbs further, it is stated:
However, not all impersonal verbs have full (“complete”) paradigms. For example, of the verbs pabaiso, pagailo, pagardo, usually only the simple past is used, and more rarely the frequentative past, while other forms are replaced by constructions with the neuter form of adjectives of corresponding meaning (baisu, gardu) or the adverb gaila and the verb darytis, e.g., (darosi) baisu, pabaiso, pabaisdavo, pasidarys baisu; (darosi) gaila, pagailo, pagaildavo (pasidarydavo gaila), pasidarys gaila (DLKG 2006: 316).
Of course, the constructions darėsi / pasidarė gaila are also possible. The verb pagailo and the construction darėsi / pasidarė gaila are used synonymously and have very similar or even identical meanings. If the missing forms in a paradigm—that is, forms not used in the language—can be replaced by combinations of other words, then those missing forms have meaning. This article seeks to describe cases in which certain individual forms of particular words are impossible, that is, words used in those forms have no meaning.
In discussing the neuter gender of participles, DLKG focuses mainly on its use (DLKG 2006: 324, 365, 377) or its use in forming compound verb forms (DLKG 2006: 302). The information is presented from the perspective of the verb: “Verbs that do not govern an object
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351–7204
Page 5
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 5 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
case have compound passive forms only with neuter participles” (DLKG 2006: 320), e.g., yra / buvo vaikščiojama / vaikščiota.
1.2. Predictability of morphological features
We will review several articles that analyze the extent to which certain morphological features of Lithuanian words can be predicted from information already available about their properties. These properties can be of very different kinds, such as semantic, morphological, and so on. Sometimes even opposing claims are made—for example, that semantics does or does not affect certain phenomena.
Inflectional classes can be mentioned as an example of a morphological property used to determine derivational features. A study conducted at Vilnius University investigated the relationship between verb suffixes and noun inflectional classes. All nominal derivatives with the suffixes Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodyno, found in the electronic version of the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (DŽ₆ₑ), were examined: ė-ti, y-ti, o-ti, uo-ti (Pakerys 2011: 273). The traditional feature used to identify noun inflectional classes was the vowel in the plural dative ending, e.g.: (i)a – vyrams, broliams; (i)o – šakoms, galioms ir t. t. Statistical analysis of the selected words established that a verb derived from a noun has a suffix that can be predicted with fairly high probability and depends on the inflectional class of that noun. For example, a verbal derivative of a noun in the (i)a class will have the suffix (i)uo-ti with a probability of 70.95%, while a verbal derivative of a noun in the (i)o class will have the suffix (i)o-ti with a probability of 71.53%. The conclusions state that no clear influence of semantic information could be discerned for the suffixes investigated (Pakerys 2011: 286).
Another article describes a study of “how the morphological features of Lithuanian lexemes can, to some extent, be predicted from their semantics” (Arkadjevas 2008: 2). The study examined primary Lithuanian verbs whose roots end in a consonant. They were all grouped into inflectional macroclasses, the largest of which are n/st- verbs, that is, words with an infix and the suffix -st- in the present-tense stem, and j- verbs, which undergo palatalization in the present and simple past stems. The analysis showed that most n/st- verbs (237 out of 248) are intransitive and can informally be described as “semantic passives,” that is, verbs denoting situations beyond the subject’s control (e.g., because the subject is an inanimate object). Primary j- verbs
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351–7204
Page 6
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 6 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
most often (247 out of 306) denote the conscious impact of a living agent on a patient undergoing an (irreversible) change of state (Arkadjevas 2008: 10). The aggregated data are presented in Fig. 1.
subject-initiated processj-verbs(potential) change in the subject’s staten/st-verbs
FIG. 1 Relationship between verb semantics and morphological classes (prepared according to Arkadjevas 2008: 14).
The article under discussion concludes that j-verbs and n/st-verbs are characterized by strong semantic tendencies.
