173 ecenzijos / e iews
gö Z keydana
geo g-augus -uni e si ä gö ingen
ields o esea ch: phonological econs uc ion: econs uc ion o
phonological g amma s (accen ology, syllabi ica ion), phone ic g oun-
ding o diach onic phonological p ocesses; his o ical syn ax, a gumen
s uc u e and case, subo dina ion (mainly Vedic sansk i ).
Pa icLes and
connec iVes in baL ic
ac a salensia 2. ed. by nicole nau, no be os owski.
Vilnius: Vilniaus uni e si e as,
asociacija „academia salensis“, 2010, 221 p.
isbn 978-609-95126-1-7
he book unde e iew is a collec ion o six o iginal pape s. i includes an
ex ensi e in oduc ion, a subjec index and a wo d index.
he opics in his book ange om diach onic o synch onic s udies in he
syn ax, he seman ics, and he unc ion o pa icles and connec i es in Li huanian
and La ian. all con ibu ions a e w i en in english, and he examples a e ca e-
ully glossed. he e o e, he book is no only accessible o s uden s o he bal ic
languages, bu o e e y linguis in e es ed in he ield.
in hei “in oduc ion” nicole nau and no be os owski gi e a sho his-
o ical o e iew o he s udy o pa icles and connec i es in he bal ic languages.
he au ho s hen discuss e minological issues and ecen con ibu ions o he
heo y o he wo d classes s udied he e. he hi d pa o he in oduc ion is de-
o ed o sho examples highligh ing he de elopmen o he bal ic pa icles and
connec i es along ypical pa hs o g amma icaliza ion. he in oduc ion closes wi h
sho summa ies o he pape s published in he book a hand.
he pape by joanna chojnicka “as i one we e no enough: on he mul iple
unc ions o La ian i kā ‘as i , as hough’” is a co pus-based s udy o he unc ions
o i kā in con empo a y La ian. chojnicka s a s ou by desc ibing he co pus
(
www.ko puss.l
), om which she ex ac ed 216 sen ences con aining i kā . She
hen gi es a su ey o he ea men o i kā in La ian dic iona ies and de elops
o mal c i e ia o dis inguishing conjunc ions om pa icles, mos ly based on wo k
by g ochowski (1986). his is ollowed by a de ailed co pus analysis o i kā in i s
use as a conjunc ion and as a pa icle. in he co pus, he conjunc ion i kā ypi-
174
gö Z keydana
ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIV–LXV
cally in oduces subo dina e sen ences wi h ini e e bs in he subjunc i e, and
nega ed sen ences wi h i kā always con ain he e b nebū u . I kā-clauses a e used
o in oduce ei he wha chojnicka calls hypo he ical compa isons o in e ed
easons. hypo he ical compa isons a e used o “desc ibe [...] a si ua ion which […]
could e oke he same o a leas a simila kind o eeling in mos people” (49).
in e ed eason, on he o he hand, is used when “ he speake makes a guess o
belie es he/she knows he eason [ o he e en deno ed by he main clause – G. K.]
bu is no ce ain o i […]” (52). combined wi h a pa icipial ph ase, he pa icle
i kā has he same unc ions. when used in ini e sen ences, howe e , i ypically
unc ions as a hedge, be i by ma king e iden iali y, hypo he ical compa isons, o
epo ed speech.
chojnicka’s pape is a aluable con ibu ion o he s udy o La ian i kā, bu
i su e s om some mino p oblems. one ha she he sel acknowledges is he
small numbe o okens he s udy is based on. o gi e an example, he e iewe
ound he es ic ion o nebū u in nega i e subo dina es wi h i kā ema kable.
