LORETA VAIČIULYTĖ-SEMĖNIENĖ

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

Research areas: Lithuanian morphosyntax, typological morphosyntax, valency.

NOUN IN THE NOMINATIVE AND INSTRUMENTAL CASE IN FINITE ASCRIPTIVE BŪTI SENTENCES

Noun in the Nominative and Instrumental Cases in Finite Ascriptive Sentences with to be

ABSTRACT

Straipsnyje kalbama apie predikatyvu einančio daiktavardžio žymėjimo galimą sąsają su nuosakomis reiškiamu modalumu. Nagrinėjamą medžiagą sudaro iš Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstyno (DLKT) rinkti askriptyviniai finitini jungties būti sakiniai, kuriuose teigiamas predikatas pasakomas skirtingų nuosakų formomis. Laikomasi nuomonės, kad vertinamojo ir irealaus modalumo atžvilgiu morfosintaksinis žymėjimas yra laipsniškas ir preliminariai galima kalbėti apie santykinį polinkį dažniau vartoti predikatyvu einančio daiktavardžio įnagininką skalių episteminis > deontinis (tiesioginė > liepiamoji nuosaka) ir realus > irealus (tiesioginė > tariamoji nuosaka) atžvilgiu.

ABSTRACT

The article deals with the possible connection between the marking of noun predicatives and the modality expressed by moods. The material analysed in the article consists of ascriptive finite sentences of the copula būti (to be) collected from the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (CCLL) where a positive predicate is expressed in the forms of different moods. The opinion is followed that in respect of the evaluative and irreal modality, morphosyntactic marking is gradual and we can speak in preliminary terms about the relative tendency to use the instrumental of the noun used as the predicative in respect of the scales epistemic > deontic (indicative > imperative mood) and real > irreal (indicative > subjunctive mood).

KEYWORDS: modality, nominal predicative, morphosyntactic marking.

KEYWORDS: modality, noun predicative, morphosyntactic marking.

Straipsniai / Articles

9

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

0. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

Classical works on Lithuanian grammar state that the marking of a noun functioning as a predicative¹ by a concordant and/or non-concordant case in būti clauses (Eng. copular sentence, Ger. Prädikativsatz2), for example, Prisėsk, būsi svečias (cf. svečiu), is associated with semantic and formal criteria. Alongside the now-canonical view that the noun’s case is affected by the permanent or temporary state of the entity expressed by the predicative³, it is also claimed that the form of the inflected copula būti is related to the form of the predicative. In some accounts, for example, it is noted that the noun’s “instrumental is much more frequent with the future-tense būti,” while with the subjunctive būti it “is not particularly frequent,” and with the imperative copula it “is likewise not frequent” (emphasis mine. – L. V.-S.) (Šukys 1998: 245–247). Elsewhere, the view is held that “the noun’s instrumental is more often used with the future tense or the subjunctive, and less often with the copula in other forms” (emphasis mine. – L. V.-S.) (Ambrazas, ed., 2006: 505–506, cf. Ulvydas, ed., 1976: 364).

The latter view, together with the idea that the inflected form of the copula būti has a greater influence on the morphosyntactic marking of a noun used predicatively than the permanent or temporary state of the entity expressed by the predicative itself⁴, as well as the data from the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language⁵ (hereafter DLKT), prompted an investigation of whether, and how, in affirmative finite būti clauses, the case of a noun functioning as a predicative correlates with the modality expressed by mood.

Taking the views mentioned above into account, this article seeks answers to the following questions:

(i) If the instrumental of a noun functioning as a predicative is, for instance, more frequent with a future-tense copula (cf. Šukys 1998), does this mean that its use may—

¹The term predicative is used following Artūras Judžentis (2012: 69): it is a word that is syntactically dependent on the verb but semantically related not only to it, but also to the subject or object. The syntactic dependency of such a word may be expressed through modification or government.

² In Lithuanian linguistics, such clauses are usually called nominal clauses (Ambrazas, ed., 2006: 612). This article examines ascriptive (Eng. ascriptive) būti clauses, leaving aside the so-called equative clauses (Eng. equative), which are distinguished according to the uniqueness (Eng. uniqueness) of the referent of the word functioning as the predicative; cf.: Jonas yra mokytojas vs. Jonas yra mano geriausias draugas; Aš esu Loreta (for further discussion, see Hengeveld 1992: 73–105). Prototypical ascriptive clauses have a definite (Ger. definit) subject and an indefinite (Ger. indefinit) predicative. In prototypical equative clauses, both the subject and the predicative are definite.

³ For further discussion, see Semėnienė 2004 and the literature discussed there.

⁴ For further discussion, see Semėnienė 2004 and the literature discussed there. See also the examples presented later in the article.

⁵ Available online: http://donelaitis.vdu.lt.

10

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finitiniuose askriptyviniuose būti sakiniuose

may be associated with the verb’s tense category. Or does the more frequent use of the noun instrumental with the future-tense būti form correlate not (only) with grammatical tense but (perhaps also) with modality (similarly to the subjunctive) (cf. Ambrazas 2006)⁶?

(ii) Modality is expressed by verb moods. Perhaps there is a relative tendency to mark it additionally (Eng. redundant) by case as well. In other words, perhaps modality is expressed not only by the grammatical categories of the verb, but also by those of the noun⁷.

To answer these questions, the following discussion first briefly addresses mood and modality (see 1), then grammatical tense and modality (see 2). Finally, it examines the relationship between modality and the expression of a noun functioning as a predicate (see 3–4), and draws conclusions (see 5).

