Dar kartą apie Didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašo žodyno klaidas: semantizmai

BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ Vytautas the Great University ONCE AGAIN ABOUT THE GREAT LANGUAGE ERRORS LIST DICTIONARY ERROR: SEMANTISMS KEY WORDS: language culture, Lithuanian language, semantics, list of major language errors, textbook of contemporary Lithuanian language, motivated and unmotivated usage. 1. Introduction The article aims to discuss the relevance of the List of Major Language Errors (hereinafter – MLEF) approved by the State Lithuanian Language Commission (hereinafter – VLKK) in 1997. As stated on the ICC website1, this is one of the most well-known decisions of the ICC. The CFS contains lexical, word formation, morphological, syntactic errors and their corrections, as well as minimum pronunciation requirements. Let us focus on one part of the CFS – lexical errors (the CFS refers to them as dictionary errors). In 2014, the first two subparagraphs of the CFS (1.1 “Non-translatable foreign words and their derivatives” and 1.2 “Non-used new foreign words”) were declared invalid (see Urnėžiūtė 2014 and information on the VLKK website). Therefore, the lexical errors in the CFS are divided into two parts: 1) non-presentable values and 2) errors in the meaning of words and compounds. It is safe to say that both of these groups of lexical errors are relevant to language users and dangerous.2 This second (and last) article of the cycle on CFS dictionary errors (the first one discussed the use of non-presentable verbs, see Rimkutė 2014) focuses on errors in the meaning of words and combinations, so-called semantics; the results of this study compared with the data on non-reportable valuations presented in the previous article. The semantics were studied in one source reflecting the current language – the Textbook of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (hereinafter – Textbook). It should be mentioned immediately that the Textbook is not the most suitable source of analysis, because many of its texts are (or should be) edited. The fact that in the Textus Receptus there are values and semantics that cannot be presented in the CFS (as well as other language errors) leads to several conclusions: 1) some of the texts in the Textbook were published before the CFS was approved (the oldest texts in the Textbook were published in 1992), so the non-presentable values and semantics found in them cannot be considered major errors (they are simple language errors); 1 Internet access: http://www.vlkk.lt/aktualiausi-temai/didziosios-klaidos. 2 Of course, we should also write and discuss about the language errors of other languages, because they are abundant even in academic language, other-news/academic-language-study-shows-low-probability-level). plg. VLKK tyrimą dėl vadovėlių, magistro darbų ir disertacijų santraukų kalbos (žr. http://www.vlkk.lt/naujienos/ BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Again about the dictionary errors of the list of major language errors: semantics | 2 2) the use of some incorrect words is motivated: language users deliberately made language errors (for more details see 3.4); 3) the authors of texts and language editors do not recognize and are unable to correct unpresentable values and semantics. The second chapter discusses what words are considered semantics, the third chapter presents a study of semantics presented in the CFS and found in the Textbook, taking into account the frequency of semantics, their use in parts of the Textbook, in texts of a certain period and the motivation of their use. 2. INTERPRETATION OF SEMANTISMS AND METHODOLOGY OF STUDY This section describes in more detail the semantics presented in the CFS and found in the Textbook, i.e. those Lithuanian words or combinations of words that acquire new meanings due to the influence of other languages and those meanings are considered non-normative. According to Aldona Paulauskienė (2000: 76), the secondary meanings of the word are usually affected, while the main meaning is not affected. Aldonas Pupkis (2005: 263) also refers to semantics as semantic, meaning evaluations, semantics. Their appearance in the Lithuanian language is not only due to inaccurate translation, but also due to careless use (for example, by confusing the meanings of two words: company and campaign, formation and pharmaceuticals). Jonas Šukys (2003: 51) mentions several Lithuanian semantics: abuojas, -a (non-presentable meaning "indifferent, -a"), aplamai (non-presentable meaning "generally"), berods (non-presentable meaning "it seems, probably, apparently"), gangreit (non-presentable meaning "quite soon"), tūlas, -a (non-presentable meaning "someone, -ia"), ainis (non-presentable meaning "grandfather, grandfather-in-law"). As can be seen from the examples, these are misunderstood dialect words. However, most of the times the unrepresentable meanings are due to the influence of other languages: formerly due to Russian, in recent years due to English. Lionginas Pažūsis (2014: 21–30) mentions false friends of the translator or false equivalents, e.g. metropolitenas should not be used in the meaning of “capital, big city”, prezidentas should not be used in the meaning of “president”; criticizes the recently widespread meaning of harmonize as “to arrange, to harmonize”; it is recommended not to use the word ambition in the meaning of “aim, goal”, pilot – in the meaning of “primary, initial”. In English, the term is also used for the non-English-speaking population of the United States (2001). These words can be considered new semantics. Several new semantics arising from English are discussed in recent articles by Dalia Gedzevičienė (2014), Rasuolė Vladarskienė (2013). Perhaps the best known example of this is the DSM-IV. Other authors of publications on language culture provide more semantics – in their works you can find several dozen semantics not specified in the CFS. For example, A. Paulauskienė (2000) considers the following words as semantics: atmintis (meaning “remembrance”), dirbti (meaning “to act” when speaking not about a person), eilė (meaning “many”, “many”, “not one”), galvoti (meaning “to think”), naudoti (meaning “to use”), pavogti (meaning “to seduce”, “to impress”), pasisakyti (meaning “to speak in public”), pergyventi (meaning “to be moved”, “to be eager”), perlenkti J. Šukys (2003), be jau minėtų lietuviškų semantizmų, nagrinėja ir daugiau netinkama (meaning “to exaggerate”, “to multiply”) and others. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Again about the list of major language errors in the dictionary: semantics | 3 shirts“); sing (meaning “to perform a hymn”), increase (meaning “to increase”), given, -a/-oji (meaning “this”, “has”, “known”), once again (meaning “again”, “again”), native, -oji (when not talking about the place of birth), especially (meaning “especially”); irreversible, irreversibly (meaning "uncorrigible", "final"), constant, -i (meaning "permanent", "frequent"), agree (meaning "to find", "to notice", "to detect"), fresh, -ia (meaning "new"), etc. In one of the newest textbooks on language culture – Redagavimo pradmenys (Basic Editing Principles), published in 2013, Nijolė Linkevičienė considers the following words as semantics: anksti (meaning “well”3), apvalus (meaning “round”), atpigintas (meaning “lower, reduced prices”), dėkingas (meaning “favorable”, “suitable”), dvigubas (meaning “dual”), išgyvenimai (meaning “feelings”), koks (meaning “which”), matymas (meaning “attitude”), medžiaga (meaning “articles”, “reports”, “reports” and so on), padėvėtas (meaning “used”), pakankamai (meaning “enough”), praktiškai (meaning “almost”), prasmė (meaning “meaning”), ženkliai (meaning “well”) and others. Readers should be aware that the CFS contains a number of words with incorrectly used prefixes (e.g., unload, reedit, join, calculate, pass, finance, credit), which would be more accurately considered as word formation errors (e.g., Šukys 2003). Thus, it should be emphasized that not all the semantics specified in the CFS correspond to the usual concept of semantics, but this study looks at this formally and examines the full CFS list of meanings and combinations of words. Only the semantics presented in the CFS are examined below. Statistical data and examples are taken from Laura Vilčinskaitė’s bachelor thesis “Semantic Use in Contemporary Lithuanian Texts” (2015)4. Semantics (as well as non-presentable values discussed in the first part of the cycle) are examined based on the methodology applied in the article of Povilas Rudzevičius (2005): whether they were used with reason or without reason. 3. USE OF SEMANTICS LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE IN THE TEXT The DCF contains 115 semantics. All of them in various forms (not only headlines) were searched in Tekstyna. No occurrences of the word atreaguoti5 were found. Some words found only examples of regular usage: they are excuse, expel, command, warn and close, e.g. : According to the law, the STT cannot propose draft legislation, so it entrusted this to the Anti-Corruption Commission.6 After catching this intelligence, the soldiers initially did not realize that they had to thoroughly investigate him and, after proceeding further, released him. 3 pg.: “People gathered at the courthouse early (= Long before the hearing)” (Linkevičienė 2013: 92). It explains less common semantics that may cause confusion in usage. 