Kas esamybė, o kas reikiamybė – tikra ar formali

Terminology | 2007 | 14 61 What is existence and what is necessity – real or formal JoNAs KLimAvičiUs Institute of Lithuanian Language The 1901 grammar of Jon Jablonski’s passive imperative verbavarpažiūros is a obligation, passive participant of expressing the lacking language; whether simple thing. Whoever looks closer, asks – what could dis, 1922 – necessity, or tolerable or permissible (deviation, stress...); Where's the half-time? "The participants of the necessity denote the characteristics arising from the action to be performed" (LKG II 1971: § 563). However, this is only a school truth, you will not get far with it, the path of standardization goes through stubs and stumps: “Some derivatives of the suffixes -tinas, -a do not have the meaning of the necessary action. Similarly, like many passive participles of the present tense, they simply denote characteristics related to a frequently performed continuous or possible action," e.g.: indisputable examples, observable world, unquestionable narrative (LKG II 1971: § 563). In contemporary Lithuanian grammar (1994, 2006) – only “verbal form of necessity (necessity participant)” (DLKG 1994: § 957), and the meaning is considered even more recently: “Most often in common language some verb forms with suffix -tinare used, which do not have the meaning of the necessary action to be performed”, e.g.: doubtful story, necessary matter, suspicious person, mortal danger, desirable guest, thing to be observed (DLKG 1994: § 957). In tritomy academic grammar, necessary is considered simply as an adjective (LKG II 1971: § 563). The necessary is not that “which must be”, but that “without which it is impossible to do without, very necessary” DJ 1993. Furthermore, already in Language and Antiquity (1922) K. Būga noted: “In the Žemaičių dialect, necessary means the same as the Russian word совершенный (vollkommen, perfectus)” (Būga RR II 1959: 122) – cf. necessary 2. "all, universal, complete, final". He returned the necessary pakajų (i.e. peace) to the world M. Valančius, necessarily: I absolutely do not drink and do not smoke Šatės (LKŽ I2 1968). 62 Jonas Klimavičius | What is existence and what is necessity… Thus, the of possibility, and some common words of this category have all kinds of peculiar lexical meanings, completely detached from both necessity and possibility. There is also a development in the opposite direction: “The passive participant of the present tense, while indicating the characteristic arising from the generalized passive action, often also indicates the possibility of performing this action” (the bed is pulled out, a person is spoken to, understandable language), with it “the meaning of purpose and suitability is closely related” (feeding beetles, living troupeau), and occasionally (in more dialects) “may also have the meaning of necessity”: Ką ten girti negirdžiamą (nepalaidinamą) daiktą Kėdainių r. Pagiriaė ( LKG II 1971: § 549–551). Here it should be said: language is not mechanics (and not unfortunately, but well, because otherwise it would stagnate and the thought would stagnate). Grammar is not at hand to many, it does not list all those words, and lexical meanings are not its subject. The Dictionary of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (1993) puts those words that have the meaning of existence rather than necessity and possibility not in the verb articles but separately; Accordingly, it explains: dubious – “false, unclear, doubtful” undubious – “unquestionable, true” deplorable – “causing pity or regret” pitiful – “causing pity, poor, weak, poor” deplorable – “pathetic, poor, difficult” sufficient – “sufficient” appalling – “causing horror” envious – “causing jealousy, very good” Some interpretations of the meanings of such words also include the element of possibility: selectable – “can be chosen, chosen” acceptable – “can be accepted” probable – “which can be believed” The meaning of necessity here, of course, has existed (the prosperity of participants in necessity is in the past, not all dialects have them), but has been lost (therefore it is not very common to doubt, horror, jealousy...). It is not difficult to find the common denominator of this group – it is not from