Ar vis dar aktualus Didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis

ERIKA RIMKUTĖ Vytautas Magnus University IS THE LIST OF MAJOR LANGUAGE ERRORS STILL RELEVANT? THE CASE OF CALQUES KEYWORDS: language culture, Lithuanian language, unacceptable calques, List of Major Language Errors, Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language, motivated and unmotivated usage. 1. INTRODUCTION The standard language, like other language varieties, is constantly changing: it is renewed and borrows new words; words used during a particular period enter dictionaries, which serve as language archives, while neologisms are recorded in databases of new words. Language norms and requirements for correct language use also change. Since we must adhere to codified norms when speaking the standard language, we therefore want these norms to be flexible, acceptable to most language users, and updated in response to various changed circumstances (for a fuller discussion of standardization principles, see Pupkis 2005; Šukys 2003). One of the sources that most strictly describes normative and non-normative usage is the List of Major Language Errors (hereafter, DKKS). Fairly categorical opinions about this list are voiced: that it results in monetary fines, that it includes outdated words, that it controls the language of the media, and so on (cf. Subačius 2013; Vaicekauskienė 2010: 169; Vaicekauskienė 2011). This article examines one part of the DKKS—unacceptable calques and their usage in the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (hereafter, DLKT)—but does not aim to discuss either language standardization or the DKKS itself. The topic was prompted by a 2014 resolution of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language to remove two subcategories of lexical errors from the DKKS: unacceptable foreign words and their derivatives, and newly borrowed foreign words that should not be used (for discussion of this, see Urnėžiūtė 2014). Linguists who discussed the changes to the DKKS conclude that the list should be updated, reviewed, clarified, and supplemented; therefore, the decision to review issues relevant to language users is welcome, since some recommendations for equivalents of borrowed words elicit quite active (though often unfavorable) responses. Nevertheless, the question arises as to whether the DKKS will be changed in the future, especially its section on lexical errors. Language users are eagerly awaiting the Language Advice booklets devoted to discussing other lexical units.1 This study aims to present data on how the unacceptable calques listed in the DKKS are used in one of the possible sources of contemporary language—the DLKT. It is hoped that information about 1 The second booklet in the lexical section is planned to address word meanings, while the third will cover other cases, including calques. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 2 The distribution of loan translations across the corpus sections, their period of use, frequency, and motivation will be useful both to Lithuanian language norm-setters and to other language users. 2. RESEARCH MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY Non-standard loan translations (also called by the negatively connoted term vertalai) are defined as “words translated uncreatively, inappropriately, or unnecessarily, for which native alternatives are usually available” (Šukys 2003: 44); “a word or expression formed on the model of a foreign language, in other words, translated ‘literally’” (Paulauskienė 2000: 85). “All [loan translations] that cannot be semantically motivated in Lithuanian or do not conform to Lithuanian word-formation patterns are disapproved of” (Pupkis 2005: 262). Aldonas Pupkis (2005: 262–263) neigiamai kodifikuotus vertinius vadina vertalais ir juos klasifikuoja į ištisinius ir dalinius. Ištisiniais laikomi ištisai išversti žodžiai (pvz.: apystova (=aplinkybė); vienok (=tačiau, bet); paseka (=rezultatas, padarinys) arba žodžių junginiai (dažnai frazeologizmai) (pvz.: makaronus ant ausų kabinti (=akis dumti, mulinti); perlenkti lazdą (=perdėti, persistengti)). Daliniais vertalais vadinami žodžiai, kuriuose netinkamai vartojamas priešdėlis, priesaga ar kitas dėmuo (pvz.: atreguliuoti (=sureguliuoti); bealkoholinis (=bealkoholis, nealkoholinis, gaivusis); kažkas tai (=kažkas)). Loreta Vaicekauskienė (2007: 17) atkreipia dėmesį, kad kartais sunku atskirti vertinius ir semantizmus, nes pirmuoju išsiverčiama forma, o antruoju – reikšmė, ir siūlo vertiniais laikyti tik morfologiškai sudėtingo (sudurtinio) svetimžodžio vertimus, aiškius naujadarus, kurie nesutampa su savos kalbos žodžiu ir todėl yra nesunkiai atskiriami nuo pasiskolintos reikšmės. This article adopts the view that non-standard loan translations are words, word combinations, or phrases whose structure is uncharacteristic of Lithuanian, formed by translating morpheme by morpheme from other languages, most often Russian, and resembling standard Lithuanian words. The DKKS lists 37 non-standard loan translations—12 words and 25 phrases: apystova; gerbūvis; įstatymdავითs, -ė, įstatymleidys, -ė, įstatymdaovystė, įstatymleidystė; išsireikšti, išsireiškimas; laisvanoris, -ė, laisvanoriškas, -a, laisvanoriškai; nekuris, -i; neužilgo; obalsis; paseka; savistovus, -i, savistoviai, savistovumas; stovy(l)s; vienok; ant kiek; ant savęs; ant sveikatos; ant tiek; pas save; iš kalno; kaip kartas; kaip sykis; kaip taisyklė; kas liečia; kas link; prie ko; būk tai; kažkada tai; ant kiek, ant tiek; kaip tai; (kaž)kaip tai; (kaž)kas tai; (kaž)kieno tai; (kaž)kodėl tai; (kaž)koks tai; (kaž)kuris tai, (kaž)kuri tai; būti (ne) kurse; ir taip; (kaž)kur tai. All these loan translations (not only headwords, but also all inflected forms) were searched for in every section of the DLKT. The corpus contained no instances of the phrases būti (ne) kurse, ir taip, (kaž)kur tai. It should be noted that the corpus is not an entirely suitable source for analyzing loan translations, since most of its texts are (or should be) edited. On the other hand, if loan translations listed in the DKKS remain in texts edited by language editors, this may indicate that they are difficult to recognize, and therefore it is still relevant to study them. It should also be borne in mind that the DKKS was approved in 1997, whereas the corpus contains texts dating from 1992; thus, in a certain sense, non-standard loan translations used in earlier texts cannot be considered major language errors (though neither should they be considered standard). Norminamuosiuose ar kitokio pobūdžio leidiniuose (žr. Pupkis 2005: 263; Šukys 2003: 50; Vilkončius 2001; Paulauskienė 2000: 87) minimi ir keli vaizdingi verstiniai posakiai. Pateikiama daugiausia pastaraisiais metais netinkamai iš anglų kalbos verčiamų žodžių ar posakių), BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 3 e.g.: pakišti kiaulę (=iškrėsti kiaulystę); makaronus kabinti (=miglą į akis pūsti, akis dumti); viščiukus skaičiuosim rudenį (=pažiūrėsim, kai dugną dėsim; neperšokęs upelio nesakyk op); stogas važiuoja (=trūksta vieno šulo); perlenkti lazdą (=perdėti, persistengti); programos vinis (=svarbiausias, reikšmingiausias); šakėmis ant vandens rašyta (=muilo burbulas, vieni niekai); eiti kaip per barchatą (=per sviestą, kaip sviestu patepta); reikalingas kaip šuniui antra uodega (=penkta koja); priskaldyti malkų (=privirti košės); turėti gerą laiką (=gerai praleisti laiką); be problemų (=nesunku, nieko baisaus, padarysiu); įvaryti į kampą (=priremti / prispausti prie sienos, suriesti į ožio ragą); kelti tostą (=kelti taurę, skelbti tostą); lažinuosi, kad... (=aš tikras, galvą dedu / guldau); pasimatysime vėliau (=sudie(v)! Viso labo! Tam kartui!); žuvo vietoje (=iš karto). Pasak Jono Šukio (2003: 50), kai kurie verstiniai rusiški frazeologizmai per dažnai vartoti sovietmečio spaudoje (jie vartojami ir dabar). Kalbininkas aiškiai nepasako, ar šie posakiai nevartotini, ar juos galima (bet nebūtina) keisti lietuviškais vaizdingais posakiais. Minimi tokie žodžių junginiai: žiūrėti iš savo varpinės (paisyti savo reikalų, interesų); mėtyti akmenis į (kieno) daržą (kritikuoti); kaišioti pagalius į ratus (trukdyti); baltais siūlais siūta (neįrodyta); į vatą vynioti (neatvirai kalbėti, pūsti miglą); gumą tempti (delsti). These translated expressions were not examined in the DLKT. The attention of language norm-setters should be drawn to the need to pay greater attention to such expressions (especially vivid ones): compile lists of them; explain why they should not be used, since language users assume that an expression is standard if it is vivid; and specify precisely the degree of censure—that is, whether an expression is unacceptable, to be avoided, or whether other Lithuanian expressions are preferable. The article examines loan translations from four perspectives: 1) how frequently they occur in the corpus; 2) in which part of the corpus they occur; 3) the period covered by the texts in which they occur (the hypothesis was that more loan translations would be found in older texts, i.e. those published before 2000, and fewer in newer texts, published from 2001 onward); 4) whether they are used with or without motivation (the assumption was that non-standard loan translations are more often used without motivation because language users do not recognize them and are unaware that they are using non-standard words) (see Section 3). The methodology of this study is not new—in a 2005 article, “Patterns of Use of Foreign Words in the Lithuanian Language Corpus,” Povilas Rudzevičius examined 144 older loanwords listed in the DKKS using the DLKT. The study will draw on the methodology presented by this author, and some of its findings will be compared with P. Rudzevičius’s research data. 3. USE OF UNACCEPTABLE CALQUES IN THE CONTEMPORARY LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE CORPUS The corpus yielded more than 20,000 concordance lines containing unacceptable calques. However, this does not mean that there are that many cases of incorrect usage. Unacceptable translated expressions often coincided by chance with correct word combinations, e.g.: (1) įmonėse įmanomi tik A ir B keliai. Arba nieko nedaryti ir žiūrėti, prie ko tai prives, arba – lopyti seną valdymo „kūną“.2 2 All examples are taken from DLKT. The