1.3. Normative issues concerning the use of word forms
Numerous publications discussing the use of word forms are published on issues of Lithuanian language standardization. The List of Language Errors1 provided by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language recommends correct usages of certain forms, but these concern only individual word forms. For example, it states that masculine forms of nouns should not be used to describe women by profession, position, and the like: architektas (= architektė) Žilienė ‘architect Žilienė’ (feminine form: ‘architectė’); likewise, masculine genitive forms of ordinal numerals and the pronoun kelintas should not be used to specify the day of the month: Kelinto (= Kelinta) ‘What date is it today?’; Atostogausiu nuo liepos penkiolikto (= penkioliktos) ‘I will be on vacation from July fifteenth’ (feminine form: ‘fifteenth’), and so on. However, such forms are inappropriate only in certain contexts; in other cases (architektas Žilinskas, tik iš kelinto karto pavyko nustatyti ‘architect Žilinskas; it was only on the ordinal attempt that it was possible to determine’) they are entirely acceptable.
The textbook Lithuanian Language Culture for Colleges discusses cases in which two or more ending variants of the same word are widely used. Such endings are called alternant endings:
Ending forms are often alternants, that is, two similar forms (one standard, while the other enters the standard language from dialects or colloquial speech),
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalbaISSN 2351-7204
Page 7
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 7 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
and although both are acceptable, in seeking stability, the language chooses one, more widespread and established variant (Griškevičienė et al. 2003: 144).
After listing all possible, i.e. used, variants, it is recommended that one normative variant be used: “There are various variants, but usually only one is normative” (Griškevičienė et al. 2003: 144). For example, the following variants of noun case endings are considered normative: sesuo – su seserimi (but not su seseria), obelis – prie obels (but not prie obelies), šuo – be šuns (but not be šunies, be šunio); adjective nominative endings: smailus, but not smailas kampas, smaili, but not smaila adata; pronoun genitive: pats – paties, but not pačio (Griškevičienė et al. 2003: 144). However, all the cases mentioned in this textbook are possible, and words with any of the ending variants are understood.
In the language-culture textbook for creative industries students, cases in which each grammatical case should not be used are discussed (Vladarskienė 2013: 75–82). For example, the nominative case should not be used to express an indefinite quantity of things or a part of an object: When opinions differ greatly, disputes arise (=disputes); Rule violations result in accidents (=accidents). The genitive is not recommended when an abstract thing is indivisible: An organization’s image has a decisive influence (=a decisive influence) on those companies that seek long-term economic success. The instrumental is considered unsuitable for expressing double-case constructions: Sport helps a person become healthy and energetic (=healthy and energetic). Sometimes it is even suggested that an unacceptable locative be replaced with a phrase that no longer contains the word being corrected: Inflation and seasonality influence (= Due to inflation and seasonality) annual indicators are distorted. The dative should not be used to express the object of an action with the words to match, to conform: The make, type, and weight of the vehicle match those specified (=those specified) in the application. Likewise, in the names of document types, the accusative with an infinitive should be used rather than the dative with an infinitive: permit for construction work to carry out (=to carry out construction work). However, alongside these notes, examples of correct use of the dative are also given: The data obtained are insufficient for a decisionto be made. Thus, it can be said that even the word forms identified in this textbook as impossible or inadmissible become so only in a particular context. In other cases, they are considered entirely correct.
The monograph Lithuanian Language Culture discusses the use of neuter participle forms in positions occupied by noun cases. Nominative: But impossible (= impossible) is more necessary to us than (= more necessary) than bread; accusative: Literary creation also involves
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204
Page 8
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 8doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
linguistic intuition: to hear the inaudible (= what is inaudible), to say the unsaid (= what has not been said). The genitive is proposed to be replaced with a syntactic construction containing a neuter participle form: From what has been said (= that which has been said), it is clear that the content of communication essentially coincides with the content of teaching and education; A poem's beauty often emerges at the intersection of the familiar, the heard and the unexpected (= that which is known, heard, and unexpected). In the same way, it is proposed that the instrumental also be replaced, e.g., But in our work, to be satisfied with what has been achieved (= that which has been achieved) is impossible, and the locative as well, e.g., The unexpected echo of beauty in what is old, forgotten (= in that which is old and forgotten) as if brings it back to life (Paulauskienė 2001: 139–145). Cases of impossible form formation are also mentioned: impersonal verbs cannot form inflected active participles; only uninflected forms functioning as predicates are derived from them (Paulauskienė 2001: 221), e.g., pasnigę.