howe e , since he whole sample se is e y small and chojnicka does no p o ide
he numbe o a es a ions o his sen ence ype, he in o ma ion emains anec-
do al. he small sample se also p e en s chojnicka om dis inguishing he sub-
o dina o i kā om he complemen ize , an impo an dis inc ion made by hol oe
in his con ibu ion. in addi ion, he a gumen a ion some imes lacks cohe ence. as
can be seen om he quo es gi en abo e, he au ho does no de ine he cen al
concep s “hypo he ical compa ison” and “in e ed eason” p ope ly. he chap e s
on sen ence ypes a e qui e imbalanced because she cons an ly mixes syn ax, se-
man ics, and unc ion. as a inal ema k, he e iewe would like o add ha he
use o i kā as a “ma ke o speech dis luency” (61) is simila o ha o like in
ame ican english.
he con ibu ion by axel hol oe is “no es on complemen ise s in bal ic”.
hol oe in oduces wo ca ego ial dis inc ions be ween complemen ize s. he i s
is he dis inc ion be ween u h- alued and non- u h- alued ones. u h- alued
complemen ize s a e hose ypically used wi h e ba dicendi, non- u h- alued ones
hose used in oli ional con ex s. he second dis inc ion is ha be ween ealis and
i ealis complemen ize s. al hough hese dis inc ions o en o e lap, hol oe shows
ha hey a e o hogonal in p inciple. he illus a es his poin wi h he La ian
complemen ize lai, which is non- u h- alued. s ill, i ypically selec s ealis e b
o ms, and i ealis wi h lai is only used o deno e a lesse “deg ee o con idence o
he speake /subjec ” (75). howe e , he dis inc ion be ween i ealis and ealis com-
plemen ize s is also a es ed in bal ic. hol oe gi es he example o old Li huanian
jog ( ealis) and kad (i ealis). i ealis complemen ize s may inco po a e i ealis
ma ke s, as is shown by old Li huanian jeib and La galian kab. ano he impo an
Pa icles and connec i es in bal ic
175 ecenzijos / e iews
dis inc ion be ween complemen ize s ela es o con ol and wha hol oe ollowing
Lich enbe k (1995) calls “app ehensional-epis emic modali y.” (86). in La ian, ap-
p ehension and a low deg ee o con ol a e ypically deno ed by ka ne, while a high
deg ee o con ol is exp essed by lai ne. hol oe hen goes on o discuss u h-
quali ying complemen ize s; examples a e Li huanian esą and La ian i kā . he
la e , when used as a subo dina o , is coun e ac ual. howe e , used as a comple-
men ize , i is u h-quali ying. hol oe closes his su ey wi h some gene al obse -
a ions on complemen ize s, claiming ha hey o en edundan ly encode modal-
i y. his edundancy may lead o di e en de elopmen s. in Li huanian, he edun-
dan i ealis complemen ize s we e los . in La ian, on he o he hand, edundancy
led o new de elopmen s, as complemen ize s o iginally deno ing i ealis a e now
used o ma k wha noonan (2007) calls p e ence p edica es.
he con ibu ion o hol oe is highly in o ma i e and inspi ing. his di e en-
ia ion be ween a ious aspec s o modali y esul s in a ine-g ained analysis o he
unc ion o complemen ize s in bal ic. howe e , he con ibu ion would ha e
p o i ed om a mo e igo ous desc ip i e appa a us. he e minology used o en
emains unde ined. his is especially e iden wi h “con ol”, a wo d used in a
a ie y o meanings in linguis ics. some imes, he e ms used a e a he mislead-
ing. albei in ui i ely comp ehensible, he labels u h- alued and non- u h- alued
a e inapp op ia e. in in ensional seman ics bo h ypes a e u h- alued, he di e -
ence lying in he wo lds ela i e o which u h is e alua ed.
in he pape “con adic ion, con as , and cause: on he unc ions o he La ian
pa icle neba in in e ne discussions”, nicole nau looks in o he use o his pa i-
cle in he gen e o in e ne o ums, discussion g oups and cha s. o he in es iga-
ion, she collec ed 198 okens o neba in oducing a clause. she iden i ies ou
unc ions in he da a se : he pa icle is used o ma k con adic ion, causali y (in
nega ed con ex s only), con as , and inally cause combined wi h con as . nau
a gues con incingly ha he in a ian meaning o neba in i s di e en unc ions is
nega ion, and ha he addi ional seman ic alues a e always due o implica u es.