examples have not been edited, and some have been slightly shortened; the calque under analysis is set in bold. The examples and statistical data are taken from Agnė Sendaitė’s bachelor’s thesis, defended in 2014, “Use of unacceptable calques in the Contemporary Lithuanian Language Corpus” (supervisor Erika Rimkutė). BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 4 (2) But... Perhaps the devil himself tripped me up. Of course, logically speaking, what’s the devil got to do with it? The election campaign threw everything into disarray. (3) over which the spirit had raged for far too long, obviously, insolently and in vain, against itself: (4) which works very well for a stomach ulcer. I experienced it myself in Kaunas, firsthand. Of course, if it is cancer, surgery is unavoidable. After excluding the concordance lines (see examples 1 and 3) in which a correct word combination was used, 3,086 concordance lines containing unacceptable calques (in various forms) remained. The frequency of use of the unacceptable calques listed in DKKS and found in the corpus (see 3.1), their distribution across sections of DLKT (see 3.2), usage by period (see 3.3), and the motivation for their use (see 3.4) are discussed below. 3.1. Frequency of use of nonstandard calques in the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language As mentioned in the second section, a total of 34 calques were found in the DLKT. Based on frequency of use, they are divided into three groups: 1. used more than 100 times, 2. used 10–100 times, 3. used fewer than 10 times. Twelve words were found in the first group (they account for 35.3 percent of all nonstandard calques found in the corpus). The most frequent calques found in the corpus are: išsireikšti, išsireiškimas (506)3, vienok (277), gerbūvis (241), neužilgo (235), (kaž)koks tai (231), (kaž)kas tai (209). The second group, that is, words used 10–100 times, comprises 16 words (47 percent). These are the calques apystova (54), obalsis (52), ant savęs (16), prie ko (33), etc. Six calques (17.7 percent) are used least frequently, that is, fewer than 10 times; all are multiword expressions. It may be assumed that expressions in this group, as well as those not found in the corpus at all—namely, ant kiek, ant tiek, ant sveikatos, būti (ne) kurse, ir taip, kaip kartas, (kaž)kieno tai, (kaž)kodėl tai, (kaž)kur tai—are disappearing from contemporary language. To confirm this conclusion, more spoken-language data would need to be examined, since these calques are probably used more frequently in speech; more recent written-language texts should also be studied. On the other hand, such infrequent use may also be due to the fact that the standard equivalents of these calques, which occur rarely in the corpus, are themselves uncommon. To summarize the frequency of use of nonstandard calques, more than a third of them are very frequent, so they are unlikely to disappear in the near future. It was observed that borrowed words are used more often than multiword expressions. The frequency of calque usage should also be discussed in a broader context; therefore, the next subsection describes the parts of the corpus in which the calques under study occur, while subsection 3.4 presents trends in the motivations for using calques. 3 The number of occurrences is indicated in parentheses. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 5 3.2. Distribution of non-recommended calques in the sections of the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language As mentioned in the introduction, all the calques listed in the DKKS were examined in the DLKT. The corpus contains 140 million words and includes texts written between 1992 and 2009. The proportions of the corpus are presented in Figure 1. FIG. 1. Structure of the DLKT4 There is considerable discussion of the representativeness of corpora, principles of compilation, and so forth (see Marcinkevičienė 2000); this article does not delve into these debated issues, but immediately draws attention to the fact that some research findings are determined by the proportions of the corpus structure (see below). As Figure 2 shows, the largest number of non-recommended calques was found in journalistic texts (58.2%), with far fewer in nonfiction, spoken language, and fiction. As expected, the fewest instances occurred in the administrative-language section of the corpus (2.6%). Nevertheless, these data need to be interpreted somewhat differently: the largest number of calques was found in journalism not because the texts in this corpus section are the least correct, but because journalism is the largest section of the DLKT (see Figure 1); spoken language is certainly not the most correct, but merely the smallest section of the DLKT, and therefore few non-recommended calques were found in it. FIG. 2. Distribution of non-recommended calques across sections of the DLKT 4 Data taken from http://tekstynas.vdu.lt/tekstynas/menu?page=statistics. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 6 To provide precise data on the use of calques in the DLKT, normalized frequency was calculated: the number of instances per 100,000 words (see Figure 3). FIG. 3. Distribution of non-recommended calques across sections of the DLKT (normalized frequency) These data suggest that non-recommended calques are not used frequently and occur most often in spoken language, which is not regulated (except in public, official usage). The spoken-language section of the DLKT is divided into public speech (including recordings of radio and television programs and formal speeches), private speech (consisting of recordings of everyday speech—the largest category), and transcripts (including several transcripts of Seimas sessions). Unfortunately, it is not yet possible to examine one or more varieties of spoken language separately. Informal everyday speech makes up the largest share. Thus, the non-recommended calques listed in the DKKS are most characteristic of everyday colloquial speech, where their use is considered motivated (see subsection 3.4). Before the study began, it was thought that calques, as a stylistic device, would be needed in works of fiction; nevertheless, 1.5 instances per 100,000 words suggests that calques are not particularly characteristic of fictional characters’ speech or useful for conveying their personalities. The data in Figure 3 do not allow us to claim that the language of documents is incorrect. Nevertheless, even the small number of non-recommended calques in the administrative-text section came as somewhat of a surprise. Most examples were found in older texts, that is, texts published before 2000, for example: (5) competition problems in the local economy. Housing services, the environmental amenitiesof cities, transport and other local-economy markets are expected to make extensive use of (6) At the request of either Party, the Contracting Parties shall exchange information on their legislation, legal system, and judicial practice. (7) ARTICLE 2 Marriage may not be entered into without the voluntary and genuine consent of the persons marrying. a) With due regard for tradition (8) sunaikinimas esant šioms aplinkybėms: a) tai atsitiko kelių eismo įvykio pasekoje, kai apdraustoji transporto priemonė buvo valdoma savininko (9) A SUBSCRIBER may have one or several objects (with independent inlets and outlets) that use water and discharge wastewater. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 7 Thus, the use of non-recommended calques in separate parts of the DLKT shows that in official usage, regulated by resolutions of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, relatively few calques occur in publicly published works; therefore, one cannot speak of widespread violations of language norms. 3.3. Distribution of non-recommended calques in texts from different periods The introduction proposed the hypothesis that incorrect calques should be used more frequently in older texts. Works published before 2000 are considered relatively older texts, while texts published from 2001 onward (i.e., already in the 21st century) are considered newer. The analysis showed that the hypothesis was confirmed: 59 percent of the calques were found in texts published before 2000, and 41 percent in texts published from 2001 onward. Some calques are clearly more frequent in older texts: nekuris, -i (87.5 percent in older texts), pasėka (83 percent), sauisto- derivatives (79 percent), stoyyla (79 percent), vienok (80 percent); by contrast, translated phrases (kaž)kaip tai, (kaž)kas tai occur more frequently in newer texts (91 and 86 percent, respectively). The frequency of other calques (e.g., kaip tai, kaip sykį, kaip kartas, gerbūvis) is similar in both older and newer texts. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude clearly that non-recommended calques have become irrelevant in recent years; one can speak only of particular calques that are disappearing or are still frequently used. 3.4. Motivation for the use of non-recommended calques This article focuses primarily on the motivation for using non-recommended calques, since these data show most clearly whether the calques listed in the DKKS are used deliberately—that is, with awareness that they are errors, but because the word is needed for stylistic or other reasons—or whether language users do not perceive the calques as foreign and therefore use them as ordinary words of the standard language. Pirmiausia aptarta, kokie atvejai laikomi motyvuota vartosena. J. Šukys (2003: 25–26) teigia, kad stilistiškai motyvuoti normų pažeidimai, dažniausiai pasitaikantys grožinėje literatūroje, publicistikoje, buitinėje kalboje, nelaikomi klaidomis. Grožinėje literatūroje svetimybės pasitelkiamos veikėjų charakteriui perteikti, tačiau jos turi būti vartojamos saikingai, priešingu atveju tekstas tampa nemeniškas. According to J. Šukys, unmotivated language violations are usually unintentional. They include errors that language users make because they do not know the standard language or its norms. Intentional language violations are those in which a language user knows how a particular word should be said correctly, but resists the norm and deliberately violates it (Šukys 2003: 25–26). Having investigated non-recommended archaic loanwords, P. Rudzevičius, in the article “Tendencies in the Use of Loanwords in the Corpus of the Lithuanian Language” (2005: 214–215), regarded the following as motivated violations of norms: 1) actual or presumed insertions from language varieties other than contemporary standard language: a) folklore; b) old literature; c) dialect texts; 2) loanwords reactivated when, for stylistic reasons, elements of usage from earlier periods are reworked and inserted into context; 3) quotations from contemporary nonstandard language: a) when a longer text is quoted in order to preserve the authenticity of the language; b) when only BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 8 a separate word is written in quotation marks; c) when a foreign word is used as an emotional-expressive stylistic device; d) in dialogues; e) in language recommendations. When examining non-standard calques, not all the cases listed by P. Rudzevičius were found, so motivated cases are not divided as finely. In this article, the following cases are considered motivated usage: 1) written in quotation marks or in italics; 2) found in quotations from old texts; 3) found in normative publications intended for teaching and education; 4) used in the speech of characters in works of fiction; 5) found in quotations conveying colloquial speech or someone’s words; 6) found in the spoken-language section of the corpus. After counting cases of motivated and unmotivated usage, it became clear that 74 percent of the calques were used unmotivatedly, while 26 percent were used motivatedly. These data were obtained by counting all usage cases in all sections of the corpus. As already mentioned, all cases found in the spoken-language section were treated as motivated usage. This is not entirely accurate, since this section of the corpus also contains examples of public, official language (transcripts of Seimas proceedings, recordings of radio and television broadcasts), which are subject to requirements of correctness. Nevertheless, the spoken-language section consists largely of informal everyday conversation, and it is not possible to separate out examples of official language; therefore, all spoken-language cases were treated as motivated. On the other hand, spoken language may also contain the other types of motivated usage mentioned earlier, for example, someone’s incorrect speech recounted by another speaker, or a non-standard calque used to describe a particular person, and so on. Thus, several cases of motivated usage may overlap in this section of the corpus, but no more detailed analysis was conducted. Therefore, excluding the spoken-language section of DLKT, the results of the motivation analysis are somewhat different: unmotivated usage accounts for 84 percent of cases, and motivated usage for 16 percent. Some examples of motivated usage are given below: (10) After the little man has finished working out his “circumstances”„apystovų“5, the text moves on to a summarizing section (11) The prosperity attained there formed a dimension of “prosperity-ism”„gerbūvizmo“, which continues to expand its spaces of spiritual traditional values. (12) Fully – completely; “to express oneself” – to say; to пережить – to experience, to feel anxious, to grieve (13) “Before long” – soon, shortly. A half-baked person – a failure. I read – I think. (14) argued that “the transfer of the mission cannot in any way be understood as a voluntary act,” and the keys were handed over by the person of the lowest diplomatic rank (15) J. Skaisgirys (Ibid.). Riflemen’s Union commander P. Saladžius: “Your obal­sis ‘Lithuania for Lithuanians!’ is beautiful and dear to all Lithuanians. (16) o ir vertimo: „tarp vardų, minavotų žmonių svetimos šalies, įdėtais paliko nekurie senovėje pagarsinti mūsų šalies vyrai...“ (p. 53-54). Robinzonas Kruzas (17) Povy­zos drąsios, o ant kažno veido narsybė žydi. Stovy­la, kalba ir kažnas žingsnis reiškia visus liuosus esančius 5 Cases of motivated usage have not been corrected. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 9 (18) I felt uneasy in my own skin and was very keen to find out “to what extent,” as the people of Kaunas say, serious my game had been (19) but I just wanted to make myself feel a little older, you know, my birthday is soon. Of course, lies have short legs, but that’s beside the point. About singing. All right. (20) says: oh, Mr. Makortai, all the English teachers make us write about some kind of stupid things, like summer vacation or the story of our lives. (21) vadina „interpretatyviuoju protu“: tradicinis filosofo vaidmuo, aprašytas „įstatymdavio“ metafora, laipsniškai keičiamas vaidmeniu, kurį geriausiai pagauna (22) frakcijos dar nepasirengusios sudaryti taiką“. Rabaniui duota galimybė „laisvanoriškai“ atsistaty­dinti. Tai padaryti reikia iki kovo 21 dienos. In examples 10–11, nonstandard calques are graphically marked, that is, with quotation marks; these motivated-usage cases were found most frequently and are the easiest to identify. Examples 12–13 are taken from publications intended for language standardization or teaching. Examples 14–15 quote another person’s speech (apparently, it was important to reproduce everything exactly, so