Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija

LAIMA JANCAITĖ Vytautas Magnus University LEXICALIZATION OF PREFIXED LITHUANIAN VERBS KEYWORDS: lexicalization, word formation, prefixed verbs, corpus linguistics, semantics, Lithuanian. ABSTRACT The aim of this article is to establish criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs and to apply them to corpus analysis. A prefixed verb becomes lexicalized when it becomes a semantically independent word whose lexical meaning is unrelated to its derivational affix and base. A more detailed description of lexicalized verbs and ways of identifying them is relevant because these cases are important to lexicographers creating corpus-based dictionaries, to language technologies, since computers must recognize exceptional cases of lexicalization, and to foreigners learning Lithuanian, since it is also important for them to understand these individual, exceptional cases of word formation. The article first discusses the broader concept of lexicalization in order to reveal the context of this phenomenon. Then, drawing on theoretical literature, it establishes criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs, and subsequently uses four common prefixed verbs to show how the criteria could be applied to identify lexicalization in texts. INTRODUCTION Lexicalization is an important process related to word formation that indicates exceptions to word formation. Usually, the lexical meaning of a prefixed verb does not differ greatly from that of the base word BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 2 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 of lexical meaning, but only has additional semantic features. Nevertheless, sometimes it may be completely different from that of the base verb. In this case, it is already a semantically independent word that should not be called a derivative. Thus, it is only formally a prefixed verb (otherwise, a prefix-marked verb), since it is semantically unrelated to the base word. For example, the verb apgauti appears to be a derivative of the verb gauti, but is semantically unrelated to it (the meanings of these words differ greatly). Other examples include ištikti and tikti; padėti (meaning “to help”) and dėti; pradėti and dėti, and so on. It also happens that a semantic connection between a prefixed verb and its base verb can be discerned, but the prefixed verb does not have a general meaning, that is, it cannot be associated with other derivatives bearing the same prefix in terms of derivational or semantic groups (it has an individual derivational meaning, but no group-level derivational meaning). In this case, the prefix gives a particular meaning to just one verb, in a specific instance. For example, the verb persekioti is related to the base word sekioti, but, according to Jonas Paulauskas, “it also means ‘to give no peace, to try to harm or destroy’, that is, following someone is understood figuratively” (Paulauskas 1958: 432–433). In no other case does the prefix per- give a verb this shade of meaning. Cases of lexicalization need to be described and studied in detail in order to clarify how lexicalized prefixed verbs can be distinguished from regular prefixed verbs. A fuller description of such verbs and ways of distinguishing them is relevant for several reasons. First of all, it matters to lexicographers compiling corpus-based dictionaries: after cases of lexicalization have been studied, they can be described more clearly and indicated in dictionaries. The topic of lexicalization is also relevant to language technologies, since exceptional cases of lexicalization need to be recognized in computational analysis. It is important, too, for foreigners learning Lithuanian: they need to understand the regularities of Lithuanian word formation while also grasping its exceptions and individual, exceptional cases. This article describes how lexicalized verbs could be identified using corpora; this analysis is useful because it may reveal how BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 3 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 learners can identify lexicalization from usage, what usage information is useful for lexicographers to include in dictionaries, and how cases of lexicalization can be identified from the context in which a word is used during computational text analysis. The article briefly surveys the broader concept of lexicalization (see Section 1) to provide a wider context—that is, the connections between lexicalization and various linguistic phenomena, not only word formation. The analysis focuses in greater detail on lexicalization related to word formation and specifically examines prefixed verbs. This part of speech is perhaps the most complex: verbs form the core of a sentence and have many inflectional forms. Apie vedinių leksikalizaciją yra rašęs Saulius Ambrazas (1990), apie veiksmažodžių leksikalizaciją – Aldona Paulauskienė (1994: 37, 41), būtent apie priešdėlinių veiksmažodžių leksikalizaciją – Jonas Paulauskas (1958), Albertas Ružė (2000). J. Paulauskas apie tai rašė ir Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos antrajame tome Morfologija (1971; toliau – LKG II), skyriuje Priešdėliniai veiksmažodžiai, apie tai rašoma ir Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatikos (2005; toliau – DLKG) skyriuje Priešdėlių vediniai, parengtame Evaldos Jakaitienės. The aim of this article is to establish criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs and to apply them to corpus analysis. The methods used in the study are descriptive and corpus-linguistic. The criteria for identifying lexicalization are established through an analysis of the theoretical literature and then applied to nine prefixed verbs common in corpora: apibūdinti, atlikti, išleisti, nustatyti, parduoti, pradėti, priimti, sudaryti, užimti (although the findings are summarized based on an analysis of all nine verbs, this article illustrates the application of the criteria using four verbs in particular senses: nustatyti, išleisti, parduoti, apibūdinti¹). The main 1 The criteria for identifying lexicalization are described in greater detail and applied to a larger number of verbs in Laima Jancaitė’s master’s thesis Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacijos atpažinimas (2020). BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 4 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 The sources are The Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (hereafter DLKT) and the Morphologically Annotated Corpus (hereafter MATAS). Although lexicalization is discussed in theoretical works, these works nevertheless devote more attention to the general meanings of prefixed derivatives (i.e., prefixed verbs are grouped according to semantic classes or their derivational meanings as groups are described), while lexicalization is mentioned primarily as an exception to the rule. This article discusses lexicalization separately and also considers how it might be detected using corpora—that is, a more objective language resource—rather than relying solely on linguistic intuition. 