4 Supervisor Erika Rimkutė. 5 In general, one should ask whether react can be considered semantics, since it is difficult to imagine a context in which this word would be used correctly. This word is more like an unrecognizable value. 6 Here and below are examples from the Textbook. The examples remain unchanged, only the meaningless beginning and end of the concordance lines have been deleted in some places, relevant words have been highlighted. Neither lexical nor other errors have been corrected. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Again about the list of major language errors in the dictionary: semantics | 4 this issue is resolved by mutual agreement and, with the agreement of the employer, the employee is dismissed on the date specified in his application, with payment of wages until the day of dismissal arming criminal groups (Article 234-4) - conditional release from punishment before term or replacement of the unserved part of the sentence with a milder punishment He warns the Corinthian Christians that those who commit adultery, steal or drink will not inherit the kingdom of God Through the Panorama we heard a Russian representative speculate that we should not even think about the recognition of Chechnya, since it is still Russian territory. Some semantics are used only in language recommendations, i.e. in a motivated context (for more on the motivation of usage, see subsection 3.4). These are the words: put on, uncover, correct, reedit, lively, take out, grasp, dictate, finance, think, comment, consult, check, allow flaws, enter, enter and enter, e.g.: "run, run": Every day I run (=run) a few kilometers. 1.3.71. p račiuo pti - cannot. r. „touch, touch“: It is easy to touch a book or notebook with an enlarged liver; open the umbrella = unfold the umbrella. 1.3.10. uncover: a tideng t i kurtiją, nusikaltėlį = to identify the culprit, criminal; It is not always clear how to evaluate the following cases of -i use. The CFS states that the following, -i cannot be used with the meanings "this, -i, this, -ia, such, -ia" (before enumeration), "this is what, this is why" (before explanation), and the following cannot be used with the meaning "yes, this is how". Following these unrepresentable values, -i; The following words make up only about 8% of the total incorrect usage found in the Textus Receptus (without distinguishing between motivated and unmotivated usage, but excluding those cases where the above-mentioned words were incorrectly used in language guidelines, explaining that they were linguistic errors), e.g. : The Soviet government of Lithuanian Foreign Minister Urbšys states the truth of the suffering facts: 1. But, still, make a final decision only after you have answered the following questions openly to yourself: – Can I be an entrepreneur? The importance of logistics can also be justified by the following arguments: – companies must take into account the needs of customers In the following data, examples with following, used meanings “next”, “next”, “coming”, “going after”, etc., are also considered language errors (but not major ones, cf. Kniūkšta 2008) and are not distinguished from the following, following meanings specified in the CFS. 3.1. Frequency of use of semantics in contemporary Lithuanian texts The most frequently used words were: know (50 9257), take medicines (34 064), read (20 194), build (16 236), maintain (16 023). In the case of such a large number, 7 Brackets indicate the total number of uses of the word in the Textus Receptus, without distinguishing between regular and irregular usage. In the following examples, the number of irregularities found is shown in parentheses. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Once again about the list of major language errors in the dictionary: semantics | 5 by the amount of data, decided by the mentioned words (and other more than 3000 times used in the žodžių ar junginių) vartoseną išsamiau nagrinėti tik publicistikos dalyje (kiti tiriami žodžiai Textbook to examine all parts of the Textbook). In this part of the Textbook, only 7 cases of incorrect use of known, two of taking medicines and reading, 28 of constructed and 5 of maintained cases of incorrect use were found. It is therefore clear that the non-normative use of these words constitutes a very small part. The use of words, of which not all examples have been examined due to the large number of uses (in addition to the above mentioned, these are also the