nothing was changed in the quotations and nonstandard calques were used). Examples 16–17 illustrate excerpts from old writings, so the use of nonstandard words here is motivated.6 In the eighteenth example of motivated usage, the calque is not only graphically marked but is also clearly used to convey the stylistic character of Kaunas speech. The nineteenth example is an excerpt of spoken language, so the calque used here is also considered motivated usage. On the other hand, perhaps the speaker is unfamiliar with language norms and uses neužilgo as a correct word—in that case, the usage should be considered unmotivated. Nevertheless, it is impossible to verify whether the authors of utterances presented in the spoken-language section of the corpus know language norms; therefore, as mentioned earlier, although it is not entirely accurate to claim this, all spoken-language instances are considered motivated usage. In the twentieth example, the speech of uneducated teenagers is aptly conveyed through linguistic means, so it is clear that the calque is used there for a reason. Examples 21–22 raise certain ambiguities: quotation marks may have been used not only as a precaution against error when quoting, but perhaps also to express irony—in which case the writer may not realize that įstatymdavio, laisvanoriškai are nonstandard words and that the quotation marks serve only to convey irony. Some examples of unmotivated usage and their commentary are presented below: (23) without saying anything, as though nothing had happened, I continued my work further. Circumstances (=Circumstances) worked out in my favor—I had a business trip to Moscow (24) Aš galvoju: šie žiūrovai, turintys šitokį materialinį gerbūvį (=gerovę), pertekę reginiais, daugybe televizijos programų, sėdės ir žiūrės mano (25) iš dviejų sferų, kurios viena kitą riboja, kitais žodžiais – kaip Fichte išsireiškia (=teigia, sako) – jos yra „dalios“ (kiekybiškos). 6Such examples from Old Lithuanian distort the statistical data somewhat: 1) because of their distribution across the corpus sections, since a text may be assigned, for example, to non-fiction, while containing a quotation from a work of fiction; 2) because of their distribution by period, since the analyzed concordance line may come from a fairly recent text, yet contain a quotation illustrating Old Lithuanian or dialect speech. On the other hand, there are not very many such cases, so it can be argued that they do not significantly affect the results presented in the article. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 10 (26) Voluntary (=Voluntary) retained earnings – this is a portion of the balance of retained earnings (27) brought them together into one team and called themselves “Sakalas”: Šiauliai “Sakalas” played some (=some) Baltic League and finished in 9th place. (28) Tautų išlaisvinimo obalsiai (=šūkiai) ypatingai buvo suprantami, patrauklūs vidutiniam žmogui. (29) Do they not regard the Poles as such; do they refuse to be controlled? – surely Mr. R. so much (=so) naive that he thinks it possible to let people meddle in the serious affairs of the nation (30) Soon (=Soon) we will face their terrifying attacks at our front door. (31) būrelyje kas nors įterptų kelis sakinius gudiškai (paprastai cituodamas kieno tai (=kažkieno) gudiškos kalbos fragmentus: ir visas pokalbis pereidavo į gudų kalbą. (32) Pasvalio rajono valdybos – leisti sumažinti akcinės bendrovės „Pasvalio gerbuvois (=gerovė)“ (6918959) Centrinės privatizavimo komisijos nustatytą (33) In Heidegger’s words, “the oldest of ancient things in our thinking lies behind us and nevertheless (=nevertheless) meets us” (34) dar apie vieną pasiutėlį, tik šįkart nebe aktorių. Apie tokį stoyyldirbį (=skulptorių, statulų dirbėją), skulptorių taigi. (35) As a result of healthy competition, Kaunas Music School at its own premisesalso introduced classes for all instruments, unfortunately, but did not know how to make use of them (36) Camouflage is everywhere, and if we do not notice it in our own country Lithuania, then the concealing material must be of very good quality. These examples suggest that language users did not realize they were making an error, since they neither marked nor explained the unacceptable calques in the text. It was observed that the unmotivated use of certain calques is particularly common in some publications (for ethical reasons, the authors and titles of the texts are not named); therefore, in some cases, rather than speaking generally about the prevalence of the calques listed in the DKKS in contemporary Lithuanian and their frequent use in the DLKT, one should speak of some authors’ lack of knowledge of language norms. It is not entirely clear whether example 32 should be considered an unmotivated use: quotation marks here distinguish a symbolic name, but it goes without saying that the names of companies, institutions, and organizations must be correct⁸; therefore, this case is classified as unmotivated use. Attention should be drawn to example 33: at first glance, it would seem to contain a motivated use of a calque in a quotation, but we know that Martin Heidegger did not write