any concrete action, but from an abstract action, more precisely – the verbs of the evaluative meaning, although it does not include all of them – the need still has praiseworthy, reproachable, condemnable, correctable, offerable, used, avoidable... there is DŽ 1993 and inconsistencies in the presentation: if it is horrible, why is it not? primary categorical meaning of necessity has often turned into the meaning Terminology | 2007 | 14 63 admirable, disgusting; if it is plausible, why isn’t plausible presented (there is only plausible “believable, plausible, reliable”) and unbelievable (there is only unbelievable 1. “unbelievable”, 2. “very large, extraordinary”). In 1993, a number of non-commercial, non-profit organizations were established. Some are interpreted only in a reference way (esamas dlv. → būti) or by synonyms (kintamas "changing, unstable"), sometimes the lexical meanings are broadly divided (writing dlv. 1. "with which it is written", 2. "on which it is written", 3. "which it is written"), but some indicate a feature of possibility or suitability: ėdamas 1. ‘eatable, suitable for eating’, edible 2. “suitable to eat” (drunk – not, smoked, smelled – not), unquestionable “unrejectable, certain” (questionable – not), accused “able to understand his actions and responsible for it”. In DŽ 1993, the pairs of necessity and present tense passive participle are rare, their difference (a) not accentuated or even (b) erased: (a) lethal 1. ‘lethal, fatal’: fatal danger, fatal disease, 2. „very big“: deadly hatred, deadly enemy (unconciliable), deadly silence (complete); deadly (necessarily) need money – dying → dying 1: dying disease (from which one dies); deadly frightened; also immortal “immortal, eternal”: immortal honor; still mortal "who has to die, dies", and immortal 1. ‘who does not die’, 2. “forever remembered, eternal”: immortal works [there is a clear difference between the terminological meaning of abstracts – mortality is “the ratio of the number of deaths to the number of people affected by the disease”, and mortality is “the ratio of the number of deaths to the number of people”]; right. fatal 1. → death 1: fatal (deadly) blow, 2. "great, infinite": mortal enemy; (b) suspected ‘suspected’ – suspected ‘suspecting’. Thus, for the normative academic grammar the matter is already quite clear, the normative vocabulary still needs to be worked on, and the usage is far from perfect. There are some really difficult cases in it. Missing and missing The common language is a language variant that can be developed and educated. The educator or the norm-setter needs to think in systems. If ordinary common language users sometimes do not feel the system, leave gaps, then it really should be helped. J. 1993 provides missing 1. → broken, 2. “which with defects”: ∆ missing verbs (not having all forms), incompletely prepared report. Provides also sufficient and sufficiently, rare enough, provides sufficiently and 64 Jonas Klimavičius | What is existence, and what is necessity... than it three times language usage there are also the words trūktinas, trūktina, trūktinai, but the normative dictionary does not provide them, although it provides them in the first place. invariably "sufficiently, sufficiently". In 1995, LKŽ XVI reported that there is a very widely used Žemaičių – 1. “who is lacking, insufficient”: It is better to be more lacking than to eat Shates. Work, don't work, and those pennies are lacking i[r] lacking Pėkeliai (2. „not of his mind, stupid“: Ans somewhat faulty, not like all Rietavas. Barbelei biškį (i.e. a little bit) was missing Endriejavas). Used by Antanas Salis: All dialect texts are very deficient in phonetics; Peter Avižonis: lack of convergence. The academic grammar provides – incompletely "too little, with defects": If there is salt insufficient, put it in LKG II 1971: § 760. Used by language culturalists. The most important is the systemic element of language. DŽ 1954, → leisti 1: allowable size, allowable rate, allowable rate (gram.) DŽ 1954, → leisti 1: allowable size, allowable rate, allowable rate (gram.) DŽ 1954, → leisti 1: allowable size, allowable rate, allowable rate (gram.) „which is not yet perfect – permissible „permitted, not prohibited“: permissible behaviour, permissibly, unlawfully