1. A BROADER CONCEPTION OF LEXICALIZATION In scholarly works and dictionaries, lexicalization is not restricted to cases of word formation; it encompasses many different processes. This section discusses which processes may be considered lexicalization. In the special publication Dictionary of Linguistic Terms (hereafter KTŽ), lexicalization is explained as follows: “The conversion of certain linguistic elements (morphemes, word combinations, letter abbreviations, etc.) into fixed linguistic units—word equivalents: ERA—an electrographic reproduction device, and the copy of the era [??] is not sufficiently clear; ranka moti and ranka moti ‘nothing will come of it,’ etc.” (Gaivenis, Keinys 1990). This conception emphasizes the emergence of word equivalents: these are not true words, but merely perform the functions of words; what matters is that such formations arise from units that already exist in the language. Among the examples given is the use of an acronym as an ordinary word. The Encyclopedia of Lithuania (hereafter VLE) presents an even more detailed conception of lexicalization (author: E. Jakaitienė): “lexicalization, the conversion of a non-lexical element of language (a grammatical form, morpheme) or a combination of such elements into an independent lexical unit. For example, BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 5 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 the emergence of adverbs from case forms (balsu, šuoliais, žaibu, vakarop), the semantic separation of the plural (pieniai ‘the milt of male fish’, viduriai ‘the internal organs of the abdomen’), the vocative becoming an interjection (varge!), as well as a derivational formative becoming a separate word (All the ultros are people with extreme beliefs; The fates of nations were played with by fascists, Stalinists, and other -ists), the contraction of several words into a univerb (sudiev < ‘with God’, padėkdie < ‘God help’). Sometimes lexicalization is also considered to include the conversion of free word combinations into idioms, figurative phraseological units, or compound terms denoting a single concept (beržinė košė ‘a punishment’, liežuviu pakišti ‘to inform on someone’, perkūno oželis ‘a bird of the snipe family’). This type of lexicalization is usually called syntactic.” It is clear that both KTŽ and VLEe present a similar conception: they note that morphemes, word combinations, and other elements can become word equivalents and begin to be used in the language as units equivalent to words. Thus, lexicalization can comprise various processes. Nevertheless, it is important not only that it encompasses many processes, but also that it can be understood in different ways. For example, Jurgita Cvilikaitė writes that lexicalized means “named by a word” (Cvilikaitė 2005: 34), while Jurgita Girčienė associates the process of lexicalization with “the integration of lexical variants into the language system” (Girčienė 2012: 32). Some foreign authors write similarly; for example, Geert Booij states that a word becomes lexicalized when it is possible and begins to be used frequently, acquiring currency in usage (Booij 2005: 17–18). This study focuses on the view that lexicalization is associated with certain semantic exceptions, in which grammatical elements become lexical (as discussed in VLEe: lexicalization can occur when a case form becomes fixed, when the plural becomes semantically distinct, and so on). The article focuses on lexicalization related to word formation—cases in which a prefixed verb becomes a semantically independent word. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 6 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 2. LEXICALIZATION OF LITHUANIAN PREFIXED VERBS IN THEORETICAL WORKS AND CRITERIA FOR RECOGNIZING LEXICALIZATION This section examines what theoretical literature says about the lexicalization of derivatives. It surveys possible causes of lexicalization, types of lexicalization in prefixed verbs, and, most importantly, how to recognize this lexicalization. Writing about the lexicalization of derivatives2, S. Ambrazas argues that “in the course of it, derivatives acquire new, usually more specialized lexical meanings that are no longer directly determined by their derivation” (Ambrazas 1990: 60). Thus, S. Ambrazas associates lexicalization with cases in which derivatives cease to be regarded as derivatives, because their lexical meaning becomes less dependent on their derivation. The author discusses types of lexicalization, arguing that lexicalization can be complete or partial. According to him, complete lexicalization occurs when “the derivative’s motivational relationship with the base word disappears entirely,” whereas partial lexicalization occurs “when the derivative’s relationship with the base word remains and the new lexical meaning does not overshadow the original derivational meaning” (Ambrazas 1990: 60–61). An example of complete lexicalization is the word galas. According to S. Ambrazas, in contemporary linguistics this word is no longer considered a derivative, although it is formed from the verb gelti and previously had the derivational meaning “a fatal sting, bite.” As an example of partial lexicalization, the author points to the changed relationship between nouns formed by ending derivation and derivatives with the suffix -imas (–ymas). According to him, many ending derivatives have now acquired specialized meanings and become terms in particular fields; for example, the word mūšis, which had the meaning “beating,” acquired the meaning “battle, combat.” As noted, in the past, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, ending derivatives and derivatives with the suffix -imas (–ymas) denoted processes and states of action (Ambrazas 1990: 61). It can be seen that S. Ambrazas describes a certain gradience: some derivatives may be 2 Although S. Ambrazas analyzes only suffixal and ending derivatives, drawing on them and providing examples, he generalizes the idea without treating prefixal derivatives as exceptions. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 7 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 more lexicalized, and others less so. The linguist also identifies a cause of lexicalization. According to him, lexicalization is a historical process: semantic change occurs gradually, and although semantic connections between the base word and the derivative can now be difficult to discern, or may not be discernible at all (that is, synchronically the form is no longer considered a derivative), semantic connections were once evident. On the basis of S. Ambrazas’s account, it can be argued that the lexicalization of derivatives is historical, that is, derivatives lose their semantic connection with derivational formatives and the base over time. Although formally they look like derivatives, they sometimes have unusual, isolated meanings that cannot be recognized from their derivational formatives and base. Jonas Paulauskas, rašydamas apie priešdėlinius veiksmažodžius (Paulauskas 1958: 327–444), išsamiai aptaria kiekvieno priešdėlio reikšmes (šiame darbe vadovaujamasi požiūriu, kad vienas priešdėlis be veiksmažodžio nevartojamas, todėl tai vadinama priešdėlinių vedinių reikšmėmis). Pavyzdžiui, priešdėlio iš- reikšmė nurodyta tokia: „Priešdėlis iš- turi tik vieną pagrindinę reikšmę – krypties reikšmę, kuri sutampa su prielinksnio iš reikšme“ (Paulauskas 1958: 350). Pora iš pateiktų pavyzdžių: Išgarmėjo jau piršliai iš Onytės; Tik neišdribau iš obelies (1958: 351). Aprašytos priešdėlių reikšmės susijusios su daug skirtingų veiksmažodžių, taigi priešdėlis tokią pat reikšmę suteikia ne vienam veiksmažodžiui, ir visi tie veiksmažodžiai sudaro vieną grupę. E. Jakaitienė’s definition of lexical meaning in VLEₑ states: “A word’s content consists of meanings of varying degrees of abstraction: grammatical (the part of speech to which the word belongs), general (the derivational or semantic groups to which the word belongs), and individual.” Thus, it can be argued that the meaning which a prefix contributes to many