words open, release, put, leave, (out)fill, separate, look, bear responsibility, instruct, warn, transfer, review, run, pass, mean, close, fill, lead), cannot be reliably used to generalize the regular and irregular usage. Examining other words, for which all cases of use found in the Textus Receptus have been examined, it is possible to draw clear conclusions as to the proportion of correct and incorrect use. A total of 58 518 concordance lines of correct usage (85.31%) and 10 073 cases of irregular usage (14.69%) were found. Therefore, semantics in the Textus Receptus are relatively few (cf. Textbook size 140 million. words). According to frequency, semantics are divided into four groups: 1) used more than 501 times; 2) used 101-500 times; 3) use 10-100 times and 4) use 1-9 times. It is noted that only cases of improper use are considered here, regular examples are rejected. Eight semantics are most commonly used and examined in all parts of the Textbook: calculate (1666), review (1591), train (1153), follow, -i (832), consecrate (593), unified, -a (574), call (548), pack (519). The second group of semantics according to frequency, i.e. words used 101–500 times, were found 12: ap(si)jungti, apsivesti, at(si)žymėti, bendrai, gautis, įjungti, matomai, šalutinis (vaistų) veikimas, pervesti, reiškia, stovis and įskaityti. Quite rarely (10–100 times) the most semantics were used in the Textbook – 51 words were found, e.g.: abuojas, aptarnauti sąskaitą, atlieti, atremontuoti, atrestauruoti, atsiekti, aukščiau stovintis, -i, davinys, glaustas, įnešti, išdirbti, išgauti, išjungti, išpulti, išryšti, išskirti, išžiūrėti, įvesti, deingas, nuimti, prijungti, pakelti, perkelti, praeiti, praklausyti, pervesti, pribūti, priešakinis, -ė, prigulėti, rastis, regimai, sudėtis, statyti, talpinti, tūlas, -a, užmanyti, užsipilti, etc. The most rarely used (1-9 times) 38 semantics, e.g.: uncover, correct, change, reedit, re-adjust, bring back, vital, -a, remove, maintain, set up the account, withdraw, bear responsibility, vote, run, overthink, come in, be interested, charge the battery, bring, sail, drive, etc. It is worth mentioning those words that are almost always (80-100%) used in the Textbook only in an inappropriate meaning. These are the words abuojas, -a, ap(si)jungti, apsivesti, aptarnauti sąskaitą, apturėti, koreguoti, iškrauti, atmirti, atredaguoti, atreguliuoti, atremontuoti, atrestauruoti, atsiekti, at (si) žymėti, aukštesnis stovintis, -i, gautis, išmesti / užmesti, paskaičiuoti, praanalizuoti, prabalsuoti, pračiuopti, pradiktuoti, prafinansuoti, pragalvoti, prakeliauti, praklausyti, prakomentuoti, prakonsultuoti, prakontroliuoti, praskambanti, pribūti, užinteresuoti, užmanyti, įskaityti, įvežimas. Some of the above words are used only a few times in the Textus Receptus, so it is not possible to draw reliable conclusions that they are used only in an incorrect sense. Language normists should pay attention to the fact that the prepositions at-, pravedniki are often used incorrectly (true, quite a lot of cases, when these words are used in works of language culture illustrating the incorrect BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. The following is a list of major language errors in the dictionary: semantics | 6 uses). When examining the data of the Textbook, the impression is created that the usual usage becomes irregular, counted, added values. However, the rationale for these words still needs to be examined in order to conclude that they are in danger of being used incorrectly (see subsection 3.4). In the text most often (80-100% of the cases; here are not mentioned those words that are always used in the proper meaning, they are listed at the beginning of the article) the following words are used correctly: bypass, open, rework, generally, davinys, dėti(s), gyvybingas, -a, trumpas, įnešti, išdirbti, išeiti, išgauti, išimti, išjungti, išlaikyti, išnešti, (iš)pildyti, išryškinti, išskirti, išeiti, išvesti, išžiūrėti, deaf, -a, nuimti, prijungti, pakelti, perkelti, pervesti, praeiti, praplaukti, pravažiuoti, pervesti, priešakinis, -ė, rastis, reiškia, statyba, statyti, talpinti, tūlas, užbėgimas, įėjimas, užnešti, įplaukimas, įvažiavimas, vesti, vieningas, -a, žinoti. In summarizing the data of semantics frequency can be compared with the main findings of the study of non-presentable values. 