Under the State Language Usage Standardization and Dissemination Programme2, the characteristics of the use of Lithuanian grammatical forms were investigated. Much attention was devoted to the category of number, since problems arise concerning the number of abstract nouns. It can be said that “the use and standardization of number forms is relevant only to nouns” (Paulauskienė 2001: 146). Lithuanian grammars state that abstract nouns can have only singular forms and do not inflect for number (LKG I 1965: 175; DLKG 2006: 62). In the Language Advice publications, exceptional cases are described in which abstract nouns become concrete and their plural can be used, e.g., A person may be seized by various fears (KP G1 2002: 20); this is also characteristic of names of actions, e.g., Two completely different ways of thinking clashed (Bučienė 2017: 50). However, no publications analyzing the use of singular or plural forms of verbs, especially impossible cases, could be found.
Correct usage cases for certain forms are suggested in the Language Advice publications; nearly every issue of the journal Standard Language considers questions of form correctness. However, these too do not cover the usability of the entire paradigm.
Perhaps the closest finding to the topic examined in this article is a note by Jonas Jablonskis in the 1925 Lithuanian language textbook by Rygiškiai Jonas, Lithuanian Language Textbook: “There is no need to discuss participles ‘būsimas, siųsimas, vesimas’ <...> here: they are rare linguistic forms; they are not
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalbaISSN 2351–7204
Page 9
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 9 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
visur ir ne iš visų veiksmažodžių padaromi“ (Jablonskis 1925: 61). Tačiau čia aptariamas atvejis, kai nėra visų dalyvio formų su tam tikra veiksmažodžio šaknimi.
1.4. Application of Natural Morphology
From the perspective of Natural Morphology, Baltic languages began to be studied only at the beginning of this century. In the first decade, studies were conducted on the Latvian nominal system (Rosinas 2005); later, this method was applied to Lithuanian verbs (Pakalniškienė, Šarkytė 2012). One of the questions investigated in Natural Morphology is what is normal in a specific language system3 (Dressler 2019). A morphological phenomenon is considered natural if it is widespread in a language and remains unchanged as the language changes (Mayerthaler 1981: 2). Not all morphological phenomena are equally widespread; for example, suffixes are more common than prefixes. A language may have no prefixes at all (e.g., Turkish), but if it has at least one type of affix, it is a suffix (Crocco Galeas 2001: 8). Further research in this direction led to the conclusion that suffixes and prefixes are more widespread than infixes4 (Wurzel 2001: 27). Suppletion is also rare, and thus unnatural, in word formation5 (Dressler 1985: 97). Lithuanian has very few suppletive forms: esu – buvau; aš – manęs, etc.
Studies of Lithuanian verb tenses led to the conclusion that “[F]rom the perspective of Natural Morphology, the past-tense forms of Lithuanian root verbs are considered basic, while the present-tense forms are derived” (Pakalniškienė, Šarkytė 2012: 155). The argument presented is the fact that “[T]he present-tense forms of infix and -sta stem verbs are structurally more complex than the past-tense stems and are therefore considered derived from a synchronic perspective” (Pakalniškienė, Šarkytė 2012: 155).
From the perspective of Natural Morphology, “inflectional rules are morphological operations by which morphological categories are formally encoded in a word” (Mayerthaler 1981: 8).
3 “<...> what is normal in the potential system of a specific language” (Dressler 2019).
4 “<...> external inflection is more natural than internal inflection, and prefixes and suffixes are more natural than infixes” (Wurzel 2001: 27).
5 “<...> suppletion is most unnatural” (Dressler 1985: 97).
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204
Page 10
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 10
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
However, no studies have been conducted on whether all “morphological operations” can be applied to individual words in a particular group—that is, whether all the forms in paradigms can actually be used.
2. LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE GRAMMAR INFORMATION SYSTEM
LIGIS is intended both for the general public, i.e. information is presented in a popular and readily understandable manner, and for computational language processing, i.e. the data are stored using the computer’s internal format.