different words is general³. J. Paulauskas does not indicate whether 3E. Jakaitienė’s proposed term general meaning should not be confused with the term general (categorical) derivational meaning used by Stasys Keinys (1999: 21) and Vincas Urbutis (1978: 162–164). The latter authors define general (categorical) derivational meaning as the meaning that is formed not by a single derivational formative but by a whole set, “forming words with similar derivational meanings”; for example, “performers of an action and persons or other beings characterized by a quality resulting from that action” are named by various derivatives: rašytojas, nešikas, piršlys, plepys, saugas, etc. (Keinys 1999: 21). S. Keinys (1999: 20–22) and V. Urbutis (1978: 144–244) present this derivational meaning alongside other derivational meanings—specific (individual) and group meanings. When E. Jakaitienė writes about general meaning, she means not general BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 8 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 meanings of derivational or semantic groups, but the meanings of prefixes she describes could be associated with group derivational meanings (cf. Urbutis 1978: 145; Keinys 1999: 21). However, J. Paulauskas also writes about “exceptional meanings” (Paulauskas 1958: 432)—these cases differ from the general prefix meanings described above, since they cannot be associated with more than one verb, and these verbs do not have a general meaning (group derivational meaning). The linguist does not mention the term lexicalization, but the exceptional meanings he describes can be associated with lexicalization. This brings into view one criterion for recognizing lexicalization: a prefixed verb is lexicalized if it does not have a general (group derivational or semantic-group) meaning, that is, if the prefixed derivative cannot be assigned to a group of verbs sharing a particular general meaning. Writing about exceptional meanings, J. Paulauskas argues that “[P]refixes can affect the root meaning of some simple verbs, changing it to a greater or lesser extent” (Paulauskas 1958: 432). Like S. Ambrazas, the author writes that there are two types of these exceptional meanings: “Prefixes give some simple verbs a new, specific nuance that cannot be extended to other verbs” (thus, as noted, verbs formed with them do not have a group derivational meaning), whereas “[I]n other cases, prefixes completely change the root meaning of a simple verb” (Paulauskas 1958: 433). From this emerges another criterion for lexicalization derivational meaning, but meaning as a component of a word’s content. It is true that she mentions that this meaning may also be the meaning of the derivational groups to which a word belongs. Although E. Jakaitienė does not use the terms provided by S. Keinys and V. Urbutis, one could understand her to mean group derivational meaning; that is, the general meaning referred to may be either group derivational meaning or the meaning of semantic groups. V. Urbutis also notes that, in degree of abstraction, group derivational meaning lies between lexical and grammatical meaning (1978: 144–145). Thus, this study draws on E. Jakaitienė’s description of general meaning and S. Keinys’s and V. Urbutis’s description of group derivational meaning (Keinys 1999: 21; Urbutis 1978: 145). As V. Urbutis notes, group derivational meaning is characteristic of “all members of a particular derivational type or of a group of derivatives that are otherwise similar (within a part of speech)” (Urbutis 1978: 145). S. Keinys provides examples of derivatives with the suffix -tojas: dūsautojas, keliautojas, prašytojas, tarnautojas have the group derivational meaning “one who performs the action denoted by the base verb” (Keinys 1999: 21). BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 9 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 recognition criterion: a prefixed verb is lexicalized if it is semantically unrelated to the base verb, i.e. the meaning of the prefixed verb is entirely different from that of the base verb. Thus, synchronically, the prefixed verb should not be considered a derivative—it merely has the form of a derivative (although J. Paulauskas writes that the meaning of the verb root changes, since a root is not used on its own, this article tends to argue that the meaning of the base word is different). As an example of partial lexicalization, J. Paulauskas gives the verb įsakyti: although the meaning of the base verb sakyti is semantically similar to the meaning of the verb įsakyti, the prefix “adds a new nuance—that of command or demand” (Paulauskas 1958: 432). Verbs apleisti, apgauti, nusiminti, and so on, are cited as examples of complete lexicalization (Paulauskas 1958: 433–434). Thus, following J. Paulauskas, one may also argue that lexicalization occurs by degrees. However, J. Paulauskas points out that the boundary is unclear between cases in which the meaning of the base verb changes only slightly (the verb has no general meaning; the prefix merely gives it some meaning, a particular nuance) and cases in which it changes completely (i.e. the verb becomes fully lexicalized and is no longer considered a derivative synchronically) (Paulauskas 1958: 433). It is therefore difficult to establish objective criteria for identifying complete and partial lexicalization. For this reason, in applying criteria for identifying lexicalization, it was decided not to distinguish between complete and partial lexicalization, since in both cases it involves certain exceptions to the rules (what J. Paulauskas calls exceptional meanings). When applying these criteria, it should be borne in mind that a prefixed verb is lexicalized if no semantic connection with the base verb can be discerned; where such a connection can be discerned, the prefixed verb is considered lexicalized if it has no general meaning. J. Paulauskas also mentions another criterion for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs—the use of two prefixes: “The second prefix is added to such prefixed verbs whose first prefix is closely fused with the verb and forms a word with a new BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 10 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 meaning.” One exception is nevertheless noted—the verb išpasakyti; in this case, the verb pasakyti is not lexicalized in relation to the base verb sakyti, although it can take an additional prefix (Paulauskas 1958: 418). The author observes that, in general, those prefixed verbs that are “widely used and have many meanings” are lexicalized (Paulauskas 1958: 434). Writing about exceptional meanings (i.e. lexicalization), J. Paulauskas also mentions verbs used only with prefixes, and gives the examples įprasti, išvysti, nustebti, nusterti, panižti, persigąsti, perprasti, prilygti, privalėti, suvokti, suprasti, užrėkti, užmiršti, and so on (Paulauskas 1958: 435). It is noted that in dialects some of these verbs may be used without a prefix, for example: Ar nesikėliau rytelį, ar aš nedirbau darbelio, kad taip tetušėliui bodo? Thus, one may conclude that prefixed verbs are considered lexicalized if their base verbs are not used without prefixes in the present-day language (i.e. synchronically, they are not considered derivatives). This is another criterion for identifying lexicalization. Writing about the lexicalization of prefixed verbs, A. Paulauskienė likewise relates it to the meanings of the prefix (affix), rather than to the meanings of prefixed verbs (words with affixes): “the semantics of a prefix (like that of any other word part) has an individual and a general aspect. The individual meaning is incorporated into the meaning of a specific derivative, while subclasses within a class are formed on the basis of the general meaning” (Paulauskienė 1994: 34). It is argued that “[w]hen the meaning of an affix (derivational formative) in a word’s structure is individual and cannot be extended to other cases, we say that the affix is lexicalized, i.e. its meaning has become inseparably integrated into the individual meaning of the word; on this basis, groups of words cannot be established <...