3086 concordance lines with non-presentable values (in various forms) from the CFS were found in the text. It is therefore clear that the values in the Textyn are much less than the semantics. The most common values found in Tekstyna are: išsireikšti, išsireiškimas (506), vienok (277), gerbūvis (241), neužilgo (235), (kaž)koks tai (231), (kaž)kas tai (209). The most rarely used translational samples are on how much, on so much, on health, as often, (something) whose it is, (something) why it is. In the Textine, no values were found for being (not) in the course, and so, (some)where it is. As can be seen from the data described above, both the semantics specified in the CFS and the cases of their use in Tekstyna are considerably more. Thus, the ability to recognize semantics and correct them requires greater attention from language users and norm-setters. 3.2. Distribution of Semantics in the Texts of Contemporary Lithuanian Language When calculating the number of semantics found in the Textbook, the data should be interpreted with caution. The first picture shows that most semantics are used in publications. Such data can be explained by the fact that the publication texts make up the majority of the Textbook. At first glance, oral language seems to be the most correct, but it is not: here the least errors were found because oral language texts make up the smallest part of the Textbook. 1 PAV. 8 The texts in the textbook are divided into such parts as shown in the first figure; their proportions see http://tekstynas.vdu. lt/tekstynas/menu?page=statistics. This does not include the semantics that are discussed only in the publicistics part, because more than 3000 cases of their use have been found in the Textbook. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Again about the dictionary errors of the list of major language errors: Palyginkime gana panašius neteiktinų vertinių vartosenos Tekstyne duomenis: daugiausia semantics | 7 errors were also found in journalism (58.2%), much less in non-fiction literature (18.4%), oratory language (12%) and fiction (8.8%). The least number of uses in the Administrative language section of the Textbook (2.6%). After calculating the normalized frequency (how many cases of use per 100,000 words), quite different data were obtained: the most semantics were recorded in sentence language (36 cases of use per 100,000 words), quite similar numbers of semantics usage in journalism (9.8 cases), administrative literature (8.8 cases) and non-fiction literature (7.8 cases). Data on the normalized frequency of non-presentable values (see Rimkutė 2014) differ significantly from semantics: in oral language there are 65.3 cases per 100,000 words, in non-fiction literature – 2.7, in journalism – 2, in fiction – 1.5, in administrative literature – 0.6 cases of use. Therefore, only in the part of the oral language the non-presentable values are used more than the semantics, and in other parts of the Textbook the values are several times less. Again, it can be concluded that semantics are more difficult to recognize than other lexical errors. These data can also be compared with the conclusions presented in P. Rudzevičius’ article (2005) about unusable old foreign words. He claims that there is the greatest number of extramarital affairs in fiction (30.2%). It is assumed that old foreign words are a more necessary stylistic means to illustrate the language and characters of fictional characters than values or semantics. Below are listed the five most common semantics of each part of the Textbook and the frequency of their use. The most frequently used semantics in administrative literature are count (339), pack (110), count (82), follow, -i (78) and consecrate (77). The following semantics are commonly used in fiction: calculate (120), call (88), follow (87), train (79) and consecrate (36). In non-fiction literature, the following semantics are frequently mentioned: sekanti, -i (221), stovis (169), apmokyti (165), pašventi (149) and iššaukti (136). The most frequently used semantics in the publications section were counted (1073), trained (797), following, -i (429), unified, -a (420) and consecrated (331). The five most commonly used semantics in oral sources are gautis (118), paskaičiuoti (19), sekantis, -i (17), apsivesti (6) and užsipilti (5). As can be seen from the given examples, in all parts of the Textbook, semantics can be found following, almost all parts use the verbs paveikti, apskaičiuoti. The verb gautis is also worth mentioning, it is common in both oral and publications (46% and 40% respectively). Thus, language norm-setters should pay attention to these common words used in various texts. There are also discussions about them (cf. Dainius Razauskas (2008) opinion on the following); in addition, there are certain constant compounds with one or another semantics (see subsection 3.4) whose frequent use may give the wrong impression to language users that these expressions are regular. 