he acted, kiamas sutikimas“) DŽ 1993, ir leistinas,neleistinas, bet šių (pa)teikimas inadmissible „which cannot be allowed, tolerated“: unlawful behaviour, inadmissibly slow down the time limits of the sentence DŽ 1954, permissible „observing certain norms, allowed, not punishable“ DŽ 1972, „supported by certain norms, allowed, not punishable“ DŽ 1993 (forgivable – not). We see that permissible, although the synonym of the meaning of existence is included in the interpretation of its meaning, but also the synonym of the meaning of necessity is not permissible, in fact retains its categorical meaning of necessity (especially inadmissible – “which cannot be allowed”). In addition, there is no lack (as in some cases is) of the current time inactive participant allowed, DZ provides terms allowable size, allowable rate. It is true that in the terminology there was and allowed, in some places and still is, and especially common in various periodicals, e.g.: greenhouse gas emissions allowable limits Vd 2006 29 10. But even a small harvest takes nutrients from the soil and they need to be compensated. Rather common, but also correctible allowable level Vd 2007 36 10, allowable and inadmissible levels Sav with TV 2006 49 5, allowable amount Vd 2007 46 38, allowable concentration more commonly (DažnŽ 1998; ganėtinas – quite rare, as is zaganėdinti). In general Terminology | 2007 | 14 65 Vd 2007 44 10, allowed speed Vd 2006 48 48, Sav with TV 2007 4 8, allowed alcohol level Vd 2006 48 49, allowed promile Vd 2007 36 14, allowed stay in USA Vd 2007 31 6, allowed altitude Sav with TV 2007 4 8. The authorized positions of the term point are strengthened by the system – the antonym is usually prohibited: prohibited action, prohibited activity, prohibited work, prohibited substances, prohibited weapons, although here too some errors occur, e.g.: to leave the car in a prohibited place Sav su TV 2007 37 8. It should be noted that the expression of negative action in terminology (and not only in it) is more often the necessary form of the participant: inadmissible deviation, inadmissible activity, dose not to be exceeded, threshold value not to be exceeded, immediate reaction... However, the opposite thing is not forgotten, for example, although the crime can be appealed, but the court decision (even the most unjust) can only be appealed, the decision of the court of last instance is not appealed, i.e. cannot be appealed. HALF SÉTINE It is important to note the attention of the language mechanics to the word halfėtinas. Its meaning is “average; 1993) 1923 – John Smith, Australian cricketer (d. „per pusę, pusinis“: When the father dies, the children are half orphans, but when they lose their mother, they are already real poor people! Do you love me at least half as much as I love you?! Earth). The word is not used in the 1943 Lithuanian-English dictionary of P. Skardžius. In Lithuanian grammar, the word pusėtinis is considered an adjective, composed, like baisėtinas „baisus“, with the secondary suffix -ėtinas (LKG I 1965: § 964 4), although the verb baisėtis is quite common (and pasibaisėtinas – certainly a participle of necessity), is also halfėti, although usually įpusėti. When necessity is real, when only the form of necessity, when necessity according to the content of the concept cannot exist or is the opposite of necessity and existence – these are important but difficult questions for terminology, requiring special attention from term creators, users and editors. There can be no automaticity here – it is the decisive factor. When considering what standards should be allowed, it is possible to talk about the permissible standard, but the permissible standard is necessarily decided and adopted. Damage must be compensated, therefore compensatory damage is necessary, but in life, if the law is not followed, there is irreparable damage. The consultant can 66 Jonas Klimavičius | What is existence and what is necessity... being paid and meaningful – paid konsultantas. The meanings of the indefinite relatives of the participants of the necessity are also different – and the necessity, and the possibility, and the existence, there are also specific lexical ones. It is not the meaning that is important here (it depends on the