1. MOOD AND MODALITY

In Lithuanian grammatical works, the category of mood is generally defined as modality expressed by grammatical means of the verb, that is, the speaker’s relationship to a situation in terms of certainty, possibility, necessity, condition, etc. (cf. Jablonskis 1922/1957: 258; Ulvydas, ed., 1971: 55–56; Paulauskienė 1979: 141; Ambrazas, ed., 2006: 304; Valeckienė 1998: 73; Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 77–78; Judžentis 2012: 165). Mood is classified in different ways with respect to meaning and expression. Some works distinguish five moods (Ulvydas, ed., 1971: 65; Valeckienė 1998: 73), others four (Jablonskis 1922/1957: 257; Ambrazas, ed., 2006: 304–305) or three (Paulauskienė 1979: 165–166; 1983: 252–253; 1994: 310–311; Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 80–82; Holvoet 2010; Judžentis 2012: 172–177). The largest number—five moods—was distinguished by Pranas Gailiūnas in the academic Lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje and by Adelė Valeckienė in Funkcinėje lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje. The former discusses the indicative, indirect, imperative, subjunctive, and optative moods, while the latter discusses the indicative, indirect, imperative, subjunctive, and interrogative moods. Jonas Jablonskis’s Lietuvių

⁶ „One of the findings that he [t. y. Ultan (1978)] reports is that future markers are often used in atemporal functions, especially functions associated with mood and modality. [...] Several languages were found with markers whose primary function appeared to express mood, but which could also be used to express future time“ (Bybee 1985: 156; dar plg. t. p.: 157–159). Plg. „What is more, at least in the major area, that of the irrealis modality, the epistemic and evaluative modes overlap to quite an extent and often share their grammatical coding“ (Givón 2001: 300–301, plg. dar 358–361).

⁷ For example, in the North Australian tangick language family, modality is also marked by noun case (for a fuller discussion, see de Haan 2006: 40–41; on this question, cf. also ibid.: 43).

Straipsniai / Articles

11

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

kalbos gramatikoje discusses the indicative, subjunctive, imperative, and optative moods, while Vytautas Ambrazas’s Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje discusses, in addition to the indicative, subjunctive, and imperative, the indirect mood as well. Aldona Paulauskienė, Axel Holvoet, and Artūras Judžentis distinguish a three-member category of mood, consisting of the indicative, subjunctive, and imperative moods (cf. Holvoet 2010). The indirect mood is classified here under the category of evidentiality (Holvoet, Judžentis 2004; Judžentis 2012) or called “a formally expressed variant of the indicative mood” (Paulauskienė 1979: 158; 165), while the optative mood (cf. tegul būna, tebūnie) is assigned to the indicative mood (Paulauskienė 1979: 160, 165; Holvoet 2010: 426).

Various classifications of modal meanings exist (cf. inter alia Palmer 2001; Frawley (ed.) 2006; Bybee 1985: 165–189; Bybbe, Perkins, Pagliuca 1994: 176–242; Paulauskienė 1979: 137–141; Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 82–85; Holvoet 2007: 16–22; Plungian 2011: 189–215; Judžentis 2012: 166–169 and the literature discussed there). Drawing on the views of foreign linguists, recent works on Lithuanian linguistics (Judžentis 2012: 166; Holvoet 2007; 2010; Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 82–85) distinguish two types of evaluative modality according to how the speaker assesses the situation and what their relationship to it is (Eng. speakers attitude, following Givón 2001: 300; cf. Plungian 2011: 189–190, 198): epistemic and deontic⁸. Epistemic modality expresses an assessment of a proposition or situation, based on the speaker’s experience or perception of the world, in terms of certainty (or probability); deontic modality expresses various acts of will on the part of the subject of the situation being discussed (desire, permission, requirement, necessity, etc.) (Judžentis 2012: 166–167; Holvoet 2007: 16–17; Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 82–83).

Sentences containing a modal adverb or modal verb expressing epistemic or deontic modality can be paraphrased by turning it into a subordinate noun clause governed by a higher predicate expressing epistemic or deontic modality, for example: Jonas is certainly a teacher, cf. It is true that Jonas was a teacher; You must be a teacher, cf. It is necessary that you be a teacher (Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 83; cf. Holvoet 2007: 16–17).

Epistemic modality is generally expressed by affirmative declarative sentences in the indicative mood (Jonas is a teacher). The core of deontic modality consists of imperative forms (Jonas, be a teacher⁹). It is also expressed, for example, in cases where an indicative verb is used

⁸ „The epistemic-deontic distinction seems to be relevant, in a certain way, to mood. [...] If dynamic modality has no counterpart in the domain of mood, then is perhaps because it belongs to the periphery of modality“ (Holvoet 2007: 18).

⁹ „If we accept that the imperative is a mood, then regardless of whether we formulate its meaning semantically as based on volition, or pragmatically as expressing directives, it is obviously convenient to have deontic modality as a volitional type corresponding to it in the domain of modality“ (Holvoet 2007: 17; dar plg. t. p.: 22–23).