he causal eading, o example, is es ablished on he speech-ac domain (as op-
posed o eal-wo ld causali y) and is simply due o he g icean maxim o ele ance.
his a gumen is s eng hened u he by he obse a ion ha in some cases neba
is ac ually combined wi h he clausal connec i e jo. in he second pa o he pa-
pe , nau deals wi h he syn ax and he ca ego ial s a us o neba. based on i s
dis ibu ion, she concludes ha syn ac ically i is no a conjunc ion, al hough
unc ionally i comes close o being one. hus, i is es ic ed o he i s posi ion
in a clause and is always clause connec ing. inally, nau ackles he ques ion o
he a he su p ising equency o neba on he in e ne . ou side he ne , neba is
mos ly es ic ed o olksongs. howe e , as nau poin s ou , he pa icle is a pe ec
176
gö Z keydana
ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIV–LXV
ool o “compensa [ing] o he lack o p osody in w i en ex s” (130), which
makes i popula in ne speak wi h i s s ong ies o spoken language.
nau’s con ibu ion is e y well a gued and hough -p o oking. she eco ds he
acquisi ion o he da a ca e ully and a gues in a e y lucid and igo ous manne .
he pape is a showcase example o an in o ma i e co pus s udy backed by well-
balanced heo e ical easoning.
no be os owski’s con ibu ion deals wi h “La ian jeb ‘o ’ – om condi-
ional o disjunc i e conjunc ion”. in he i s pa o his pape , os owski aces
he de elopmen o jeb om a conjunc ion in oducing condi ionals o one ma k-
ing concessi e condi ionals and inally simple concessi es. such de elopmen is
well a es ed in o he languages such as english (c . hough) and has been desc ibed
by könig (1985). os owski shows ha jus like in english, he condi ional chang-
es o a concessi e in e p e a ion when he “p o asis con ains an exp ession ma k-
ing a sui able ex eme alue on some scale o some p oposi ional schema” (141,
quo ed om könig (1985: 238)). in o he wo ds, an o iginal side meaning u ned
in o he deno a ion o he conjunc ion. os owski hen goes on o explain he
disjunc i e use o jeb on he basis o i s concessi e meaning, again ollowing könig
(1985). howe e , acco ding o os owski, jeb de ia es om he pa h desc ibed by
könig and u ns in o a causal conjunc ion (in he o m o jeb u) in some old
La ian a es a ions. in he las pa o he pape , os owski p oposes an e ymol-
ogy o jeb. he assumes ha he wo d is composed o ja ‘i ’ plus *be < *bijā (p e -
e i e). he p oposes a eg essi e assimila ion o accoun o he e in jeb and a de-
elopmen om *bijā o *be, which is no accoun ed o by sound laws.
he pape by os owski is well a gued. s ill, mino p oblems should be men-
ioned. hus, i emains unclea o he e iewe why os owski explains he de-
elopmen om condi ional o concessi e wi h Polish examples (139). as ega ds
he conclusions o he pape , i seems di icul o accep he de elopmen o con-
cessi e jeb u in o a causal conjunc ion. os owski gi es only one example o he
causal unc ion, which, howe e , is no necessa ily con incing, as a condi ional
eading canno be excluded in he gi en sen ence. o eally s eng hen he case
o causal jeb u, os owski would ha e o o e es s o di e en eadings ha go
beyond me e in ui ion. ano he p oblem conce ns he e ymology o jeb. in ui-
i ely, a connec ion wi h ja and a o m like *bijā seems ob ious. howe e , he
p oposed eg essi e assimila ion is o ally ad hoc, as is he claimed de elopmen
o he p e e i e.
