Apie naujas veiksmažodžių 3 asmens galūnių paieškas

Notes It should also be added that V. Vitkauskas incorrectly interprets my ability dél latviy or slavy kalby jtakos. First of all, I do not claim anywhere that Zemai¢iy and aukStaitiu vilniSkiy -elis —respectively Latvian and Slavic language consequences. I am just trying to find an explanation, why multi-family helonyms with -elis are found in places where there should already be a deminutive suffix -élis: south, narrow east of Lithuania and in the territory around Zelva, Alanta, Ridninkai’. At least some of these helonyms -elis (-elé) could certainly have arisen from Slavification, cf. similar structures in Lithuanian names of places of residence and personal names in Slavic Saltines: Trafzkunele" 1744, 1771, Traszkunele 1775, 1784 = lit. Troskiiné liai (vs. Tro8kiiny sen.), Wilunele 1784 = lit. Vildnéliai (village, Jiezno district); 1689) 1689 – Jan van Eyck, Dutch painter (d. 1626) 1626 – Wenceslaus II of Poland (b. 1628) 1628 – Jaroslav I of Bohemia (b. Zemaitélis and so on. Laimutis Bilkis Lithuanian Language Institute P. Vileisio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lithuania About the new final forms of the 3rd person verbs It has long been known that the 3rd person forms of the 3rd person verbs in Lithuanian, undifferentiated by number, correspond to pure vowel stems and there is no evidence that they ever had finals. This characteristic of Lithuanian language is considered by Pisani, Toporov, Ivanov, Schmalstieg and many others to be particularly important for the reconstruction of the action-adverbial origins and for linguistic typology. It is clearly reflected in the synchronous Lithuanian verb system, where the vowel stems of the 3rd person form the basis for many forms. ga -élis (r. Razmukaité, M. Lietuvos priesaginiai oikonimai. Doctoral dissertation, Vilnius: Institute of Lithuanian Language, Vytauto Didžiojo University, 1998, 34-35, 36-40). ° Zr. Bilkis, L. Lietuviy priesaginiai deminutyviniai helonimai. Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 41, 1999, 70. 1 Historical place names are provided from the Historical Place Names File of the Names Division. 4 Historical personal names are presented in i8 Historical Personal Names File of the Namebook Section. 109 Todél’s proposal in Vaskelienés’ article (2006: 83-93) to consider the stem vowels of the 3-person form as final vowels and to determine the rules for introducing participles and participles according to them seems rather unlikely. It seems to the author that there is not one opinion about the ending of the third person of the present and past tense of the action in Siol,né — one linguist says that Sis person has no ending, other linguists think that it is appropriate to consider it as an ending in the present Lithuanian language (85). The author illustrates this idea of free choice by comparing works separated by decades: Jablonskis’s grammar (1901, 1922), Ambragos and Ziugzda’s handbook (1937), the second volume of LKG (1971), the Lithuanian language dictionary (1998) and others. Interestingly, in this comparison the author did not even raise the question, why Jablonskis only in the first Lithuanian language textbook (1901) uses the endings of 3 person forms as noun endings, 0 since 1922 grammar consistently spoke about 3 person forms. There is no reflection on why the authors of the DLKG decided to change the personification of the word in the second volume of the LKG, why Paulauskiené (2006: 155) refused to consider the 3 person endings as possible in the synchronic view of her previous (1979: 133) position (by the way, such an assumption is also possible in 1974: 182). This change was the result of the discussion on the presentation of the personal form in the second volume of the Lithuanian Grammar (Girdenis, Zulys 1973: 208-209; Ambrazas et al. 1974: 182-184). The most important works of I8 jy are Zulis (1975) and Bulygina (1977). They strongly demonstrate that the synchronous verb personalization system of Lithuanian language can be described transparently and consistently only by considering the 3-person form endings as vowel stems, and attempts to translate them into final personifications are obscured by numerous artificial flexions. It is only strange that these most important researches on the question of speech remained unnoticed by the authors, although they are the basis of the definition of word change in all three volumes of Lithuanian grammar prepared by the Lithuanian Language Institute (1985, 1994-2005, 1997*2006), in the Lithuanian Language Encyclopedia (1999), in the Functional Grammar of Lithuanian Language (Valeckiene 1998) and in many other works. leSkoti nebiity 3 asmens galtiniy does not help nei dalyviy daryba. The present tense subjunctives described in this article differ from the usual subjunctives only by the given deadline and the newly discovered present tense subjunctive suffix ir -am / -om / -im (91). 110 Notes BIBLIOGRAPHY Ampraska, J., and Ziucapa, J. 1937: Lietuviy language grammar I. Amanazas, V., Stitiee, N., and Vateckiené, A. 1974: Some considerations on the morphology of Lithuanian language. Baltistica 10 (2), 177-186. Butvoina, T. V. 1977: Opyt "dynamic" description of the lituanian conflagration. In: Problemy teorii morfologiéeskix modelej, Moscow: Nauka, PLKG 236-269, = Modern Lithuanian Grammar, red. V. Ambrazas, Vilnius: 2001. ir Dosrovotskis, L., and others, Lithuanian 1994-12006. Language B. ir Dictionary, Kaunas: Sviesa. Ginpents, A., and Zuvys, V. 1973, [rec.] Lietuviy language grammar 1-2, 1965-1971. Baltistica 9 (2), 203-214. JapLonsxis, J. 1901: Grammar of the Lithuanian language. The Reader's ir Guide. TilZé: Otto v. Mauderode. Japtonskis, J. 1922: Lietuviy language grammar. Etymology. Kaunas-Vilnius: Svyturys. LKG Il =Lietuviy kalbos gramatika 2, red. K. Ulvydas. Vilmus: Mintis, 1971. PauLauskiene, A. 1979: Grammatical categories of Lithuanian verbs. Vilnius: Mintis. Pautauskien, A. 2006: Morphology of the Lithuanian language. Kaunas: Technologija. VALECKIENE, A. 1998: The Functional Grammar of the Hebrew Language. Vilnius: ir Mokslo enciklopedijy leidybos institutas. Vaskeziene, J. 2006: Dél of the morphologiir cal breakdown of the present tense participle and ir participle verb. Minutes Linguistics Lithuanica 54, 83-93, Zu.vs, V. 1975: The final person of the verb in common investigative language. Linguistics 26 (1), 63-73, Vytautas Ambrazas Lithuanian Language Institute P. Vileisio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lithuania 111