12

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finitiniuose aspektviniuose būti sakiniuose

with the hortative particle te(gu(l)) or the proclitic te⁻¹⁰ (Let Jonas be a teacher). The indicative is the unmarked member of the mood system; it is associated not only with epistemic but also with deontic modal meanings (Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 86–87, 102–103; Holvoet 2007: 23–24; cf. Jablonskis 1922/1957: 258). The conditional forms, like the indicative forms, are also used in sentences expressing both epistemic and deontic modality (e.g., Jonas, if you were a teacher, things would be different; You’d better be a teacher). However, it contrasts with both the indicative and the imperative moods in another respect—that of irreality (nonfactuality) (Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 88; Holvoet 2007: 25; Judžentis 2012: 172–175).

Real and irrealis modality are distinguished according to the speaker’s attitude toward the reality of the matters being discussed. Situations that exist independently of human beings and are factual are instances of real modality. They are typically expressed by sentences using the present and past forms of the indicative. Situations of irrealis modality are nonfactual, imagined; their reality cannot, at the very least, be verified at the moment of speaking. Such situations can be expressed by the future tense of the indicative¹¹ and by imperative and conditional forms (Judžentis 2012: 168–169; cf. Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 96–97, 104; Paulauskienė 1979: 141; 153; Plungian 2011: 124, 213–214). In addition, irrealis situations can also be expressed by the aforementioned present and future forms of the indicative with tegu(l)¹².

Thus, the mood system is distinguished according to two independent criteria. In terms of factuality, the opposition between real and irrealis modality (indicative vs. conditional mood), whose marked member (irrealis) is expressed by conditional forms, involves emphatic nonfactuality (unreality). In terms of the type of evaluative modality (epistemic vs. deontic), indicative forms contrast with imperative forms. If we recognize the opposition between real and irrealis modality as the basis of the mood system (Paulauskienė 1979: 141; 1994: 310–311; Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 103; Holvoet 2007: 26, 59–60; Holvoet 2010: 441–442), then the imperative mood should be assigned to real modality (Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 103; Holvoet

¹⁰ Čia laikomasi panašios nuomonės kaip in Holvoet 2007: 39, Judžentis 2012: 172. Plg. „We will therefore describe teateina as an indicative and teateinie as a residual separate mood“ (Holvoet 2007: 39).

¹¹ Plg.: „It can be argued that future is a prototypical irrealis category because it refers to events that have not yet happened and are therefore unreal“ (de Haan 2006: 41). „Although the future can be considered to be an irrealis category, as it refers to events that have not (yet) taken place, it is expressed with the Indicative mood in Latin“ (de Haan 2006: 44).

¹² “The principal opposition between moods here is established according to whether the speaker states an action to be real (indicative mood) or unreal—commanded, desired, or hypothetical (imperative and conditional moods)” (Paulauskienė 1979: 141). Cf. (ibid.: 165): “The conditional and imperative have their own morphological markers, which indicate the unreality of the action, whereas the indicative has no special marker; therefore, its forms can express both real and unreal actions.”

Straipsniai / Articles

13

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

2007: 60¹³; Judžentis 2012: 173; for a different view, cf. Paulauskienė 1979: 141, 153–154). More precisely, with respect to (ir)reality, the imperative mood would fall in the middle of the scale real (indicative mood) > unreal (conditional mood), similarly to how the conditional mood falls in the middle of the scale epistemic (indicative mood) > deontic modality (imperative mood).

2.

TENSE AND MODALITY

Grammatical tense, as a deictic category, locates events on the timeline from the perspective of the moment of speaking. Simple verb tenses (present, past, future) express deictic tense oppositions (present, past, future). Unlike statements expressed in the present and past, statements expressed in the future are not verifiable at the moment of speaking; they are less categorical because the speaker cannot guarantee their truth (for more detail, see Holvoet, Pajėdienė 2004: 121–124). Thus, as noted, statements expressed in the Lithuanian future tense are associated with irrealis modality, while, in terms of the speaker’s relation to reality, the future tense is associated with epistemic and deontic modality. The question arises as to which modal properties, besides grammatical tense, might be associated with the relatively more frequent instrumental case of a predicatively used noun (cf. de Haan 2006: 49–50).

The imperative and conditional forms have no morphological markers expressing a tense category and do not indicate more precisely defined temporal relations. The action expressed by these simple forms has not yet occurred at the moment of speaking and did not occur earlier. With imperative forms, the action must be carried out; with conditional forms, it is (im)possible, merely imagined or hypothetical (i.e., irrealis); thus, the action may begin and be realized at the moment of speaking itself (in the present) or after it (in the future) (Ulvydas, ed., 1971: 59).

From what has been briefly said so far, one might conclude that in Lithuanian modality correlates not only with the grammatical categories of the verb but perhaps also with those of the noun¹⁴. If modality is viewed as a component of the verb category known as TAM (Eng. time–aspect–modality; cf. Givón 2001: 285, 303–305,

¹³ Plg. „In itself, the imperative cannot a priori be quantified as realis or irrealis. [...] With its explicit deontic meaning, the imperative is opposed to both the indicative and the conditional. If we regard the realis: irrealis distinction as the nucleus of the mood system, then the imperative only partly belongs belongs to mood: its functions can be defined pragmatically, and is actually superimposed on modal meanings“ (Holvoet 2007: 26; plg. t. p.: 60).

¹⁴ Cf.: “The grammatical markers of modality a very varied. [...] Basically there are three types of marker: (i) individual suffixes, clitics and participles, (ii) inflection and (iii) modal verb” (Palmer 2001: 19; cf. de Haan 2006: 40–41).