>” (1994: 51). The point is that the meaning of the affix has become inseparably integrated into the lexical meaning of the word. As defined in the VLE entry on lexical meaning BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351–7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 11 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 definition, this is “the individual part of a word’s content”4. According to A. Paulauskienė, a derivational affix usually changes only the most general meaning of a word, but sometimes a greater difference in lexical meaning arises; an affix can sometimes “give a word an individual meaning that cannot be extended to other cases, i.e. it can become lexicalized” (Paulauskienė 1994: 37). The verb įrodyti is given as an example of lexicalization. Thus, on the basis of A. Paulauskienė, the aforementioned criterion for identifying lexicalization could be confirmed: a prefixed verb is lexicalized if it has no general meaning. However, it is important to emphasize that every verb has a lexical meaning (whether lexicalized or not) and that, although no lexicalized verb has a group derivational meaning, verbs associated with partial lexicalization (which are considered derivatives) may have an individual derivational meaning, whereas in cases of complete lexicalization, a verb has no individual derivational meaning and is no longer considered a derivative. A. Ružė (2000), panašiai kaip ir J. Paulauskas (1958), vardija bendrąsias priešdėlinių vedinių reikšmes. Kaip nurodo A. Ružė, savo darbe jis mėgina „pagal priešdėlius pateikti būdingiausias priešdėlinių veiksmažodžių semantines grupes“ (Ružė 2000: 160). Taigi, vardijamos ne grupinės darybos reikšmės, o semantinių grupių reikšmės, kurios irgi yra bendrosios. Pavyzdžiui, minima, kad priešdėlio nu- vediniai „rodo veiksmo kryptį nuo ko nors“ (nulipti, nušliuožti, nužengti ir t. t.), gali žymėti veiksmo kiekį ar intensyvumą (nugerti, numenkinti, nurausti) 4 Lexical meaning should not be confused with individual derivational meaning. As noted above, there is a group derivational meaning that makes it possible to link different derivatives into a single group, but each derivative also has an individual derivational meaning, which differs from the group derivational meaning in that it “indicates an individual feature characteristic only of that derivative”; for example, mokytojas—“a person who teaches” (Urbutis 1978: 145). V. Urbutis explains the difference between lexical and derivational meaning: “Derivational meaning is only an approximate semantic schema indicated by a word’s structure. One can speak of knowing a word’s actual lexical meaning only when one knows what the word is customarily used to denote” (Urbutis 1978: 146). One example showing that individual derivational meaning and lexical meaning are not the same is the word kirstuvas: this word has one derivational meaning—“a tool for cutting (that with which one cuts)”—but several lexical meanings, for example, “a tool for chopping vegetables and their leaves” and “a tool for cutting ice or frozen ground; a pick” (Urbutis 1978: 146–147). BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351–7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 12 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 or an endpoint (to varnish, to drown, to fall silent). It is also mentioned that for some prefixed derivatives, “the lexical meaning, or one of the lexical meanings, is individual. Sometimes it differs markedly, or entirely, from the lexical meaning of the base verbs.” Therefore, some prefixed derivatives cannot be assigned to the listed semantic groups—their lexical meanings are individual. Thus, A. Ružė’s work confirms two criteria for identifying lexicalization: first, a prefixed verb is lexicalized if it does not have a general meaning, that is, if it cannot be associated with other derivatives by derivational or semantic groups; second, a prefixed verb is lexicalized if it has no semantic links to the base verb. The author also notes that the base verbs of some derivatives are no longer used (Ružė 2000: 160), which also confirms another criterion for identifying lexicalization distinguished here: a prefixed verb is lexicalized if its base verb is no longer used. Thus, linguists essentially agree on the lexicalization of prefixed verbs: it is understood as a historical process in which, over time, the semantic links between a prefixed verb and its base verb disappear, and the prefixed verb has no general (derivational or semantic group) meaning. Although not everyone uses this term, lexicalization is associated with exceptional, individual meanings. The lexicalization of prefixed verbs is also discussed in grammars. First of all, it is important to note that they identify 12 prefixes used with verbs: ap- (api-), at- (ati-), į-, iš-, nu-, pa-, par-, per-, pra-, pri-, su-, už- (LKG 1971: 269; DLKG 2005: 402). Prefixes formed from particles are not included, for example, the prefix ne-. Accordingly, the author of this article also searched for instances of lexicalization using derivatives of only these 12 prefixes. In DLKG, in the section Prefixed Derivatives, prepared by E. Jakaitienė, it is noted that there are cases in which a prefix “essentially changes the lexical meaning of the base word”; such “derivatives denote a new concept, and it is difficult to discern its connection with the concept expressed by the base verb” (DLKG 1994: 402). Thus, cases are mentioned in which base words are so closely connected with a prefix that synchronically they are no longer considered BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 13 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 (or can scarcely be considered) derivatives—they are regarded not as the result of word formation, but as semantically independent words that have the form of prefixed verbs. Examples are given: apgauti, aptekti, atrodyti, atstoti, įstengti, įmanyti, išmanyti, ištikti, nutuokti, nudėti, pagauti, pavydėti, perspėti, perdėti, parduoti, prarasti, praversti, priklausyti, sugauti, sutikti, užtekti, užgauti (DLKG 2005: 402). Alongside such exceptional, lexicalized cases, this DLKG section separately identifies the derivational categories of seven prefixed verbs (DLKG 402–406). In LKG, the section Prefixed Verbs, prepared by J. Paulauskas, notes that “some meanings of prefixed derivatives are very widespread, that is, they occur in many prefixed verbs” (LKG 1971: 270). It also lists the general (derivational group) meanings of prefixes (as mentioned, this article adopts a different view); for example, one meaning of the prefix pra- is that “the action denoted by the base word takes place past something” (LKG 1971: 285). The verbs praeiti, pravažiuoti, praberti are cited as having this meaning. It is also stated that all prefixes can alter the meaning of verbs individually; such cases are associated with lexicalization (LKG 1971: 270). It is indicated that these verbs have no general (derivational or semantic group) meaning and are individual cases (although, as emerged from other works, all derivatives, both lexicalized and non-lexicalized, have an individual derivational meaning). LKG states that such prefixed verbs can be either perfective or imperfective, and gives examples of perfective prefixed verbs such as apgauti, apsimesti, įveikti, įgyti, išsižadėti, and imperfective ones such as apsimokėti, atsiprašyti, atrodyti, atsid užti, nutuokti, numanyti, and so on (LKG 1971: 271). It can be argued that grammars treat lexicalization cases as exceptions to the rules, since they are called individual, exceptional cases and are not assigned to verb groups with general meanings. When prefixes alter the meanings of several verbs in similar ways, the verbs containing them are not considered lexicalized. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 14 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 As becomes clear, verbs are considered lexicalized when they lack general (derivational or semantic group) meanings, that is, when they have only an individual derivational meaning or no derivational meaning at all. Thus, to conclude that a prefixed verb is lexicalized, it is necessary to check whether it has a general meaning. This can be checked on the basis of the information provided when describing the general meanings of prefixed derivatives. LKG and J. Paulauskas’s work (1958) suggest that verbs with general meanings of prefixed derivatives can sometimes be distinguished by grammatical information. For example, when LKG mentions one meaning of the prefix ap-—“the meaning of encompassing many objects”—it states that prefixed derivatives with this meaning are transitive (LKG 1971: 272–273). It is emphasized that they are transitive even when the base words are intransitive. One example of this general meaning is: News of the unexpected return of Petras Janulis and his sudden death aplėkė the whole parish (LKG 1971: 272–273). It follows that if a particular derivative with the prefix ap- is not transitive, it does not have this general meaning. Another example from J. Paulauskas’s work (1958) is the prefix pa- and its general meaning: “The prefix pa- denotes movement in a direction beneath an object” (Paulauskas 1958: 367). It is stated that “[I]n a sentence, the preposition po, which highlights this meaning, is usually used” (Paulauskas 1958: 367). One example of this general meaning is: The hawk crawled po under the wing, while the rooster walks (Paulauskas 1958: 367). It follows that if a derivative does not take a prepositional phrase with the preposition po, it probably does not have this general meaning. These publications, LKG and J. Paulauskas’s work (1958), provide more examples with various prefixes. Thus, grammatical information can be used to identify whether a particular prefixed derivative has any general meaning and, if it does not, to conclude that it is lexicalized. Accordingly, grammatical valency and general meanings can serve as criteria for identifying lexicalization. In summary, the lexicalization of prefixed verbs can be said to consist of exceptional, individual cases. It is a phenomenon in which a prefixed verb becomes semantically BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351–7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 15 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 an independent word, rather than the result of word formation. Certain criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs can be summarized: a prefixed verb is considered lexicalized if it 1) does not have a general (derivational or semantic-group) meaning, i.e. it cannot be assigned to a group of verbs with a particular general meaning (verbs with a particular general meaning may exhibit a certain degree of grammatical combinability; thus, grammatical combinability can be used to determine whether a prefixed verb has any general meaning, and, if it has none, to conclude that it is lexicalized); 2) has no semantic connections with the base verb; 3) the base verb is not used in the contemporary language; 4) can take an additional prefix. 3. APPLYING CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING THE LEXICALIZATION OF PREFIXED VERBS IN A CORPUS This section describes how the criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs derived from the theoretical discussion were tested in corpora. As became clear, evidence of lexicalization must be sought in contemporary rather than earlier language, because lexicalization is a historical process: words become lexicalized over time, and, from the perspective of an earlier stage of the language, certain words may appear not to be lexicalized even though they have become lexicalized in the contemporary language. The criteria for identifying lexicalization were applied to two corpora—the DLKT (a large-scale corpus containing 140,921,288 words, which makes it possible to find many usage examples and reflects the contemporary language) BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 16 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 and the MATAS corpus (a morphologically annotated corpus comprising 1.6 million words, in which grammatical information that may be relevant to identifying lexicalization is clearly represented). As J. Paulauskas notes, words that are widely used and have many meanings are most often lexicalized; therefore, the criteria for lexicalization were tested using a selection of the most frequently used verbs (apibūdinti, atlikti, išleisti, nustatyti, parduoti, pradėti, priimti, sudaryti, užimti). This article illustrates the test with four of the verbs examined—apibūdinti, išleisti, nustatyti, parduoti. The Frequency Dictionary of Written Lithuanian (hereafter DRLKŽ), compiled using a morphologically annotated corpus of 1 million words, indicates that the verb nustatyti is the most frequent verb with the prefix nu- (ranked 107th by frequency), the verb išleisti is the most frequent verb with the prefix iš- (ranked 204th by frequency), the verb parduoti is the most frequent verb with the prefix par- (ranked 725th by frequency), and the verb apibūdinti is the second most frequent verb with the prefix api- (ranked 602nd by frequency). It should be borne in mind that a verb may be lexicalized in all or only some of its meanings. For example, the verb pradėti is lexicalized only in the sense ‘to begin doing something, to initiate’, as indicated in the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (hereafter DŽ7i), and is not lexicalized as a verb meaning ‘to miss when trying to put something in place’ (DŽ7i); the verb nutuokti, which is listed in DŽ7i with one meaning, ‘to intuit, understand’, is lexicalized when used in this sense. However, this article does not aim to analyze the meanings of the verbs and determine which meanings are lexicalized; rather, it uses the verbs mentioned above to illustrate how criteria for identifying lexicalization might be applied in a corpus. The first criterion applied is that a prefixed verb is lexicalized if its base verb is not used in the contemporary language. This criterion is convenient to apply first because it is easy to check: all that is needed is as large a corpus as possible. It is established, for example, that the verb apibūdinti (whose meaning, as indicated in DŽ7i, is ‘to describe characteristic features, to characterize’) occurs in the DLKT BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 17 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 14,958 times. Only two instances of the use of the base verb to describe were found in the corpus: Vaižgantas