in Lithuanian; therefore, the unacceptable calque used is the translator’s error, not the author’s, and is considered unmotivated use. Example 34 shows that derivatives are formed from unacceptable calques (in this case stoyyldirbis), which are not recorded in the DKKS (the DKKS lists only stoyyla(s)), but they are also examined in this article. On the other hand, this sentence shows that, in pursuit of vividness and synonymy (sometimes unnecessary), incorrect words are used (P. Rudzevičius also notes such cases). The calques in examples 35–36 pas save are used without motivation. The usage of these translated multiword expressions is rather unclear: it is difficult to understand when this expression is used correctly and when it is not— ⁷ In this and example 36, the multiword expression pas save is unnecessary. ⁸ The company is now called “Pasvalio gerovė”. BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 11 ly, since many normative publications present the same examples and lack discussion of more complex and varied cases. It should be noted that, because the contextual information provided by DLKT is limited (a concordance line of no more than 300 characters is provided), it was sometimes not easy to determine the motivation behind the calque under investigation. Therefore, other researchers examining the same material might in some cases determine its motivation differently. The following calques are most often used without motivation (unmotivated usage accounts for more than 80%): gerbūvis, įstatymdavys, įstatymleidys (and other derivatives), išsireikšti, išsireiškimas, laisvanoriškas (and other derivatives), neužilgo, obalsis, paseka, stovyla, vienok, kaip kartas, kaip taisyklė. The translated multiword expressions ant tiek, ant kiek, ant sveikatos, kas link, (kaž)kaip tai. are most often used with motivation. However, DLKT yielded relatively few instances of these calques, so no reliable conclusions can be drawn about their motivated and unmotivated use. 4. CONCLUSIONS Summarizing the study of the calques listed in DKKS in DLKT, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Calques, as a group of unacceptable loan translations, remain relevant—as evidenced by their fairly frequent unmotivated use in DLKT (84%, excluding the spoken-language corpus section). 2. By frequency, calques were divided into three groups: the largest group (47%) comprises calques used 10–100 times in the corpus (e.g., apystova, obalsis). Slightly fewer (35.3%) are calques used very frequently, i.e., more than 100 times (e.g., išsireikšti, išsireiškimas, vienok, gerbūvis, neužilgo). The least frequently used calques account for 17.7% (e.g., ant kiek, ant tiek, ant sveikatos). 3. Most calques were found in the journalistic section of DLKT, because this is its largest section. After calculating normalized frequency (the number of occurrences per 100,000 words), it became clear that calques are used most often in the spoken-language corpus section. Thus, few unacceptable calques are used in texts that adhere to language norms. 4. An examination of calque usage by period showed that more calques (59%) occurred in older texts, i.e., those published before 2000, while fewer (41%) were found in newer texts (published from 2001 onward). This indicates a decline in the use of unacceptable calques. 5. Comparing the results of this study with the results of P. Rudzevičius’s (2005) analysis of unacceptable old loanwords revealed two important differences: 5.1. Unacceptable calques are much more often used without motivation (84%), whereas old loanwords are more often used with motivation (60%). This means that language users recognize loanwords more easily and, when they use them, set them apart graphically or in some other way; 5.2. Most unacceptable calques were found in journalistic writing (58.2% (calculated using raw rather than normalized frequency)), whereas most loanwords occurred in fiction (30.2%). These data suggest that old loanwords are a more useful stylistic device than calques for illustrating the speech and character of figures in works of fiction. 6. The list of loan translations should be reviewed, since some of them are no longer relevant; it should be supplemented with loan translations that have recently spread from English or other languages, especially vivid expres- BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualus didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 12 sions. Vivid nonstandard expressions should be explained, since language users often do not understand why those expressions are not recommended. Such a list would be very useful to editors, translators, teachers, lecturers, and students. ŠALTINIAI Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas. Prieiga internete: http://tekstynas.vdu.lt. Didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas. Prieiga internete: http://www.vlkk.lt/lit/klaidos. LITERATŪRA Kalbos patarimai. Kn. 1. Sintaksė: 1. Linksnių vartojimas. Sud. R. Miliūnaitė, teksto aut. V. Labutis, A. Pupkis ir J. Šukys, vyr. red. A. Pupkis, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2003. Marcinkevičienė R. 2000: Tekstynų lingvistika. Teorija