reference words – the meanings of the participants), but the use. Academic grammar notes their characteristics only in folklore and fiction, e.g. : If it is liveable – will survive, if it is miserable – will suffer (cause). We will weep afterwards (i.e. afterwards), if the Earth is to be wept for (LKG II 1971: § 596). However, these forms are particularly common in subjective texts – to express assessments: regrettable, deplorable, suspicious, emphasized, likely; (not) doubtful, (not) excusable, (not) disputed, (not) praised, (not) permissible, (not) enviable, (not) reproachable, (not) acceptable, (not) condemnable, (not) correctable, (not) offerable, (not) used, (not) avoidable... There are also many adverbs among the participants of necessity (of various meanings). In 1993, they are presented in the articles of those participants, e.g.: dvojotinas, ~a <...>. ~ai prv. The language has certain peculiarities here – there is no adverb permissible, there is only inadmissible; is not sufficient for the participant (is only excessive, also excessively), but is very characteristic of the adverb sufficiently. The 1993 DG presents in separate articles only those participants of necessity that do not fit into its categorical meaning. Adverbs made of the usual participles of necessity, which do not have their own articles in the dictionary, are presented separately: atmestinai „badly“ and atmestinis „without will performed“, atsitiktinai ir atsitiktinis, įskaitytinai ir įskaitytinis, išpirktinai ir išpirktinis, sąlygiškai ir sąlyginis, pabaigtinai „completely“ and pabaigtinis „final, last“, insistentily and insistentily, forcibly and coercivel, sudėtingai ir sudėtinis, sutartinai ir sutartinis, vogtinai ir vogtinis. Some of these adverbs appear in adjective articles: dirbtinis, ~ė <...>. ~ai, kartotinis, ~ė <...>. ~ai, žūtbūtinis, ~ė <...>. ~ai. Does this indicate a different creation: these from participle adjectives, and those from necessity adjectives? Hardly (except for the mostnecessary). For academic third-person grammar, they're all like that „adjectives of the origin of participants of necessity“ (LKG II 1971: § 760), there are even more of them: atsiskaitytinai, „ne veltui“, galutinai „visiškai, labai“, grįžtinai „nutačius grįžti“, išsineštinai, liktinai 1. "by staying somewhere forever", unpaid, paid and unpaid, but meaningless necessity – unpaid consultant, Terminology | 2007 | 14 67 2. "so much that it still remains", opinionately, downrightly "with the right to take away something", admiredly "being intoxicated", reproachably "reproachingly, wrongly", understoodly "understoodly", weighedly "weigh, not from the eye". By the way, LKG II 1971: § 760 is also omitted fairly, horribly, acceptably, half-heartedly, confusingly. They are definitely needed more for the normative vocabulary, a lot of them can be found in the technical language. For example, in the 1938 Dictionary of Commercial Correspondence, the following adjectives are presented: atsisakyti, atskaityti, išmesti, išpirktinai, išskaitytinai, išsivežtinai, įskaitytinai, neatsakytinai, pamestinai, pareikalautinai, pasirašytinai, pristatytinai, trauktinai (A. SalR I 1979). Another unusualness – in the chapter of the Pronoun, unexpectedly mentioned verb adverbs never heard before, for example, in payment (LKG II 1971: § 684). Need adjectives are most often used in combinations with verbs, e.g.: apvertinai siūti, atmestinai dirbti, gręžtinai sušlapti, iškirsti nai pirkti (forest), mirtinai sirgti, paveldėtinai gauti (farm), užgultinai reikalauti (rarely – with adjectives: enviably beautiful). When transforming the verb into abstract and adverb, it is replaced: sell for payment – payment sale, buy for payment – purchase for payment (A. SalR I 1979: 463, 472), conditional: conditional release from sentence – conditional: conditional sentence DZ 1993. “Combinations of nouns with adverbs are very rare” (LKG III 1976: § 396), the examples are exceptional (learning by heart or by memory can certainly not be a supporting example). CONCLUSIONS Among the grammatical issues that are important for professional and scientific language and terminology is the tricky question of the so-called necessary participants. The difficulty comes not from terminology, but from the