3.3. Distribution of semantics in texts of different periods In the study of the dictionary errors presented in the CFS, it was assumed that language users become better acquainted with language norms and make fewer errors over time. Therefore, the hypothesis that in older BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Again about the dictionary errors of the list of major language errors: semantics | 8 tekstuose (skelbtuose iki 2000 m.) semantizmų (kaip ir kitų DKKS nurodytų klaidų) bus daugiau, and in newer texts (published since 2001) semantics will occur less. The analysis of the data confirmed the hypothesis: semantics used in texts published before 2000 account for 60% of all examples, and since 2001 – 40%. Very similar data were found in the study of non-presentable values: 59% of values were found in texts published before 2000, and 41% of values were found in texts published after 2001. In the texts published before 2000 there is not a single case of usage only of the semantics dėti(s) (in later texts it is used once), and in the texts published since 2001 there are not even 26 examples of usage of semantics: apsidėti, atskleisti, koreguoti, atredaguoti, atreguliuoti, atnešti, gyvybingas, -a, išimti, išnešti, praanalizuoti, prabėgti, pračiuopti, pradiktuoti, prafinansuoti, pergalvoti, prakeliauti, prakomentuoti, prakonsultuoti, prakontroliuoti, leisti trūkumus, skaityti, užbėgimas, užinteresuoti, užplaukimas, įvažiavimas, įvežimas. It can be discussed whether it is worth introducing these words into the ICD, because especially for young people their incorrect use is unusual and often incomprehensible. The most commonly used semantics before 2000 are calculated (1181), reviewed (716), trained (714), wrapping (440), following, -i (425). The most frequently incorrectly used semantics since 2001 are: review (875), calculate (485), train (414), follow, -i (407). Therefore, some semantics were and remained relevant. As mentioned in the previous subsection, these words are used in almost all parts of the textbook, they are among the most common, so those who want to speak and write correctly in common language should pay attention to the non-normative meanings of these words. 3.4. Motivation for the use of semantics The most accurate data on the correct or incorrect use of lexical units can be obtained by examining the motivation, since it is possible to decide quite clearly whether semantics presented in the CFS are used deliberately, i.e., with the realization that it is a mistake (it is usually graphically distinguished), but for stylistic or other considerations9 it is a necessary word, or language users do not understand that some words are used in an inappropriate meaning. According to Dalia Blažinskaite (2000: 96), “[g]era language can also be incorrect, if the correctness of the language is violated by one or another stylistic motivation”. Other linguists (e.g., Šukys 2003: 25–26) agree that stylistically motivated violations of norms, most commonly occurring in fiction, journalism, and everyday language, are not considered errors. As P. Rudzevičius (2005: 215) states, “a clear distinction between motivated and unmotivated use is not always possible because the language users themselves have different perceptions of the non-normativeness of foreign words10 and their possible functions in the language”. And when studying the usage of the semantics described in this article, it was not always easy to determine the motivation: sometimes there was a lack of longer context, in some cases the meaning of the sentence was unclear. P. Rudzevičius (2005: 214–215) considered the following to be justified violations of norms: 1) existing or implied insertions not in the present common language: (a) folklore; (b) ancient literature; (c) dialect texts; 9 pg. The reason mentioned by Jurgita Girčiene (2007: 149) is: “the desire to say something differently, stylistically expressively, to express social identity, thus striving for a newer, more fashionable language expression”. 