2.1. The idea behind its creation
The impetus for creating a grammar information system providing comprehensive and highly accurate information came from the insufficient accuracy of existing automatic morphological analysis systems. The software developed by Vytautas Zinkevičius (2000) for morphological analysis and synthesis of Lithuanian works perfectly only when performing synthesis. During analysis, errors are made in identifying the base form. This problem was also observed during the annotation of DLKT. Since most word-formation patterns had been included as regular, i.e. characteristic of all words, regardless of their semantics, many unreal homonyms were generated, i.e. words that do not exist in Lithuanian but whose certain forms coincide with existing Lithuanian words. For example, regular formation of deverbal nouns produced such lemmas as gulėjas, neišskubėjas, etc. (Rimkutė 2006: 38), because their genitive forms coincide with the third-person forms of the past simple tense of the verb (gulėjo, neišskubėjo). In developing an automatic syntactic analysis system for Lithuanian, morphological analysis is the first stage (Šveikauskienė 2010: 86); consequently, such errors led from the very outset to incorrect syntactic analysis results. Thus, a need arose for one-hundred-percent reliable morphological information about a word.
Another reason for creating a grammar information system was the insufficient number of words found in dictionaries and corpora. Linguists who studied the composition of grammatical forms in DLKT note that it “uses very few different inflectional forms: <...> the main cases of nouns are the nominative, genitive, and accusative” (Rimkutė 2006: 39). Researchers in other countries report similar observations. For example, Latvian
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204
Page 11
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 11
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
linguists also point out that “even very large corpora may lack less frequent forms” (Paikens et al. 2013: 272). Dictionaries do not include all possible derivatives, especially few prefixed derivatives.
Thus, in creating LIGIS, the aim is to avoid both of these shortcomings: efforts are made to cover all possible Lithuanian words and their forms; accordingly, all possible combinations of Lithuanian prefixes and suffixes with each root are generated by computer, and, after the resulting lemmas have been reviewed, words that do not exist in Lithuanian are discarded.
2.2. Work completed and problems encountered
Kol kas yra sukurtas tik bandomasis LIGIS pavyzdys (Šveikauskienė 2016). Buvo pasirinkta tokia darbo metodika: pradžioje paėmus vieną šaknį sudaryti visos sistemos modelį, t. y. panaudojant vieną šaknį pateikti visas sistemoje numatytas informacijos rūšis, o paskui, sistemą plečiant, įtraukti ir kitų šaknų žodžius. Pradiniam variantui naudota šaknis bėg-. Tokį pasirinkimą nulėmė jos paprastumas: niekada neatsiranda intarpas, nevyksta balsių kaita ir priebalsių kaita bent jau tiesioginėje nuosakoje. Siekiant apimti visas galimas visų šios šaknies žodžių formas buvo dirbtinai kompiuteriu generuojami visi vediniai su veiksmažodžiams būdingais priešdėliais ir priesagomis. Tada peržiūrėtos lemos ir atmesti lietuvių kalboje neegzistuojantys žodžiai. Taip gautas lemų sąrašas, kurį sudaro visos kalbos dalys, galinčios turėti raidžių rinkinį bėg šaknyje: daiktavardžiai, pvz.: bėgikas, bėgtakis; būdvardžiai, pvz.: bėglus, vienbėgis (geležinkelis); prieveiksmiai, pvz.: pabėgom, bėgčia, probėgšmais. Panaudojant lietuvių kalbos morfologinės analizės ir sintezės programinę įrangą (Zinkevičius 2000) buvo sintezuojamos visos atrinktų žodžių kaitybinės formos. Iš viso duomenų bazėje pateikiami 28 322 įrašai, t. y. tiek žodžių formų, turinčių šaknį bėg-, rasta lietuvių kalboje. Iš jų: daiktavardžių – 1 254, būdvardžių – 330, prieveiksmių – 12, veiksmažodžių – 5 913, veikiamosios rūšies dalyvių – 14 310, neveikiamosios rūšies dalyvių – 1 772, pusdalyvių – 500, padalyvių – 485. Reikia pasakyti, kad kol kas negalima daryti jokių apibendrinimų dėl kitų šaknų, nes atskirų šaknų produktyvumas gali labai skirtis.
However, even after selecting the word lemmas, i.e. reviewing the base forms and deleting all sets of morphemes that do not exist in Lithuanian, it became clear that this was not enough to ensure that words unused in Lithuanian would not be included in the system. When all the resulting inflectional forms were checked, several cases were observed in which some of the forms in the paradigm of the same
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 12
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 12 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
Some forms of a word are used, while others are not, and this is determined by the word’s semantics, i.e., its meaning. Three main cases in which certain word forms are not used can be distinguished: a) the absence of singular forms of a verb, b) the absence of the past simple tense of a verb, and c) the use of only the neuter gender of passive participles. This is described in more detail in Section 3.