presents a list of all the characters, listed under the heading “Descriptive person”; particularly vividly, he described in a wholly biased manner described leaders and politicians. The first usage instance is from an older form of the language: it is part of the title of Vaižgantas’s text. As mentioned in Section 2, lexicalization should be assessed on the basis of facts from the contemporary language, not an older form of the language. Given the size of the corpus, the two usage instances are statistically insignificant (only two were found, whereas instances of prefixed verbs are far more numerous). Thus, it can be argued that the verb to describe is lexicalized, because its base verb to describe is not used in contemporary language (the verb is no longer considered a derivative in contemporary language). The second criterion applied is the ability of a prefixed verb to take a second prefix. As already discussed, a prefixed verb is considered lexicalized if it can take another prefix. This criterion is convenient to apply second, because it is also easy to check. Although failure to establish lexicalization using this criterion does not mean that the verb is not lexicalized, the criterion is important because it makes it possible to automate the process of identifying lexicalization: there is a very high likelihood that two prefixes will be identified automatically. Like the first criterion, this one should be checked in a large corpus. For example, the following derivatives of the verb parduoti (base word: duoti) occur in DLKT: išparduoti, išsiparduoti, perparduoti (the derivative išparduoti is also mentioned in DRLKŽ). Thus, it can be claimed that the verb parduoti is lexicalized with respect to its base word duoti (synchronically, it is no longer considered a derivative), since it can take another prefix. If lexicalization was not detected after checking these two criteria, a further criterion focused on the general meaning was applied. If a prefixed verb has a general meaning, it must have semantic links with the base verb (synchronically, it is a derivative): the prefix adds a semantic component to the base verb, but changes its meaning only slightly. If there are no semantic links between the prefixed verb and the base verb, it can be claimed that the prefixed verb BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 18 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 has no general meaning. Thus, it is important to check whether the prefixed and base verbs have semantic links. When making this check, it is worth considering the verb’s usage environment5. For example, if the lexical collocability of a prefixed verb used with a particular meaning differs greatly from the lexical collocability of all the meanings of the base verb, it can be claimed that the prefixed verb is semantically very distant from the meanings of the base verb. For instance, the verb nustatyti, used in the sense ‘establish by confirming with facts, clarify’ (DŽ7i), tends to take nouns belonging to an abstract lexical-semantic group: By examining the eyes, we can establish eye redness and dryness (DLKT). In this case, the collocates taken are redness and dryness. The verb nustatyti, used in the sense ‘mark out or designate in advance’ (DŽ7i), also tends to take nouns belonging to an abstract lexical-semantic group: The procedure for testing veterinary medicines is established by the State Veterinary Service (DLKT). In this case, the collocate taken is procedure. That the verb nustatyti, used with these meanings, tends to take nouns belonging to an abstract lexical-semantic group was established by examining and comparing, in the MATAS corpus, the concordances of the prefixed verb nustatyti and its base verb statyti. Analysis of the concordance of the base verb statyti showed that it tends to take concrete nouns: He places a bottle in the corner, blinks, wipes his eyes; Lithuanians abroad build residential and industrial facilities; mopeds and bicycles may be parked in two rows (DLKT). In this case, the collocates taken are a bottle, residential and industrial facilities, mopeds and bicycles. Instances in which the verb statyti takes nouns belonging to an abstract lexical-semantic group 5 The fact that word meanings can be determined from their usage environment has been discussed, for example, by Rūta Marcinkevičienė: to understand a word, one must take its usage context into account, since one cannot know what a word means until one has heard it or read it in a text (Marcinkevičienė 2011: 9). John Sinclair wrote about the extended unit of meaning: most often, it is not a word that has meaning, but a linguistic unit larger than a word (Sinclair 1996: 114, cited in Marcinkevičienė 2000: 42). BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 19 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 belonging to this group were not found. Since the lexical collocability of the verb nustatyti, used in the senses ‘establish by confirming with facts, clarify’ and ‘mark out or designate in advance’, differs greatly from the lexical collocability of the base verb, it can be claimed that the verb nustatyti, used with these meanings, is semantically very distant from the base verb and is lexicalized. Thus, when searching for instances of lexicalization and assessing the lexical collocability of verbs, it is useful to consider lexical-semantic groups, although sometimes collocates must also be taken into account. One example is the verb išleisti, used in the sense ‘educate, train’ (DŽ7i). Few examples of the verb išleisti used in this sense occurred in the MATAS corpus, so its concordances and those of the base word leisti were checked in DLKT. Based on DRLKŽ, the three most frequent forms of the verb išleisti were selected—išleido, išleisti, išleista—and their concordances were compared with the corresponding forms of the base word—leido, leisti, leista. It emerged that the verb išleisti, used in the sense ‘educate, train’, takes nouns belonging to the lexical-semantic group of people, as does the base verb leisti when used with certain meanings. Nevertheless, the verb išleisti very often tends to take the collocates graduates and cohort: By 1940, Vytautas Magnus University had graduated 3,790 graduates; on December 16, 1919, the military aviation school graduated its first and last cohort (DLKT). The verb leisti does not tend to take collocates of this kind. Thus, sometimes it is not enough to consider lexical-semantic groups: lexicalization can be identified through collocates. This criterion for identification can be considered important, but subjective: when analyzing a corpus, one must select what will be used to check lexical collocability—lexical-semantic groups (and, if so, which ones) or collocates. If semantic links between a prefixed verb and its base verb are found, and the lexical collocability of the prefixed and base verbs is similar, this still does not mean that the prefixed verb is not lexicalized—it may lack a general meaning (a derivational group meaning or a semantic-group meaning). Thus, further checks are needed. One method is to consider the grammatical BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 20 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 valency. Verbs with a particular general meaning are characterized by a particular grammatical valency. Thus, it is important to determine what grammatical valency is characteristic of verbs with a particular general meaning. If a verb has grammatical valency different from that of verbs with the general meaning, it can be argued that it does not have that general meaning (it may have another general meaning or none of the general meanings) and is lexicalized. For example, the verb nustatyti, used in the sense of “adjust,” tends to take an accusative object belonging to the lexical-semantic class of things: you can easily adjust precise astronomical instruments; put things in their places and adjust clocks (DLKT). An examination of the general meanings of verbs with the prefix nu- shows that derivatives with this prefix tend to take nouns belonging to the lexical-semantic group of objects: “Derivatives with the prefix nu- denote the extension in space or over a surface of the action expressed by the base word.” (LKG 1971: 208). However, when listing verbs with this prefix, LKG gives as an example With pine needles, twigs and cones the sun bakes a useless area covered (LKG 1971: 208). This shows that nouns belonging to the lexical-semantic class of things are attached to the derivative nukloti in the instrumental, not the accusative case. The verb nustatyti, in one of its senses, does have this general meaning—not “adjust,” but “lay out a lot of” (DŽ₇i). DŽ₇i gives the following examples: Set the table with food and, when the verb is used reflexively, He covered all the corners with flowerpots. An example found in DLKT is The tables are covered with champagne and cognac. As can be seen, when the verb nustatyti is used in the sense “lay out a lot of,” it takes nouns belonging to the lexical-semantic class of things in the instrumental case. It can therefore be argued that it has the general meaning described in LKG: “Derivatives with the prefix nu- denote the spreading of the action expressed by the base word over a space or across the surface of something” (LKG 1971: 208). When the verb nustatyti is used in the sense “adjust,” it tends to take nouns belonging to the lexical-semantic class of things in the accusative case; therefore, it does not have this general meaning. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 21 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 This is how it was determined whether the verb has at least one general meaning. Derivatives with a particular prefix may have more than one general meaning, so it is necessary to check whether the prefixed verb lacks all of them. If no general meaning is identified, the verb is considered lexicalized. This leads to the conclusion that the verb nustatyti, used in the sense “adjust,” is lexicalized. This is a more objective criterion for identifying lexicalization and is convenient to apply to corpus data. Thus, the criteria for identifying lexicalization in a corpus can be applied in the following order (if lexicalization is established, there is no need to apply the next criterion). First, it is checked whether the base verb of the prefixed verb in question is attested; if it is not, the prefixed verb is considered lexicalized. Next, it is checked whether the prefixed verb can take another prefix; if such instances are found, the derivative with one prefix is considered lexicalized. Then, it is checked whether the lexical valency of the prefixed verb is similar to that of the base verb; if the valencies differ, the prefixed verb is considered lexicalized. Finally, grammatical valency is used to check whether the prefixed verb has any general meaning. If its grammatical valency differs from that of other verbs with general meanings, the prefixed verb is considered lexicalized. CONCLUSIONS Lexicalization is a broad-ranging phenomenon that encompasses more than one level of language and is not understood in entirely uniform ways. The lexicalization of prefixed verbs is associated with the semantic autonomy and individual character of the derivative’s meaning: a verb lexicalizes when it becomes a semantically autonomous word and is no longer merely the result of word formation, or when it has only BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 22 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 an individual derivational meaning, but no general meaning (of a derivational group or semantic groups). The article describes the criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs that emerged from theoretical studies, and how these criteria were applied to corpus data. An analysis of the lexicalization of 9 prefixed verbs (apibūdinti, atlikti, išleisti, nustatyti, parduoti, pradėti, priimti, sudaryti, užimti) on the basis of two corpora, together with a description in this article of the lexicalization tendencies of 4 of them (nustatyti, išleisti, parduoti, apibūdinti), reveals a certain order for applying the lexicalization criteria: if lexicalization is identified using one criterion, there is no need to apply another. First, a large corpus was checked to determine whether the base verb of the prefixed verb was in use: if it was not, the prefixed verb was considered lexicalized. This criterion is convenient to apply first because it is easy to check. Next, a large corpus was checked to determine whether the prefixed verb could take an additional prefix: if it could, the prefixed verb with a single prefix was considered lexicalized (the exception is the verb išpasakyti). This criterion is also convenient to apply because it, too, is easy to check. After that, it was checked whether the prefixed verb had semantic connections with the base verb: if it did not, the prefixed verb was deemed lexicalized. In the corpus, semantic connections were checked by comparing lexical collocability: the concordances of the prefixed verb and the base verb were analyzed, taking into account whether the prefixed verb and its base verb take words belonging to the same lexical-semantic groups and the same collocates. Although this criterion for identifying lexicalization is somewhat subjective, it is very important. Checking it takes a considerable amount of time (substantial concordances must be reviewed), so it was applied third. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 23 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 Finally, it was checked whether the prefixed verb had a general meaning: if it had no general meanings, the verb was considered lexicalized. This was checked with reference to grammatical collocability: if the grammatical collocability of the prefixed verb differed from that of verbs with general meanings, the verb was considered lexicalized. This is a more objective criterion and is convenient to apply, but takes a considerable amount of time (a large number of concordance lines must be reviewed). Although these criteria for identifying lexicalization can be applied to corpora, it emerged that different criteria may be needed to identify the lexicalization of each verb; therefore, there are no universal criteria. There may also be cases in which lexicalization is not identified on the basis of these criteria (additional criteria may be needed to identify that a prefixed verb has no general meaning). In such cases, lexicalization can be investigated outside the corpus, or one can examine what other criteria might be applicable to corpus data. Research into criteria for identifying the lexicalization of prefixed verbs is useful to the study of semantics. In this study, the criteria are systematized and described; theoretical publications have devoted more attention to general meanings than to exceptional cases of lexicalization. Further research could examine other cases of lexicalization (for example, the fossilization of case forms, the semantic separation of plural forms, etc.). ŠALTINIAI DLKT – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas. Prieiga internete: http://tekstynas.vdu.lt/tekstynas [žiūrėta 2019 m. rugpjūčio mėn.–2020 m. gegužės mėn.]. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 24 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 DRLKŽ – Dažninis rašytinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. A. Utka, Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, 2009. Prieiga internete: http://donelaitis.vdu.lt/publikacijos/Dazninis_zodynas.pdf. DŽ7i – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas (internetinis), vyr. red. S. Keinys, 7-as patais. ir papild. leid., Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2015. Prieiga internete: http://lkiis.lki.lt/dabartinis. MATAS – Lithuanian Morphologically Annotated Corpus – MATAS v1.0. E. Rimkutė, A. Bielinskienė, V. Dadurkevičius, J. Kovalevskaitė, A. Utka, L. Boizou, 2019: Prieiga internete: https://clarin.vdu.lt/xmlui/handle/20.500.11821/33. LITERATŪRA Ambrazas Saulius 1990: Lietuvių kalbos istorinės žodžių darybos principai. – Lituanistica 1, 59–65. Booij Geert 2005: Grammar of Words: An Introduction to Linguistic Morphology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cvilikaitė Jurgita 2005: Leksinės ertmės: anglų kalbos „A Pet“ ir jo lietuviškų atitikmenų analizė. – Žmogus kalbos erdvėje: mokslinių straipsnių rinkinys 4, Kaunas: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 34–46. Prieiga internete: https://etalpykla.lituanistikadb.lt/fedora/objects/LT-LDB-0001:J.04~2005~1367153653318/datastreams/DS.002.0.01.ARTIC/content. DLKG – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika, red. V. Ambrazas. 4-as patais. leid., Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2005. Girčienė Jurgita 2012: Naujoji lietuvių kalbos leksika: teorija ir praktika: metodinė priemonė, Vilnius: Edukologija. Prieiga internete: http://talpykla.elaba.lt/elaba-fedora/objects/elaba:4331816/datastreams/MAIN/content. Jancaitė Laima 2020: Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacijos atpažinimas: magistro darbas. Vadovė prof. habil. dr. Rūta Petrauskaitė, Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 25 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 Keinys Stasys 1999: Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba, Šiauliai: Šiaulių universiteto leidykla. Gaivenis Kazimieras, Keinys Stasys 1990: Kalbotyros terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Šviesa. LKG 1971 – Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 2: Morfologija, vyr. red. K. Ulvydas, Vilnius: Mintis. Marcinkevičienė Rūta 2000: Tekstynų lingvistika: teorija ir praktika. – Darbai ir dienos 24, 7–64. Prieiga internete: http://donelaitis.vdu.lt/publikacijos/marcinkeviciene.pdf. Marcinkevičienė Rūta 2011: Žodžio reikšmė. Žodynai ir tekstynai, Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Prieiga internete: https://www.vdu.lt/cris/bitstream/20.500.12259/208/1/ISBN9789955127543.pdf. Paulauskas Jonas 1958: Veiksmažodžių priešdėlių funkcijos dabartinėje lietuvių literatūrinėje kalboje. – Literatūra ir kalba 3, 301–453. Paulauskienė Aldona 1994: Lietuvių kalbos morfologija. Paskaitos lituanistams, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla. Ružė Albertas 2000: Priešdėlinių veiksmažodžių semantika. – Paradigmatika, sintagmatika ir kalbos funkcijos: tarptautinės mokslinės konferencijos pranešimų medžiaga, Kaunas: Vilniaus universitetas, 160–162. Urbutis Vincas 1978: Žodžių darybos teorija, Vilnius: Mokslas. VLEe – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (elektroninis variantas), Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras. Prieiga internete: https://www.vle.lt. Gauta 2020 06 02 Priimta 2020 10 30 BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 26 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 A LEXICALIZATION OF PREFIXED LITHUANIAN VERBS Summary A lexicalization of prefixed verbs is a phenomenon when a verb becomes semantically independent word, and its meaning is not related to the formant and its root word. Lexicalization is related to individual, exceptional cases (exceptions to the rules). Therefore, it is important to investigate and describe lexicalized words for lexicographers who write corpus-based dictionaries, computerized analysis of Lithuanian language, learners of Lithuanian and the science of semantics. The aim of this article is to identify the criteria of identification of lexicalization of prefixed verbs and to adapt it to the corpus analysis. First of all, the common concept of lexicalization was described in order to show a broader context of this phenomenon. The criteria of identification of lexicalization of prefixed Lithuanian verbs then were identified by analyzing theoretical works. Finally, it was demonstrated how the criteria of identification of lexicalization could be applied in corpus analysis with four common Lithuanian verbs used in certain meanings (nustatyti, apibūdinti, parduoti, išleisti). In this research 9 common Lithuanian verbs in total were analyzed in two corpora: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas, i.e. Corpus of Present Day Lithuanian and Morfologiškai anotoutas tekstynas, i.e. POS Tagged Corpus of Lithuanian. The results showed that the criteria of identification of lexicalization of prefixed Lithuanian words should be applied in particular order. Firstly, it should be checked in a big corpus whether the root word of prefixed word is used: if it is not used, then the prefixed verb is supposed to be lexicalized and no more criteria should be applied. Secondly, it is important to check whether prefixed verb could be used with one more prefix: if it can be used with one more prefix, then the prefixed verb with one prefix is supposed to be lexicalized and no more criteria should be applied. BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204 LAIMA JANCAITĖ. Priešdėlinių lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių leksikalizacija | 27 doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2020.93.05 Thirdly, it is important to check whether prefixed verb with particular meaning is semantically related to its root verb (in corpus, this criteria was applied by comparing lexical valency of prefixed verb and its root verb; if lexical valency was very different, it was stated that the prefixed verb and its root verb are not semantically related and prefixed verb is supposed to be lexicalized; therefore, no more criteria should be applied). Finally, it was checked whether prefixed verb had a common meaning or just individual (common meaning is related to the group of different derivatives). If prefixed verb does not have a common meaning, then it is supposed to be lexicalized. In corpus analysis this criteria can be checked by analyzing grammatical valency because verbs that have the same common meaning are associated with the same grammatical valency (if prefixed verb has a different grammatical valency than verbs that have common meanings, it can be stated that prefixed verb does not have any common meaning, only an individual one). The criteria of identification of lexicalization of prefixed verbs were successfully applied in corpus analysis and the results showed that the lexicalization of every verb can be detected by using different criteria. KEYWORDS: lexicalization, word formation, prefixed verbs, corpus linguistics, semantics, Lithuanian language. LAIMA JANCAITĖ Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas Humanitarinių mokslų fakulteto Lituanistikos katedra V. Putvinskio g. 23-206, LT-44243 Kaunas [email protected] BENDRINĖ KALBA 93 (2020) http://journals.lki.lt/bendrinekalba ISSN 2351-7204