14

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finitiniuose askriptyviniuose būti sakiniuose

337 et seq.)—a portion (while, of course, acknowledging that modality and sentence predication can be expressed not only by a verb)—the article seeks to determine whether/how modality expressed by different verb moods may affect the case-marking preferences of nouns functioning as predicates. When comparing the trends in the expression of nouns functioning as predicates more generally, can we speak of a tendency to mark different types of modality differently? The article discusses modality in ascriptive¹⁵ copular būti sentences with a noun functioning as a predicate; it examines finite būti sentences whose affirmative predicate is expressed by forms of the indicative, imperative, and subjunctive moods. The discussion begins by examining the possible correlation between evaluative modality and the case marking of nouns functioning as predicates (see 3), then considers the relationship between (ir)realis modality and the expression of nouns used predicatively (see 4), and concludes with the findings (see 5).

The expression of nouns functioning as predicates is examined on the basis of empirical data found in DLKT. In total, 1,462 finite ascriptive būti sentences were collected and analyzed in the article: 639 with indicative forms, 351 with imperative forms, and 472 with subjunctive forms. The available data are statistically summarized.

3. EVALUATIVE MODALITY (EPISTEMIC VS. DEONTIC) AND THE EXPRESSION OF NOUNS FUNCTIONING AS PREDICATES

The core of epistemic modality consists of assertive statements expressed by indicative forms, while the core of deontic modality consists of directives expressed by the imperative mood. For the reasons mentioned earlier, let us set aside for now assertive sentences using affirmative future-tense forms of būti in the indicative, and first compare sentences with present- and past-tense forms of būti in the indicative with sentences using the imperative, for example:

(1) Ten years older than me. Well, then the Germans came, then it was the Russians, then the Germans, and afterwards the Russians again. Dad was a builder, if he was building houses. DLKT

(2) We went dancing, and that Romas came from another collective farm. He used to come to the feast day at Labūnava, to Ona’s. He would come in a truck, with lots of people squeezed in. He was a driver. He came, he brought her there. Well, so it was a kind of date, and we sort of started seeing each other. Then at night… in the evening we got back to my cousin’s, around dawn. DLKT

¹⁵ Cf. footnote 2.

Straipsniai / Articles

15

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

(3) Over its long history, VU has played a special role in the cultural life of our state and beyond. For centuries it was a European-level university, where people from various countries studied and taught. DLKT

(4) The educator and academic Juozas Brazaitis, according to the aforementioned Stasys Yla, was a manof struggle—subtle, dignified, resilient, incisive, and profound. If we looked for examples abroad of people like him in this postwar period, we would find perhaps three. DLKT

(5) Rule or obey!—that is the motto underlying such a stance; or be a Great Man, a Hero, who wrestles unflinchingly with fate and earns glory (“the greater the fall, the greater the glory,” says Heraclitus). DLKT

(6) At the end of the letter are three small lines written in Aleksandras Stulginskis’s handwriting: “Dear Aldutė, finish your studies successfully, be a good person; although I live far away, my thoughts are always with you. I rejoice in you and am proud of you. I bless you; may the Almighty bless you. Dad. DLKT

(7) We hear V. Krėvė’s words, akin to Vydūnas’s: “If you are a person unto yourself, be your own personand seek your own path, relying on no one else’s hand.” DLKT

(8) A couple of days ago the Lithuanian teacher Eugenija ordered those. “Petrai, be a person, get it done sooner, make an effort; we’re expecting an inspection next week. Hurry up, I won’t be in your debt.” “Oh, teacher, really, you don’t have to.” DLKT

(9) Palydi!. Sako. Nors iki namų, žinai. Tai ką, sakau, da į lovą paguldyt gal reikės?. Sako, nors iki namų, žinai. Ne ne, sakau, nelydėsiu. Ne. And riau, būk draugas, palydėk, ma baisu. Eik tu, aš įsitikinęs! Eik tu, te jis ma, šakės, sako, prisižaidėm. Daba, vyru ti, namuose dvasios. Turėsi kunigą užpirkt. DLKT

(10) “I can’t accept your offering! It will be enough if you pay for the animals.” Then, after a pause, he said: “I’d also like to offer you something. Be my friend.” In the name of eternal friendship, the men silently shook hands. DLKT

Sentences (1)–(10) show that the noun functioning as a predicate can, in principle, be expressed interchangeably in the nominative or the instrumental. Are the differences in modality expressed by these moods related to the preferences in the expression of nouns functioning as predicates? If we accept that the nominative is usual for nouns in copular sentences with present-tense indicative forms of būti, and that it is somewhat less frequent with past-tense forms, then we must conclude that in sentences with imperative forms of būti there is a stronger tendency to choose the instrumental case for nouns. More specifically, in sentences of types (5)–(10), the instrumental is chosen for the noun functioning as a predicate in 23.1% of the available cases (or in 81 of 351 sentences), whereas in sentences of types (1)–(4) it is chosen in 7% of all cases (or in 10 of 146 sentences) (see also Semėnienė 2004 on this).