grammar itself – that category, which flourished in the past, is not preserved by all dialects, the content is considerably washed away – some derivatives no longer have the meaning of the action required to be performed (or do not have it in all combinations, but only denote – like the passive participants of the present tense – the possibility or even the characteristic of a permanent action (necessary, fatal, observed...), in addition, have very specific – far from the categorical meaning – lexical meanings (lackful – 1. “who lacks something, insufficient”, 2. low “not of all his senses, foolish”, half-hearted – “medium; good, strong”). Although it is far from the category, but it is also an inherited and precious language wealth, ensuring 68 Jonas Klimavičius | What is existence and what is necessity... will give tradition grammatical contradictions of microsystems do not allow to blindly follow this path, for example, what is not necessary to allow, but only due to inevitability is allowed, is the necessarily permissible, -oji (speed, rate...), and not the permissible, -oji. The opposite prohibited, -oji (action, material, weapon...) is more firmly in terminology (although every prohibited thing must be prohibited at the same time). The sense of grammar and at the same time the grammatical and logical thinking are very much needed here by the creators and users of terms, editors and secondary users – journalists. ŠALTINIAI DažnŽ 1998 – L. Grumadienė, V. Žilinskienė. Dažninisdabartinėsrašomosioslietuviųkalbos   žodynas(abėcėlėstvarka), Vilnius. DŽ 1954 – Dabartinėslietuviųkalbosžodynas, Vilnius. DŽ 1972 – Dabartinėslietuviųkalbosžodynas, Vilnius. DŽ 1993 – Dabartinėslietuviųkalbosžodynas, Vilnius. LKŽ I2 1968 – Lietuviųkalbosžodynas1, Vilnius. LKŽ X 1976 – Lietuviųkalbosžodynas10, Vilnius. LKŽ XVI 1995 – Lietuviųkalbosžodynas16, Vilnius. MkslL – MoksloLietuva (laikraštis). A. SalR I 1979 – Prekybinėskorespondencijosžodynėlis. – A. Salys. Raštai 1, Roma, 453–484. Sav su TV – SavaitėsuTV (savaitraštis). "Vid - Veidas (magazine)". LITTERACY Būga K. RR II 1959: Rinktiniairaštai2, Vilnius. DLKG 1994: Grammar of Contemporary Lithuanian Language, Vilnius. LKG I 1965: Lithuanian Grammar 1, Vilnius. LKG II 1971: Lithuanian Grammar 2, Vilnius. LKG III 1976: Lithuanian Grammar 3, Vilnius. WHAT IS A REALITY AND WHAT IS A TRUE OR FORMAL NECESSITY Amongst matters of grammar which are important to special language, language of science and terminology there is the tricky issue of necessitive participles. The difficulty arises not from terminology, but from the grammar itself – a content of this category which flourished in the past, but did not survive in all dialects, lacks clarity of usage. Some formations do not any longer have the meaning of an action which s h o u l d o r m u s t be done (or have it, but not in all collocations and it signifies – like the present passive participle – the p o s s i b i l i t y or even the property of c o n t i n u a l action (būtinas, mirtinas, stebėtinas...)), but in addition they have very peculiar lexical meanings, which are distant from the categorial meaning (trūktinas – 1. „kuriam ko trūksta, nepakankamas“, 2. žem. „ne viso proto, kvailas“, pusėtinas – „vidutiniškas; gerokas, smarkokas“). Despite moving away from the category, such gerundives ought to be cherished, since they are an inherited treasure of the language, which ensures tradition. and community. However, the logic of terminology, the relationships of Terminology | 2007 | 14 69 Logicality of terminology and relations of grammatical oppositions of microsystems do not allow a blind following of this root, for example, a thing which s h o u l d n o t b e allowed, but is allowed only because of inevitability, is leidžiamasis, -oji (greitis, norma...), but not leistinasis, -oji. The opposite prohibitive (action, substance, weapon...) keeps a tighter hold in terminology (every prohibited thing needs to be prohibited). In such cases a sense of grammar together with grammatical and logical thinking is very necessary for creators and users of terminology, editors and secondary users – journalists. Retrieved 2007-11-20. Jonas Klimavičius Institute of Lithuanian Language P. Vileišio g. 5, LT - 10308 E. mail terminal[email protected]