ir praktika. – Darbai ir Dienos 24, 7–64. Paulauskienė A. 2000: Lietuvių kalbos kultūra, Kaunas: Technologija. Pupkis A. 2005: Kalbos kultūros studijos, Vilnius: Gimтасis žodis. Rudzevičius P. 2005: Svetimybių vartojimo polinkiai lietuvių kalbos tekstyne. – Kalbos kultūra 78, 210–219. Subačius G. 2013: Kalbos klaidų didybė. Prieiga internete: http://www.delfi.lt/news/ringas/lit/g-subacius-kalbos-klaidu-didybe.d?id=63258244 (žiūrėta 2014-10-10). Šukys J. 2003: Kalbos kultūra visiems, Kaunas: Šviesa. Urnėžiūtė R. 2014: Taisyklingos kalbos niekas neatšaukė (R. Urnėžiūtė kalbino D. Vaiš nienę, J. Palionytę, R. Miliūnaitę, A. Dvylę, D. Smalinską). – Gimtoji kalba 2, 18–26. Vaicekauskienė 2011: interviu Kalbininkė L. Vaicekauskienė: „Mes manipuliuojame visuomene, kai nuolat kalbame apie grėsmes lietuvių kalbai“. Prieiga internete: http://www.lrytas.lt/-12959878831295744879-kalbinink%C4%97-l-vaicekauskien%C4%97-mes-manipuliuojame-visuomene-kai-nuolat-kalbame-apie-gr%C4%97smes-lietuvi%C5%B3-kalbai.htm (žiūrėta 2014-10-13). Vaicekauskienė L. 2007: Naujieji lietuvių kalbos svetimžodžiai: kalbos politika ir vartosena, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla. Vaicekauskienė L. 2010: Lietuvių kalbos norminimo šimtmetis. – Naujasis židinys–Aidai 5–6, 165–172. Vilkončius V. 2001: Vertimas į lietuvių kalbą: trąfaretų antplūdis, Vilnius: Gimtas(is) žodis. Gauta 2014 10 23 BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 ERIKA RIMKUTĖ. Ar vis dar aktualūs didžiųjų kalbos klaidų sąrašas? Vertinių atvejis | 13 IS THE LIST OF MAJOR LANGUAGE MISTAKES STILL RELEVANT? A CASE STUDY OF LOAN-TRANSLATIONS Summary The article analyses 37 improper loan-translations given in the List of Major Language Mistakes. The Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language was used for the study of the said loan-translations; 34 loan-translations were found in this source. The loan-translations were analysed in terms of four aspects: 1) how often loan-translations were used in the corpus; 2) the part of the corpus they were used in; 3) the time period of texts; 4) motivation (present or not). The investigation of the material studied showed that more than a third of loan-translations were very frequent (used more than 100 times; e.g. išsireikšti, išsireiškimas, vienok, gerbūvis, neužilgo, (kaž)koks tai, (kaž)kas tai) and therefore unlikely to disappear in the nearest time. It was noticed that translated words rather than collocations were more common. After calculating the distribution of the analysed loan-translations in different parts of the Corpus, it turned out that the greatest number of loan-translations occur in publicistic texts (58.2 per cent), much less – in non-fiction (18.4 per cent), spoken language (12 per cent), and fiction (8.8 per cent). Improper loan-translations were the most uncommon in the administrative texts (2.6 per cent). It should be noted that the above given statistics show the number of loan-translations found in certain parts of the Corpus. As different parts of the Corpus vary in size, the normalised frequency (per 100 000 words) was calculated in order to find out the actual use of loan-translations. The data obtained were different: the greatest number of loan-translations used was found in the spoken language (65.3 instances per 100 000 words), non-fiction – 2.7, publicistic texts – 2, fiction – 1.5, administrative texts – 0.6. The investigation of the use of loan-translations according to the time period approved the hypothesis assumed in the introduction: the number of loan-translations found was greater (59 per cent) in the texts published before 2000, while their use in the recent texts (published starting from 2001) was less frequent (41 per cent). This suggests a certain decrease in the use of improper loan-translations. After counting the instances of motivated and unmotivated use, it turned out that 74 per cent of loan-translations were used without motivation, 26 per cent – with motivation. These data were obtained by counting the total number of instances throughout all the parts of the Corpus. Spoken language excluded (as all such instances of use were regarded as motivated), the results were quite different: unmotivated use was present in 84 per cent of the instances, motivated – 16 per cent. On the basis of such statistics, it can be concluded that language users do not recognise loan-translations as lexical errors. Thus, the discussion of improper loan-translations is still relevant, yet the List of Major Language Mistakes should be updated with recently widespread loan-translations that are more frequent in the current language as well as with improper figurative expressions. KEYWORDS: language culture, the Lithuanian language, improper loan-translations, the List of Major Language Mistakes, the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language, motivated and unmotivated use. ERIKA RIMKUTĖ Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas Humanitarinių mokslų fakultetas Lietuvių kalbos katedra K. Donelaičio g. 52, LT-44244 Kaunas [email protected] BENDRINĖ KALBA | 87 (2014) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204