Thus, if the instrumental case of a noun functioning as a predicative is more frequent in sentences with an imperative form, it could presumably be used similarly in sentences with te(gu(l)), te- and indicative forms. Compare:

16

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finitiniuose askriptviniuose būti sakiniuose

(11) – For the one with the little horns! – For Ralph! Ralph! – Let the one with the trumpet be leader. Ralph raised his hand for everyone to be quiet. – All right. Who wants Jack to be leader? The choirboys frowned, but raised their hands. – And who wants me? DLKT

(12) One of the best ways to help children understand the concept of respect is to treat them respectfully. Let them be your partners as they learn. Encourage children to express their suggestions, incorporate their suggestions into your plans, and value their ideas. Listen to what they say. DLKT

(13) Nor are you to be called teachers, for you have one Teacher, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. DLKT

(14) The group’s colorful discography offers many more magical discoveries and moments of rock’n’roll ecstasy. So let this double album be just a key, allowing anyone who wishes to open the door to the world of modern heavy metal. A world whose uncrowned kings became Judas Priest. DLKT

(15) Let the volunteers be an example to us. We shall set aside party and personal disputes until the day when we are completely free and nationally mature. The volunteers went to die for Lithuania. DLKT

(16) A plot directed against the Nation, its solidarity and its life. Therefore, no decent Lithuanian can be a participant in this conference. If compelled, he must not attend. Let the two Lithuanian men, Dr. K. Grinius and Prof. J. Aleksa, be an example to us. DLKT

(17) Listen, teacher, let me be a bouquet of flowers for you to breathe in their fragrance! Let me be a fresh, delicious fruit for you to taste me! Let me be an eternal embrace, and you drown in me!.. DLKT

(18) Aš pats nenoriu (ir negaliu) būti liudytoju savųjų nesąmoningųjų potyrių. Tegu kitam aš tokių nesąmonės šaltinių būsiu. Jis įsižiūrėjo į savo atvaizdą veidrody, kabėjusiam čia pat, ant sienos. Dievė, iš veidrodžio į jį žvelgė nepažįstamas barzdotas vyras. DLKT

(19) Please, listen. Here, let Aurimas be a witness. He will not let me lie. DLKT

(20) A. Roslanas, who had tasted the bread of Soviet camps, replied: “If I went to Moscow, I would not rush to condemn or scold him. It is not I, but God, who is his judge.” DLKT

(21) Let this broadcast of ours be a little memorial candle for them. DLKT

Although there are relatively few sentences of type (11)–(21) in DLKT, it is possible to discuss tendencies in the expression of nouns functioning as predicatives. In sentences where the particle te(gu(l)) is used with a present or future indicative form of būti (cf. sentences (11)–(12); (17)–(18)), the nominative is the usual case for the noun functioning as a predicative: in the first case it is used in 93.75% of all available instances (or 15 out of 16 sentences), and in the second, in 87.5% (7 out of 8 sentences). The nominative is also quite frequent with the archaic form tebūnie¹⁶: it is chosen in 87.2% of sentences (or 34 out of 39 sentences) (cf. sentences (13)–(14)). In sentences with tebūna (cf. sentences (15)–(16)), the agreeing case of the noun functioning as a predicative accounts for 66.7% of cases (22 sentences

16 Cf. “The permissive (historically continuing the Indo-European optative) is now defunct, having been replaced with indicative forms: the contemporary equivalent of te-būnie would be te-būna or tegul būna“ (Holvoet 2010: 426; cf. Paulauskienė 1994: 311–312).

Straipsniai / Articles

17

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

out of 33), whereas with tebus (cf. sentences (19)–(21))—93% of all the sentences (or 40 out of 43)¹⁷. It seems that in the case under discussion, the case of the predicative is influenced not so much by the deontic type of modality itself as by the verb form: in the te- form, there is an additional tendency to choose the instrumental case for the noun when marking deonticity.

It seems the time has come to return to affirmative būti sentences with the future-tense form of the indicative mood. For example:

(22) So I know: I will be a writer. Not a teacher, not some education inspector, and not even a lecturer or literary scholar (frightening even to think about!), but a literary writer. DLKT

(23) Goodbye. The only evening. Soon I will be a shadow. Soon. I want to tell you what you were to me and what you are. You were never just a shadow. You give me eternity without knowing it. DLKT

(24) When asked whether weaving was difficult, Andrius, who had been attending the weaving club for the third year, thought for a moment and replied: “No. Perhaps when I grow up I’ll be a weaver.” And when the pupils were asked where the ancient Lithuanians used woven objects, the teacher smiled and exclaimed: “How much they know...” DLKT

(25) What do you imagine your future will be like? – It’s unclear what things will be like after the mutation. If all goes well, I’ll thank God and perhaps become a singer. – I sincerely wish that for you, Dima. DLKT

(26) This superstition persists in sociology, clearly showing that there is no shortcut out of the morass of our ideologies. (If you became a Hegelian, then you will always be a Hegelian.) Self-reflection cannot replace the practical actions needed to establish democratic institutions. DLKT

(27) I’m playing for only the second time: on my first turn I “missed” one side of the bowling lane, and on the second, the other. I thought I’d be an anchor for my children, but now I’ve outperformed my husband. We’re firmly planning to take third place,” Klaipėda resident Inga Briažalova told Kauno diena. DLKT

(28) “Johansen, do you know anything about seafaring?” – “No, sir.” – “Well, never mind! You’ll be the navigator anyway. Take your rags to the cabin, to his berth.” – “Aye aye, sir,” Johansen replied cheerfully and went to the hold. DLKT

(29) “God, I am doomed,” Aichas groaned. “Save me!” And the Lord heard him and had mercy on him. “Man, you will be my prophet!” said the Lord. “Do you see the city? It is called Regabu. Its inhabitants have defiled the earth beneath their feet, for they have transgressed the laws.” DLKT

(30) “Remember, I am a merchant intending to stay in Egypt and make a fortune. The Hittites will provide us with the stability we need.” – “You will be my finance minister, Raja. – God willing, we will grow rich. War is a temporary matter; the most important thing is to stay out of it.” DLKT