daniel Pe i ’s con ibu ion “on p esen a i e pa icles in he bal ic languages”
gi es an o e iew o his class o pa icles in Li huanian and La ian. P esen a i e
pa icles a e de ined by he au ho as “special o ms he unc ion o which is o
d aw a en ion o a gi en eali y wi h a s ong deic ic ocaliza ion” (151). as Pe -
Pa icles and connec i es in bal ic
177 ecenzijos / e iews
i shows, Li huanian has a ple ho a o p esen a i e pa icles (e.g. anska , šiska , e),
whe eas La ian only has ou (luk, au, e, še). ypologically, p esen a i e pa icles
a e ypically sen ence-ini ial, no nega able, and hey can be used p edica i ely.
he au ho illus a es each o hese ea u es wi h Li huanian and La ian da a. o
special in e es is he ea u e “p edica i i y”, as, acco ding o he au ho , wo ypes
o go e nmen can be dis inguished: some pa icles go e n he nomina i e (Li h.
š ai, La . še), o he s he accusa i e (Li h. še, e). he la e a e some imes eana-
lyzed as e bs (šeki , eki in Li huanian dialec s). howe e , he same pa icles may
also in oduce independen clauses. his o ically, mos bal ic p esen a i e pa icles
a e anspa en . hey go back o impe a i es (Li h. žiu ), p onouns (š ai), and lo-
cal ad e bs (še p obably om an ins umen al in Pie *-eh1).
he pape by Pe i is a welcome “ i s glimpse” o p esen a i e pa icles in he
bal ic languages. a mino commen conce ns he ac ha he au ho claims ha
some o hese pa icles “go e n a nomina i e” (159). as hey seem o pa e n
syn ac ically wi h local pa icles like Li huanian čia (160), i seems bes o ea
hem as small clause p edica es unable o assign (o go e n) case.
he las con ibu ion o he book unde e iew is bjö n wieme ’s “on he
lexicog aphic ea men o Li h. esą ( om a backg ound o o he pa icles in
Li huanian and elsewhe e)” [sic!]. in his pape , he au ho add esses he ques ion
o how many lexical en ies should be assumed o Li huanian esą. in acco dance
wi h he lexicog aphic adi ion, wieme dis inguishes he pa iciple esą om he
unc ion wo d. he la e is used as a pa icle wi h a epo i e unc ion and as a
complemen ize ( ypically) es ic ed o complemen s o e ba dicendi. he au ho
acknowledges he obse a ion made by hol oe in his con ibu ion o he book a
hand ha he complemen ize can be used wi h e bs o p oposi ional a i ude.
s ill, he es ic s his s udy o he mo e equen use wi h illocu i e e bs. wieme
a gues ha esą is he e osemic, a e m bo owed om Lich enbe k (1991). he e -
osemy, in he wo ds o wieme , “cap u es meaning ela ions o a uni ha a e se
ac oss […] ca ego ial bounda ies” (179–180). being a complemen ize and a pa -
icle, esą ob iously mee s his c i e ion. wieme hen goes on o compa e esą wi h
epo i e ma ke s in La ian, Polish, and ussian. inally, he u ns his a en ion
o he lexical en ies. as he pa icle di e s in syn ax and (p obably) seman ics
om he complemen ize , wieme op s o assume wo di e en lexical en ies.
hese a e p oposed in a s yle eminiscen o na u al seman ics Me alanguage.