3. VERB FORMS THAT ARE NOT USED
Research on the morphologically annotated corpus at Vytautas Magnus University established that “the theoretical inflectional paradigms of parts of speech presented in grammars differ greatly from the forms actually used” (Rimkutė 2006: 39). However, there are no publications presenting an analysis of inflectional paradigms from the perspective of form availability, i.e., addressing the question of whether all forms can be used.
One type of information provided by LIGIS is all the inflected forms of a word entered by the user (a fragment of the paradigm of the word nubėgti is shown in Fig. 2).
When all theoretically possible inflected forms were generated by computer, it was observed that some of them were unrealistic, a fact determined by the semantics of the particular word. This occurs because the lexical meaning is incompatible with the grammatical meaning, or because the two meanings are logically contradictory.
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351–7204
Page 13
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 13 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
FIG. 2 Fragment of the information about the word nubėgti presented in the OTHER FORMS tab
3.1. Absence of the singular
When inflected forms of all tenses and moods of verbs were generated, it became clear that the singular forms of some verbs, especially those denoting collective action, are illogical and fail to convey semantic content. All the inflected forms of the word nubėgti shown in Fig. 2
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204
Page 14
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 14
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
formos yra galimos, tačiau kito žodžio – nuskraidyti (turinčio tą patį priešdėlį nu-) galima tik daugiskaita, pvz., Papūtus vėjui pro atvirą langą nuo stalo nuskraidė keli jos prirašyti lapai. Šio žodžio vienaskaitos formos yra nerealios ir lietuviui nesuprantama, ką galėtų reikšti, pavyzdžiui, *nuskraidžiau. Daugiskaitos pirmasis asmuo suvokimo problemų nesudaro, pvz., Nuo smūgio mes visi nuskraidėme nuo vežimo ant žemės. Trečiojo asmens forma naudojama tik su ne vieną veikėją žyminčiu veiksniu (sakinių pavyzdžiai paimti iš interneto): Triūsas nuėjo perniek, nes nuo stiklainių nuskraidė tvirtai užsukti dangteliai. Dalis stogo liko kieme, kada nuskraidė kitos dalys, nežinau. Stalas parvirto, aš taip pat, nuskraidė tortas ir dovanos, gėlės ir lėkštės. Internete rastas tik vienas žodžio nuskraidžiau pavartojimo atvejis: Į Einthoveną nuskraidžiau pinigus ir ten juos atidaviau, o iš jo skridau į Londoną6. Tačiau perskaičius šį sakinį tenka pamąstyti, ką galėtų reikšti nuskraidyti pinigus ir atrodo, kad šioje vietoje labiau tiktų žodis nuskraidinau. Kitas žodžio, neturinčio vienaskaitos formų, pavyzdys būtų veiksmažodis susispiesti. Lietuvių kalbos žodyno elektroniniame variante7 pateikiami tokie jo pavartojimo pavyzdžiai: Ei, jūs, vaikai, ko čia susispietėt? Krūvelėn susispietusios čionai pat stovėjo moterys. Per pirmąjį pasaulinį karą Peterburge susispietė nemažai lietuvių. Čia vėl susispiečia varnenai į vieną juodą dėmelę. Vasarą ūkis darbai susispiečia į vieną vietą. Širdy susispietė jausmai kiti. Mokytojo akys susispietė į vieną mokinį LKŽe. Tačiau forma *susispiečiau yra negalima. Dar vienas žodžio, negalinčio turėti vienaskaitos formų, pavyzdys būtų veiksmažodis išsiskirstyti: Baigę mokslo metus išsiskirstėme neramūs. Išsiskirstėme kaip geri draugai. <...> mes, buvę mokiniai, irgi išsiskirstėme po visą Lietuvą <...> DLKT. Tačiau forma *išsiskirsčiau yra negalima, nes šis žodis neturi prasmės. Kiti tokių veiksmažodžių pavyzdžiai galėtų būti: išsibėgiojo, pasklido, išsiskraidė, išsiskraidžiojo, išsivažinėjo ir kt.