(31) “Come to me—I will bless you and give you an occupation.” As he blessed them, he assigned each a profession, saying: “You will be a teacher, you will be a priest, you will be a doctor, and you— scholar.” Another—a soldier; yet another—a artist... He took pity on those shut up in the prison. DLKT

(32) “Did you know in advance?” – “I was ordered...” – “Do you know ‘Ereliukas’?” – “No, I swear to God! I’ve only heard he sometimes pretends to be lame.” – “And you’ll be mute! As long as this cripple keeps walking around alive!” said Antosė, fastening the holster of her Colt. The secretary shook with uncontrollable nervous laughter. “Ferret!” DLKT

¹⁷ Cf. “This construction [i.e. te būna] is now bookish and in the spoken language it has been ousted by constructions with tegu(l)” (Holvoet 2010: 427).

18

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finitiniuose askriptyviniuose būti sakiniuose

(33) Knibždėjo žuvų. Netrukus jie tiek jų susėmė, kad vos galėjo ištraukti tinklą. Tada Jėzus Simonui, kuris vėliau tapo Petru, tarė: Nebijok! Nuo šiol tu būsi žmonių žveju! Žuvys buvo stambios, o per didinamąjį stiklą atrodė dar didesnės. Akys baltos, išverstos, jos be reikalo manė, kad saugiai lindės sau. DLKT

(34) Žiaurus dabar bus Mano nuosprendis: bet Tu – negalėsi gyventi be Manęs! Visais kitais atvejais: tu pavirsi Žmogumi be Féjos – Globėjos!! Tu būsi eiliniu lietuviu... Bet, Mielas Linai! Aš nė kiek nenoriu išgąsdinti Tavęs! DLKT

As sentences (22)–(34) show, they express epistemic (cf. sentences (22)–(27)) or deontic (cf. sentences (28)–(34)) modality. In sentences of both epistemic and deontic modality, either of the two ways of marking the noun functioning as the predicative can be used interchangeably: agreement and non-agreement. However, there is a tendency for the instrumental case to be chosen somewhat more often in deontic-modal sentences: in sentences with a future-tense copula expressing deontic modality, the instrumental is used in 26% of all available cases (or in 27 of 104 sentences), whereas in epistemic-modal sentences it is used in 12.4% (or in 31 of 250 sentences).

From the perspective of evaluative modality, it remains to discuss to be sentences in the conditional mood. In such sentences, the degree of epistemic certainty and deontic manipulation expressed is lower (cf. Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 88; Givón 2001: 313 n. lower certainty; weaker manipulation). Compare:

(35) At last I would lack no perfection, for I would give myself all the perfections whose ideas I possess, and would therefore be God. One should not think it harder to acquire things I lack than those I already possess. DLKT

(36) Gagarin, the first human, rose into the heavens and found no God. The students were talking, too. Only the girls. Among the girls of Dievažėnai I would disappear; I would be a quiet titmouse among the singing orioles and nightingales. DLKT

(37) I hope that someday, in the hazy future, other, better translators and deeper thinkers will continue the work that has been begun. But I would be a hypocrite if I comforted myself only with the future. I hope my translation is not hopelessly poor either. DLKT

(38) – Matai, broli, galėjau ir aš per jo protekciją užimti prie tarybinės valdžios neblogą vietą. Būčiau dabar kokiu nors tardytoju, koks nors MGB kapitonas Jonaitis. Tinka mano pavardei toks titulas, ar ne? Narstyčiau dabar tave po kauliuką. DLKT

(39) Ne, žinoma, ir ne todėl, kad ji laukiasi – nors nesuprantu, kodėl ji nori turėti palikuonių su nuobodžiuoju B retu... Tai todėl, kad ji nori, jog aš būčiau jos pamergė. Bifė tyliai sukikeno. – Manau, velniškai drąsu. O tu nenori? – Aš? Su mergaitiškų spalvų, kaip pyragaitis atrodančia suknele? Nė velnio! DLKT

(40) Šią svajonę puoselėjau ir aš, ypač tėvas norėjo, kad būčiau povandeninio laivo kapitonu, iškilčiau moterų pliaže ties Palangos tiltu... DLKT

(41) Įdomu, kaip Tamsta pasidarei universiteto lektorium? – Šiame slavų klube susipažinau su lingvistu prof. Rozvadovskiu, kurs panorėjo, kad aš būčiau lietuvių kalbos lektoriumi prie jo katedros. DLKT

Straipsniai / Articles

19

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

(42) Elegantly, she pivots on her only leg and hops over to the box. With exactly the same affection, she takes another mushroom. If only, just for this moment, I were a mushroom... Quickly! Faster, move it; everyone must be picked by an hour from now. We’re mowing too. No mercy. We have neither machetes nor scythes. DLKT

(43) By the Curonian Lagoon, in a small fishing village, there lived a little fishing boat that very much wanted to become a big ship and see the sea. “Oh, if only I were a big ship, then I would sail out onto the roaring sea,” she thought and sighed. DLKT

(44) Make the working day or week shorter, grant a few days off each month, “exempt” them from overtime or weekend work. I’d much rather be unemployed. When I finally managed to find a job, they worked me as hard as the boss piled it on. I keep quiet, although I have to stay late at work and sacrifice days off. DLKT

(45) Seeing the soldier’s bloodshot eyes, his gaze fixed on them, Jakov hurriedly said to himself: if only you were a jackal, and if only wolves and wild dogs would attack you and tear you apart, so that you would fear humans and live only on carrion! And he fell silent, waiting. DLKT

Sentences (35)–(38) express epistemic modality, while (39)–(45) express deontic modality. The available DLKT data allow us to state that in sentences expressing deontic modality with the subjunctive form of būti ‘be’, the instrumental case is more often chosen for the noun functioning as the predicate: it is used in 31.6% of all instances (or in 24 of 76 sentences). In sentences of type (35)–(38), the instrumental case of the noun accounts for 4.5% of all sentences (i.e. it is used in 18 of 396 sentences).