he con ibu ion by wieme lea es he e iewe puzzled. he e osemy may be
an adequa e label o he s uc u al ela ions be ween esą as a pa icle and esą as
a complemen ize . howe e , he whole heo e ical easoning abou ine-g ained
ca ego ial di e ences in he ela ions be ween lexemes seems a he ui less, as
wieme ’s decision o se up wo dis inc lexical en ies is en i ely based on dis i-

178
gö Z keydana
ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIV–LXV
bu ion (c . p. 204). in addi ion, he leng hy discussion o La ian and especially
Polish and ussian da a is a he poin less, as i does no con ibu e o he main
hypo hesis. he e a e also mo e undamen al p oblems. he mos impo an one
is he aim o his con ibu ion, o as long as he lexicon is no concei ed as pa
o a gene a i e de ice (and his is ob iously no wha wieme has in mind), he
whole en e p ise o deciding how many lexical en ies o p opose boils down o
me e s uc u alis axonomy. his is e en mo e ue since he lexical en ies p o-
posed by wieme a e ul ima ely inadequa e. one eason o his inadequacy is he
ac ha wieme admi s ha “ he ques ion [o he exac meaning o he comple-
men ize , g.k.] equi es mo e esea ch” (205). he lexical en y o he comple-
men ize is he e o e necessa ily de ec i e. wo se s ill, he syn ac ic and seman ic
desc ip ions gi en in he en ies a e a o imp ecise o wo k wi h. he syn ax o
he complemen ize , o example, is desc ibed as “X1_ [esą[X2]]” (206). in a oo -
no e, X2 is said o be “a clause ha is subo dina e o he clause X1” (207). how-
e e , “clause” emains unde ined and may e e o ini e and in ini e s uc u es alike.
e en wo se, i X1 is o be aken as a clause, he s uc u al desc ip ion misses he
impo an poin s ha (1) esą is a complemen ize and (2) i is licensed by he sub-
ca ego iza ion ame o he embedding e b. he syn ac ic desc ip ion o he pa -
icle (204) is equally inadequa e. he seman ics gi en a e imp ecise h oughou .
aking again he en y o he complemen ize as an example, we ead in e alia
“(b) i say P, wi h P being housed by X2” (206). P ob iously e e s o a p oposi ion,
which is a seman ic en i y. X2, howe e , is a syn ac ic cons i uen . besides, “being
housed” is a me apho a bes , bu ce ainly no e minus echnicus in any linguis ic
amewo k. Mo eo e , as he e a e no Ps and Xs in he sen ence (a) o he de ini-
ion, he connec ion be ween pa s (a) and (b) emains obscu e. howe e , e en i
he seman ics gi en by wieme we e mo e p ecise, hey would s ill su e om a
se e e sho coming ypical o nsM-seman ics, i.e. hey a e no composi ional. his
is especially p oblema ic in he case o unc ional wo ds like esą. he las poin ,
which comes up when compa ing he en ies gi en o he pa icle and he com-
plemen ize , ega ds he ac ha hey could easily be con la ed in o a single en y
i he au ho allowed o unde speci ica ion in he lexicon.
e e ences
g ochowski Maciej 1986: Polskie pa ykuły (składnia, seman yka, leksykog a ia) .
w ocław: ossolineum.
kö nig ekk eha d 1985: on he his o y o concessi e connec i es in english. dia-
ch onic and synch onic e idence. – Lingua 66, 1–19.
Pa icles and connec i es in bal ic
179 ecenzijos / e iews
Li ch en be k an iš ek 1991: seman ic change and he e osemy in g amma icaliza-
ion. – Language 67, 475–509.
Li ch e nbe k a n i ek 1995: app ehensional epis emics – Modali y in G amma and
Discou se, ed. by joan bybee, suzanne leischman. ams e dam: john benjamins Publish-
ing company, 293–327.
no onan Michael 2007: complemen a ion. – Language Typology and Syn ac ic Desc ip-
ion. Vol. ii. complex cons uc ions. 2nd ed., ed. by imo hy shopen. camb idge: cam-
b idge uni e si y P ess, 52–150.
Į eik a 2011 m. spalio 19 d.
gö Z keydana
Geo g-Augus -Uni e si ä Gö ingen
Kä e–Hambu ge –Weg 3, D–37073 Gö ingen, Deu schland
[email p o ec ed]