No cases were observed in which plural forms of verbs were impossible.
In LIGIS, the problem of indicating verbs that cannot have singular forms is addressed as follows: in the OTHER FORMS tab, only the plural is shown for words whose singular forms are impossible: Fig. 3 shows a fragment of the paradigm of the word nuskraidyti.
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 15
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
FIG. 3 Fragment of the information about the word nuskraidyti presented in the OTHER FORMS tab
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 16
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 16
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
3.2. Absence of the past definite tense
Another case in which certain word forms are impossible is also related to semantics.
Verbs with the prefix tebe- denote an ongoing action8 (Arkadiev 2010: 21), so there can be no telic verbs with this prefix.
In describing Lithuanian grammar, it is stated that “the form of aspectual oppositions in the verb is irregular” and that “with respect to aspect, forms of different tenses may be opposed—the present tense has an imperfective meaning, while the past and future [have] a perfective...<...>, cf.: A gloomy evening is coming (Nėris) and And the long-awaited hour of the solar eclipse arrived (Vienuolis)” (Judžentis 2012: 157–158). On the basis of what is stated in the citation, the word ateis is considered a telic verb, whereas tebeateis already indicates the continuation of an action and is classified as imperfective (He knew that even after this event his son’s letters would tebeateis as before.).
Aspect in Lithuanian usage is also discussed in relation to verbs:
“<...> imperfective verbs are unprefixed, whereas perfective verbs have prefixes. If a prefix indicates only the result of an action taking place in the corresponding direction, then words related by derivation are so closely connected that they seem to be forms of the same word: a) daryti–padaryti; rašyti–parašyti; skaldyti–suskaldyti; balti–išbalti, pabalti, nubalti; skęsti–nuskęsti, paskęsti; nykti–sunykti; b) eiti iš... – išeiti; eiti į... – įeiti; eiti nuo... – nueiti; bėgti per... – perbėgti; bėgti pro... – prabėgti, etc.” (Paulauskienė 2001: 211)
It is further noted that aspect may also be determined by the tense of the verb:
“<...> the Lithuanian present tense also allows prefixed forms of some verbs to be used with an imperfective meaning: verbs of motion ateina, atplaukia, atvažiuoja, išvažiuoja, parvažiuoja answer the imperfective aspect question what is he doing now? <...> But it is enough to change the present tense to the past, and the verb indicates a completed, resultative action: atėjo, atplaukė, atvažiavo, išvažiavo, parvažiavo.” (Paulauskienė 2001: 213)
8
„<...> the combination of te- and be- <...> this sequence can only be interpreted as a continuative form <...>“ (Arkadiev 2010: 21).
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351–7204
Page 17
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 17 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
It could also be added that not only the present-tense forms but also the frequentative past-tense forms are imperfective, since the repeated action is ongoing: would come, would sail in, would drive in, would drive away, would return. However, no observations have been described that some prefixes can change perfective verbs into imperfective verbs. When tebe- is also added to the verbs mentioned, the simple past forms become impossible. Inflected forms of perfective verbs with this prefix are unreal, e.g., the third-person form *tebeišvažiavo. LIGIS does not provide simple past forms for such verbs.
Thus, a general tendency has been observed: verbs of motion indicating direction (and some non-motion verbs), with the prefixes at-, nu- and additionally tebe-, cannot have simple past forms, e.g., atvažiuoti, nuvažiuoti, atbėgti, nubėgti, atskristi, nuskristi, nudažyti, etc. The words tebeatvažiuoja, tebeatvažiuodavo, tebeatvažiuos are possible in Lithuanian, but *tebeatvažiavo, *tebenudažė are already meaningless. The sentence When I returned, he was still tebedažė the shelf is understandable and acceptable, because dažė is an imperfective verb. The perfective form would be nudažė, whereas *tebenudažė already sounds unusual; one has to think hard about what it could mean, and it is doubtful that any meaning of this word would come to mind. Tebe- and the perfective aspect exclude one another.
3.3. Only the neuter gender of passive participles
For a considerable proportion of passive participles, only the neuter gender is used. For passive participles formed from intransitive verbs, only the neuter form is possible. The first observations about the use of participles only in the neuter gender seem to have been described at the beginning of this century, though phrased somewhat differently, with the neuter gender termed an indeclinable participle form: “Only a non-agreeing and indeclinable form is formed from intransitive verbs” (Paulauskienė 2001: 222).
This is also evident from LIGIS statistical data. There are 14,310 active participles with the root bėg-, but only 1,772 passive participles. Statements expressing the same view can also be found in theoretical works: “<...> more active participles are formed than passive ones” (Paulauskienė 2001: 221). Thus, a very large proportion of passive participles—namely, those formed from intransitive verbs—have no masculine or feminine forms or cases. For example, bėgamas ruožas, prabėgta atkarpa, nubėgti kilometrai may be used, as may vaikų jau buvo išsibėgiota kas
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 18
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 18
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
kur, however, the word *išsibėgiotas is impossible. In total, the LIGIS database contains 236 passive participle lemmas. Of these, 120 can only have neuter forms.
More examples can be found with other verbs, not yet included in LIGIS, where only the neuter gender of passive participles is possible. For example, from the verbs augti, blizgėti, nesisupti, it is possible to form augta, blizgėta, nesisupta, whereas *augtas, *augtam, *blizgėtas, *blizgėtame, *nesisuptas, *nesisupto are unintelligible.
CONCLUSIONS
When computers began to be used for language processing as well, new facts about languages and their grammar came to light—facts that had not previously attracted attention, because these questions are not relevant to people as users of language.
When Lithuanian grammar was computerized, it was observed that some Lithuanian words cannot take all the forms of their theoretical paradigms, either because their lexical meaning is incompatible with their grammatical meaning or because of logical contradiction. Singular forms are impossible for words denoting collective action. Derivatives of perfective verbs with the prefix tebe- cannot have simple past forms. Most passive participles formed from intransitive verbs can only have neuter forms.
ŠALTINIAI
DLKT – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas. Prieiga internete:
LIGIS – Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinė sistema. Prieiga internete:
http://ligis.lki.lt/ (žiūrėta 2021-05-25).
LKŽₑ – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas, t. 1–20, 1941–2002 (elektroninis variantas), vyr. red. G. Naktinienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005. Prieiga internete: www.lkz.lt (žiūrėta 2021-05-25).
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 19
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriantLietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 19doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
LITERATŪRA
Aputis Juozas 1977: Sugrįžimas vakarejančiais laukais: Novelės, Vilnius: Vaga.
Arkadiev Peter 2010: Notes on the Lithuanian restrictive. – Baltic Linguistics 1, 9–49.
Arkadjevas Piotras 2008: Lietuvių kalbos pirminių veiksmažodžių klasių semantika tipologinių duomenų kontekste. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 59, 1–27.
Bučienė Laimutė 2017: Daiktavardžių skaičiaus kategorijos raiška: normos ir vartosenos sankirta. – Kalba ir kontekstai: mokslo darbai 7 (2), 44–61.
Crocco Galeas Grazia 2001: What is Natural Morphology? The State of the Art. - Linguistics Athens 13, 7–33.
DLKG – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika, red. V. Ambrazas. 5-as patais. leid., Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2006.
DŽₑ –Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, vyr. red. S. Keinys. 6-as leid. (elektroninis), Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2006.
Dressler Wolfgang U. 2019: Natural Morphology. - Oxford Research Encyclopedias – Linguistics. Prieiga per internetą: https://oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-576 (žiūrėta 2021-05-25).
Dressler Wolfgang. U. 1985: Suppletion in Word-formation. Historical Semantics, Historical Word-formation, ed. J. Fisiak, 97-112.
Gaivenis Kazimieras; Keinys Stasys 1990: Kalbotyros terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Šviesa.
Griškevičienė Jolita; Lapkuvienė Cecilija; Navalinskienė Gražina; Šmulkštytė Rima 2003: Lietuvių kalbos kultūros vadovėlis kolegijoms, Vilnius: Homo liber.
Jablonskis Jonas 1925: Rygiškių Jono Lietuvių kalbos vadovėlis, Kaunas: „Vaivos“ b-vė.
Judžentis Artūras 2012: Lietuvių kalbos gramatinės kategorijos, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.
KP 2002: Kalbos patarimai 1: Gramatinės formos ir jų vartojimas, sud. R. Miliūnaitė, teksto aut. R. Miliūnaitė, A. Paulauskienė, vyr. red. A. Pupkis, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.
LKE 1999: Lietuvių kalbos enciklopedija, red. V. Ambrazas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 20
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamaumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 20 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
LKG 1965: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1: Fonetika ir morfologija, vyr. red. K. Ulvydas, Vilnius: Mintis.
LKG 1971: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 2: Morfologija, vyr. red. K. Ulvydas, Vilnius: Mintis.
Paikens Peteris; Rituma Laura; Pretkalnina Lauma 2013: Morphological Analysis with Limited Resources: Latvian example. Proceedings of the 19th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (NODALIDA 2013). Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 85, 267-277. Prieiga per internetą: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260907832_Morphological_analysis_with_limited_resources_Latvian_example (žiūrėta 2021-05-25).
Pakalniškienė Dalia; Šarkytė Raimonda 2012: Mikaloj aus Daukšos raštų intarpiniai ir sta kamieno veiksmažodžiai natūraliosios morfologijos požiūriu. – Res Humanitariae XI, 151–172.
Pakerys Jurgis 2011: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos daiktavardinių veiksmažodžių priesagų ir jų pamatinių daiktavardžių kait ybos klasių santykis. – Baltistica, 46, 271–288.
Paulauskienė Aldona 2001: Lietuvių kalbos kultūra, Kaunas: Technologija.
Rimkutė Erika 2006: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatinių formų vartosena morfologiškai anotuotame tekste. – Lituanistika 66 (2), 34-55.
Rimkutė Erika; Kovalevskaitė Jolanta 2008. Tai, kas tinka žmogui, netinka mašininiam vertimui: žodynų problema. – Gimtoji kalba 2, 3-14.
Rosinas Albertas 2005: Latvių kalbos daiktavardžio linksniavimo sistema: sinchronija ir diachronija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.
Šveikauskienė Daiva 2010: Lietuvių kalbos vientisinių sakinių automatinė sintaksinė analizė: daktaro disertacija.
Šveikauskienė Daiva 2016: Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinė sistema: I. Morfologija. – Lietuvių kalba 13. Prieiga internete: http://www.lietuviukalba.lt/index.php/lietuviu-kalba/article/view/183 (žiūrėta 2021-05-25).
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204
Page 21
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 21 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
Wurzel Wolfgang U. 2001: Flexionsmorphologie und Natürlichkeit: Ein Beitrag zur morphologischen Theoriebildung. Studia Grammatica 21, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag GmbH.
Zinkevičius Vytautas 2000: Lemuoklis – morfologinei analizei. – Darbai ir dienos 24, 245–273.
Gauta 2019 10 22
Priimta 2021 09 06
BENDRINĖ KALBA 94 (2021)
http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba
ISSN 2351-7204
Page 22
DAIVA ŠVEIKAUSKIENĖ. Veiksmažodžio formų vartojamumas, išryškėjęs kuriant
Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos informacinę sistemą | 22
doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2021.94.02
USAGE OF THE VERB FORMS DEVELOPED ON THE LITHUANIAN GRAMMAR INFORMATION SYSTEM
Summary
Up until now, the usage of grammatical forms mostly has been discussed in standardization or diachronic aspects. Searching for articles about paradigm coverage or its completeness yielded no results. We encountered the same critical question while creating the Lithuanian Grammar Information System, while preparing the material for the tab OTHER FORMS to be exact. It turns out that paradigms of some words are incomplete, which is determined not by morphological features of Lithuanian language, but by word semantics, making specific paradigm forms impossible, non-existent, by resulting in words not understood by a native speaker. We present three types of such occurrences: 1. Verbs having no singular form: such verbs mean group action. 2. Verbs the past simple tense forms of which are illogical. Such problem occurs when indicator of aspect of verbs is time (i.e. present tense forms are imperfective, and past simple tense forms are perfective), and they have attached the prefix tebe-, which notes continuity. 3. Most of passive participles that are derived from intransitive verbs can only have neuter gender forms.
KEYWORDS: grammar, morphology, paradigms, inflectional forms of words, semantics.