Thus, from what has been said, it becomes clear that the relative tendency to use the instrumental case for a noun functioning as the predicate correlates not only with the finite form of the verb itself, but also with deontic modality (cf. further below). On the other hand, if the mood system is taken to be based on the opposition real / unreal, and if it is claimed that the subjunctive mood is not connected by any special relations with either epistemic or deontic modality and that its function in sentences of the type exemplified in (35)–(45) is essentially the same (cf. Holvoet, Judžentis 2004: 88–95, 101–103; Holvoet 2010: 431–432; Judžentis 2012: 174–175)—namely, to express unreal (emphatically nonfactual) situations—then the following discussion addresses the relationship between (i)real modality and tendencies in the expression of the noun functioning as the predicate.

4. (UN)REAL MODALITY AND THE EXPRESSION OF THE NOUN FUNCTIONING AS THE PREDICATE

As already stated, the typical expression of real modality is the indicative mood of the verb, above all its present- and past-tense forms. The speaker asserts the action as a real (actual) fact in the present or past¹⁸. Unreal modality is typically expressed by the subjunctive

¹⁸ “When an action is stated as actual, its location in a particular time—past, present, or future—is also specified” (Paulauskienė 1979: 153).

20

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finiti­niuose askriptyviniuose būti sakiniuose

mood. With all other mood forms, the degree of reality expressed is lower. Does this correlate, and if so how, with the marking of a noun used predicatively?

In addition to what has already been said about the marking of a noun used predicatively with different tense forms of the indicative mood, it should also be noted that in sentences with the future-tense form of būti, the instrumental case is used for the predicative noun in 16.4% of all available cases (or in 58 of 354 sentences). In sentences with conditional forms, the instrumental is chosen in 8.9% of all available cases (in 42 of 472 sentences). Thus, it becomes clear that in sentences with the conditional mood, as an indicator of emphatic non-factuality (i.e. irrealis), the instrumental case of the noun is used less often than with forms that are not so marked, i.e. forms that express a higher degree of reality (e.g. future-tense indicative or imperative forms).

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS

If the mood system is regarded as bipolar and divided according to two independent criteria—the evaluative criterion (the speaker’s relation to the situation) and irrealis (the speaker’s view of the reality of the matters being discussed)—a scale can be distinguished between forms of epistemic and deontic modality and forms of emphatic non-factuality and forms that are not so marked (indicative > imperative mood and indicative > conditional mood).

The relation between the indicative and imperative moods is asymmetrical: the core of deontic modality is the imperative, and that of epistemic modality is the indicative, whose forms are also used deontically. In principle, moods belonging to different types of modality tend to mark a noun used predicatively in somewhat different ways. The unmarked (basic) expression of deontic modality is the imperative: in positive copular sentences with būti, there is a relative tendency to use the instrumental case more often for the predicative noun. Similar relative tendencies in expression—that is, a preference for the instrumental case of the noun—are also evident with forms of other moods used deontically; here the instrumental is chosen even more often than with imperative forms. When atypical mood forms are used deontically (i.e. the indicative or conditional rather than the imperative), the modality in question tends to be marked more often by the instrumental case of the predicative noun (cf. Holvoet 2007: 68). Conversely, the indicative, which forms the core of epistemic modality and is characterized by agreement marking of the predicative noun, is also relatively reflected in sentences with other moods used epistemically (cf. the conditional). Thus, looking at the expression of the predicative noun in finite ascriptive sentences with būti, it is evident that tendencies in the use of the predicative case are related to evaluative modality. A relatively more frequent instrumental case for the predicative noun can be expected along the scale epistemic > deontic modality, or, in other words, with respect to evaluative modality—

Straipsniai / Articles

21

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

taking the present-tense indicative forms expressing epistemic modality as the starting point and contrasting them relatively with the imperative forms of deontic modality, one could speak of a gradual scale (hierarchy) indicative mood > imperative mood, within which the other mood forms fall in terms of the expression of the noun.

In terms of irrealis, the other finite forms of būti, which have a lower degree of irrealis than the conditional itself, lie between the asymmetrically distinguished indicative and conditional moods: namely, tegul with the present and future tenses, future-tense forms, and the imperative¹⁹. As for a possible correlation between irrealis and the expression of the predicative noun, the instrumental case of the noun appears to be chosen more often not with the conditional, which typically expresses irrealis, but with forms of other moods (i.e. the indicative and imperative), which express less real situations. Typical irrealis is usually marked by the verb’s conditional mood. The expression of a lower degree of irrealis seems to correlate not only with mood, but also with tendencies in the expression of the predicative noun.

Thus, on the one hand, it seems possible to speak of a fundamental relative correlation between the expression of the predicative noun and modality among the asymmetrically distinguished members of the scales epistemic > deontic and real > irrealis; on the other hand, in cases where modality is expressed atypically, there is a tendency to mark it additionally—that is, to use the instrumental case for the predicative noun as well.