10 P. Rudzevičius examined the old aliens that cannot be presented (note by E. R.). BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 Erika Rimkutė. Again about the dictionary errors of the list of major language errors: semantics | 9 2) updated foreignness, when for stylistic reasons elements of older usage are reworked and inserted into the context; 3) quotations of current non-normative language: (a) where a longer text is quoted in order to preserve the authenticity of the language; (b) whenever a single word is enclosed in quotation marks; c) when foreignness is used as an emotional-expressive means of style; (d) in dialogues; (e) language guidelines. In this article, the following cases are considered to be motivated use of semantics (they are illustrated by several cases of use at once): 1) write in quotation marks, e.g.: another possible meaning in English – “come out” can mean for someone “gau tis” (to get out) vert. Then, having already shown real vigilance, the communist cohort of the editorial board “carried out the decision”… The street, alcohol or psychiatric hospital were waiting. from the middle of May went on tours around Lithuania. The theatre “filled and exceeded” plans, actors performed the “norm” of performances and roles It is believed that salad can “conjure” love, and for a pregnant woman “conjure i”1 1 childbirth. In those days, before independence, performances were “nuim a mi” not only for political, but often for artistic reasons: And next week, the representative of the Moscow government promises to “check the documents” and find out whether the announcement of Alexander Litvinenko in Lithuania is true. No one can deny that from such an organization of work “standing a ukščia u” falls Judas grashes, so horns and claws defend three posts 2) found in literal quotations, as well as in quotations from older texts, in dialectal texts, e.g. : Vaižgantas noted: "Dr. For J. Basanavičius there is nothing, nor has there ever been, that would have been a nation, and for him it would have been dubious and unacceptable. 27 September 1926 - 2 February 1933 // LVA. F “I am complying with the procedures established by the Ministry of Education, reporting on my work And yet her son did sin, and became a sinner. But she couldn't do anything. “There where darkness reigns fresh, / To the late, to the beginnings of being, / It will be born anew for the coming morning” (17 “Winter” sonnet, p. 65). “The Prime Minister and some ministers are interned and are in the army headquarters. "Armed Forces of the United States". From the letter of Kazis 1948 09 27: "Unhappy things with our Vlad. He's in a sanatorium somewhere and probably drowning in pessimism. 3) to be found in normative publications for teaching, education, e.g.: Service: a szolgálna uti s ąskaitą = manage the account; I corrected you – you can’t. r. ‘(a)djusted: Our committee has recently adjusted this draft; Rework (= finish preparing, creating, final processing, refining) methodology, plan. 11 Šiame pavyzdyje kabutės gali būti pasirinktos ne dėl noro apsisaugoti pavartojus netaisyklingą žodį, bet dėl kalbos play. Erika Rimkutė. Once again about the dictionary errors of the list of major language errors: semantics BENDRINĖ KALBA | 88 (2015) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 | 16 Girčienė J. 2007: The use of new borrowings: the gap between language culture and stylistics. – Language culture 80, 143–152. Kniūkšta P. 2008: What follows next? – Language Culture 81, 236–244. Linkevičienė N. 2013: Basics of Editing, Vilnius: Vilnius University Press. Access on the Internet: http://www.flf.vu.lt/mokslas/elektroniniai-resursai#vadovėliai-teaching-means (viewed 2015 05 15). Paulauskienė A. 2000: Lithuanian Language Culture, Kaunas: Technologija. Pažūsis L. 2014: Translation and Language, Vilnius: Vilnius University. Access online: http://www.esparama.lt/es_parama_pletra/failai/ESFproduktai/2014_Monograph_Translation_and_Language.pdf (viewed 2015 04 10). Pupkis A. 2005: Language Culture Studies, Vilnius: Gimtasis žodis. Razauskas D. 2008: On the next question. – Language Culture 81, 224–235. Rimkutė E. 2014: Is the list of major language errors still relevant? The Case of Values. – Common Language 87, 1–13. Retrieved 2015-06-05. www.gemerinekalba.lt/Pdf/Rimkute_BK_87_straipsnis.pdf (accessed 2015-06-05). Rudzevičius P. 2005: Proneness to use foreign words in Lithuanian texts. – Language Culture 78, Šukys 210–219. J. 2003: Language Culture for All, Kaunas: Šviesa. Urnėžiūtė R. 2014: Nobody Canceled the Regular Speech (R. Urnėžiūtė interviewed D. Vaišnienė, J. Palionytė, R. Miliūnaitė, A. Dvylytė, D. Smalinskas). – Native Language 2, 18–26. Vilčinskaitė L. 2015: Use of semantics in contemporary Lithuanian texts. Bachelor's thesis, Kaunas: Vytautas Didysis University. Vilkončius V. 2001: Translation into Lithuanian: the influx of stencils, Vilnius: Gimtasis žodis. Vladarskienė R. 2013: New meanings of international words in administrative Lithuanian, – Applied Linguistics 3 (2013–2014). Access online: http://taikomojikalbotyra.lt/en/2013/12/naujostarptautiniu-zodziu-reiksmes-administracineje-lietuviu-kalboje (accessed 2015 07 20). Received 22 July 2015 Adopted 03/11/2015