ŠALTINIAI

DLKT – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas, sud. Kauno Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto Kompiuterinės lingvistikos centras (prieiga internete http://donelaitis.vdu.lt).

LITERATŪRA

Ambrazas Vytautas, red., 2006: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Bybee Joan 1985: Morphology. A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Bybee Joan, Perkins Revere, Pagliuca Williams 1994: The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago-London: The University of Chicago Press.

¹⁹ Plg. „..Kalbant apie realaus / nerealaus veiksmo priešpriešą, būtina pažymėti, kad ji yra pačios tiesioginės nuosakos viduje: tai, kas įvyko praeityje, realiau ir konkrečiau negu tai, kas bus po kalbamojo momento. Todėl nereal(a)us veiksmo modaliniuose kontekstuose būtojo laiko formos nevartojamos. Čia tinka tik į ateitį projektuojamos esamojo ir būsimojo laiko formos“ (Paulauskienė 1994: 311).

22

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX

Daiktavardžio vardininkas ir įnagininkas finitiniuose askriptyviniuose būti sakiniuose

Frawley William, ed., 2006: The Expression of Modality. Berlin: Mounton de Gruyter.

Givón Talmy 2001: Syntax 1. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Haan Ferdinand de 2006: Typological approaches to modality. – The Expression of Modality, ed. by Frawley William. Berlin: Mounton de Gruyter, 27–69.

Hengeveld Kees 1992: Non–verbal Predication: Theory, Typology, Diachrony. Berlin etc.: Mouton de Gruyter (= Functional Grammar Series 15).

Holvoet Axel 2007: Mood and Modality in Baltic. Krokow: Wydawnictwo Uniwersitetu Jagiellonskiego.

Holvoet Axel 2010: Mood in Latvian and Lithuanian. – Mood in the Language of Europe, ed. by Björn Rothstein, Rolf Thieroff. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 425–443.

Holvoet Axel, Judžentis Artūras 2004: Nuosakos kategorijos struktūra. – Gramatinių kategorijų tyrimai, red. Axel Holvoet, Loreta Semėnienė. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas (= Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos darbai 2), 77–104.

Holvoet Axel, Pajėdienė Jūratė 2004: Laiko kategorija ir laiko formos. – Gramatinių kategorijų tyrimai, red. Axel Holvoet, Loreta Semėnienė. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas (= Lietuvių kalbos gramatikos darbai 2), 121–140.

Jablonskis Jonas 1922/1957: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. – Jonas Jablonskis. Rinktiniai raštai 1, sud. Jonas Palionis. Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, 1957, 181–433.

Judžentis Artūras 2012: Lietuvių kalbos gramatinės kategorijos. Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas, rankraštis.

Paulauskienė Aldona 1979: Gramatinės lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžio kategorijos. Vilnius: Mokslas.

Paulauskienė Aldona 1994: Lietuvių kalbos morfologija: Paskaitos lituanistams. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Palmer Frank Robert 2001: Mood and Modality, 2 edition. Cambridge: University Press.

Plungian Vladimir 2011: Gramatinių kategorijų tipologija 2. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.

Semėnienė Loreta 2004: Die Prädikative Verwendung von Substantiven im Litauischen: Nominativ vs. Instrumental. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 50, 35–53.

Šukys Jonas 1998: Lietuvių kalbos linksniai ir prielinksniai: vartosena ir normos. Kaunas: Šviesa.

Ultan Russell 1978: The Nature of Future Tenses. – Universals of Human Language, Vol. 3, ed. by Joseph H. Greenberg. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 83–123.

Straipsniai / Articles

23

LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ

Ul vydas Kazys, red., 1976: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 3: Sintaksė. Vilnius: Mokslas.

Ul vydas Kazys, red., 1971: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 2: Morfologija. Vilnius: Mintis.

Valeckienė Adelė 1998: Funkcinė lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.

Noun in the Nominative and Instrumental Case in Finite and Ascriptive Sentences of būti (to be)

SUMMARY

The article deals with the possible connection between the marking of noun predicatives and the modality expressed by moods. The material analysed in the article consists of ascriptive finite sentences of the copula būti (to be) collected from the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (CCLL) where a positive predicate is expressed in the forms of different moods.

When the system of mood is considered bipolar and divided under two independent criteria – evaluative (speaker’s relationship with the situation) and irreality (speaker’s approach towards the reality of the subject of speaking), the scale of epistemic and deontic forms of modality and the forms of highlighted non-fact as well as the forms not marked like that (indicative > imperative mood and indicative > subjunctive mood) are singled out.

In principle, the moods belonging to different modality types can be characterised by a relatively different marking of the noun used as a predicative. The opinion is followed that in terms of evaluative and irreal modality, morphosyntactic marking is gradual and we can speak about the relative tendency to use the instrumental of the noun used as a predicative in respect of the scales epistemic > deontic (indicative > imperative mood) and real > irreal (indicative > subjunctive mood). On the other hand, in cases when the expression of modality by moods is less typical, a relative tendency can be observed to use the instrumental of the noun used as a predicative in a redundant manner and to use it even more often. The more atypical modality is expressed by the forms of verbal moods, the more the instrumental of the noun used as a predicative is likely.

Įteikta 2013 m. gruodžio 3 d.

LORETA VAIČIULYTĖ-SEMĖNIENĖ

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lietuva

[email protected]

24

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXX