Der Nominativ in Zeitadverbialen im Litauischen

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA LII (2005), 41 -58 Der Nominativ in Zeitadverbialen im Litauischen MARKUS RODUNER Lietuviy kalbos institutas This paper deals with the nominative in temporal adverbials (mainly durative) in Lithuanian. On the basis of an analysis of a text corpus it was established that certain lexemes show a strong tendency to appear in the nominative in adverbial function. Other constructions involving temporal adverbials in the nominative tend to become fixed expressions. We argue that the so-called nominative object could have played, or still plays, a part in generally supporting the use of temporal and spatial adverbials in the nominative case. When describing the occurrence of the nominative in adverbial function ata synchronic level, it can be said that (a) it occurs mostly with quantifying modifiers before the noun and (b) it describes a time space from some fixed (sometimes unfixed) point in the past up to reference time or, in the case of the present, up to speech time (as in English he has been singing for three hours). 0. IMPORTING In this article, the purpose is to examine the nominative temporal adverbs, which occur sporadically in Lithuanian, but in certain cases regularly. Where possible, the present-- day Lithuanian written language (bendriné kalba) was examined, using the text corpus of the contemporary Lithuanian language (KT). For some phenomena that do not occur in the written language, published dialect texts (LKT, LTCu) and the own phonothek' were used. The subject of this article is not completely fixed phrases and pure adverbs to express the time. The use of the nominative in adverbial tenses is for the second time, at least for speakers of Western European languages, rather unusual.’ In denjeni4 The recordings were made in the framework of two research projects together with staff of the Institute for Lithuanian Language and are partly accessible in the phonothek of the Institute for Lithuanian Language in Vilnius. Edmundas Trumpa and Asta Leskauskaite helped us with the interpretation of the passages that were important for us, and we would like to thank them for this. 2 Jablonskis (1957: 560) notes:,, Vardininkas kitoms (antrininkėms) sakinio dalims, ypaé aplinkybéms, reiksti yra ne visai paprastas misy gramatikoms dalykas* (,,The nominative for the designation of other (secondary) sentence parts, especially of adverbs, is a not too usual fact of our grammar.” ); Valiulyté (1998: 259):,,Like Zinia, circumstances and functions are irrelevant to the denominator. Taciau turime atveju, kada Sis linksnis vartojamas veiksmo trukmei reikSti* (,,As is generally known, the use of the nominative in adverbial function is not typical for them. Nevertheless, there are cases where this case is used to express the duration of the action*). 42 | MARKUS RODUNER The West-European Indo-European languages, which have a somewhat developed case system, use almost exclusively oblique cases (accusative, instrumental, dative, genitive, etc.) to express adverbial temporal relations (time, duration, repetition). In German, you think of it as dabeiz. E.g. to archaic, usually already adverbized, time determination in the genitive like morgens, nachts (also des Nachts) or the many accusative ones like letzter Monat, nchsten Samstag. In addition to these purely case-determined nouns, nouns with prepositions also function very prominently as temporal adverbs, cf. from German e.g. am Abend, im Sommer. In Lithuanian, too, prepositional constructions make up a significant, but comparatively smaller part of the temporal adverbs- *. Of the various cases, the nominative to be dealt with in this article is by far the least commonly used for determining time. In the following, however, it will be established that this case is used increasingly for the designation of time duration and for constantly repeated actions, especially in certain turns and in certain dialect areas. However, it always competes with the “grammatical” accusative. 1. THE NOMINATIVE FOR EXPRESSING THE DURATION OF TIME 1.1. (yes) + time ‘(already) since X years, months, etc.’ According to Sukys (1998: 83), the nominative can express a period of time in principle only in connection with ordinal numbers and certain pronouns. Valiulyté (1998: 260) adds in this context that the nominative usually denotes the duration of the action in connection with the present, less often also with the simple praeteritum (bitasis kartinis laikas), often with the addition of jau. An example of a temporal adverb with both is the following sentence: (1) Mes kelinti metai bendradarbiaujame su AIDS centru we:Nom’ already how much: year:NomM cooperating: with AIDS Center: Nom. PL° Praes.1. PL Ins. SG Paulauskiené (1989: 74) schreibt dazu:,, The function of the denominator as circumstance is Salutiné. [...] Most often it does not perform the circumstantial function alone, but in conjunction with other words — numerals and pronouns, together with adverbs” (,,Die Adverbialfunktion des Nominativs ist sekundar. [...] Mostly it does not function alone as an adverb, but together with other words, numerals and pronouns, and together with them it immediately becomes an adverb’*- ). In Basque, which as an ergative language has no accusative, the nominative is used primarily to express the duration of time, but not for the duration of time since something has lasted, which is in the inessive (cf. Lafitte 1978: 429). For Baltic fishing, see section 4. * However, these are not the subject of this article and will therefore not be discussed here. The following abbreviations are used in the grammatical glossaries: Apv: adverb; AKk: Accusative; But: in dative; F: Feminine; Fur: Future; Gen: Genitive; Hprr: semi-participle; Imp: impersonal; Ine: Inessiv; INs: Instrumental; Lox: Localative; M: Masculine; N: Neutral; Nec: Negation; Name: Nominative; Par: partitive; PL: Plural; PPP: Participle Perfect Passive; PPRA: Present Participle Active; PPRP: Present Passive Participle; PRAgs: Prasens; PRAET: Prateritum; ReFL: Reflective; SC: Singular. ® Metai ‘year’ is a plural tantum in Lithuanian, therefore here at the congruent kelintas the corresponding ending. THE NOMINATIVE IN TIME ADVERBS | 43 ‘We have been working with the AIDS Center for many years.’ (KT) The use of the construction jau + numerals or pronouns (kuris ‘which’, keleri ‘some’, keletas ‘a certain amount, some’, etc.) in connection with the nominative for the duration of time that an action already lasts is also common in standard language. Table 1 gives an, admittedly limited, insight into the frequency’ of nominative and competing accusative in the structure discussed here: TABLE 1: JAU + TIME TIME INDICATION Nom AKK CARDINAL NUMBER ORDINAL NUMBER CARDINAL NUMBER ORDINAL NUMBER kelintas kelintas Simtmetis /Simtmeciai ‘Century(s)’ Sg 4/PI 11 6 Sg 33 /Pl 36 11 metai ‘Year(s)’ 83 80 76 46 jau keleri | kelinti metai 61 15 28 1 ‘already since some Jahren’ ménuo /ménesiai Sg 24 /P1 74 68 Sg 14 Pl 113 LT ‘month(s)’ jau keli ménesiai | 57 15 66 1 kelintas ménuo ‘already for a few months’ valanda | valandos Sg 4/P14 Sg 25 /PI 15 ‘hour(s)’ Although the (sparse) statistical data hardly allow for a definitive interpretation, especially for the less frequently occurring time designations, we can find that, in contrast to the information provided by Ambrazas (1996: 548), the nominative clearly prevails in certain lexemes. For the lexemes metai and ménuo, the results showed an approximately balanced use of nominative and accusative for cardinal numbers, while for the ordinal numbers the nominative prevailed and for jau kelinti metai /kelintus metus the search for fixed connections resulted in a ver-; The denominations mentioned in Table 1 were analyzed. Fiir simtmetis century’ and valanda ‘hour’ were omitted due to the lack of evidence. In addition, minuté and sekundé were also examined, but they are not used here because of the (expected) extremely sparse appearance. Fiir metai and ménuo /ménesiai were the two areas of national and regional press reviewed. In addition, the reliability of the results was checked for metai by searching for combinations (already one, two, several... years). 44 | MARKUS RODUNER haltnis of 254: 33 in favour of the nominative, which indicates an already far advanced adverbial turn. For the less commonly used time designations, the accusative seems to be the norm. This is confirmed (probably because of the few evidence to be evaluated with caution) also by the temporal adverb jau n-ta vasara ‘already the n-th summer’, where also with 24: 6 the accusative prevails. The construction since soundsolange can also be transposed into the past, whereby nothing changes in the construction as such. Here, too, an action/state is described that continues in the past from a certain moment until the reference time in the past and includes it, whereby the verb usually appears in the simple past tense (preterm- -concurrent): (2) Jau treji metai ji nevaiksciojo, nors puikiausiai galéjo eiti. Already three: Year:Nom sie laufen:NEG.PRAET.3 Name. PL “She had not been walking for three years, although she had been able to walk very well/’ (KT) In the two examples mentioned above, the nominative time appears on the one hand in the sense of the nominative in conjunction with certain modifiers, on the other hand additionally in conjunction with the ominésen jau. However, the nominative can also stand in simply marked statements, as the following examples show, the first for a simple marking by jaw, the other for one by a number word. (3) as long as he drives the automobiles Jau dass er: GEN lenken:PPRP.GEN.SG. F Auto:GEN. SG schon menuo is looking for Kaunas criminalists. Month:No. of days Search for SG:PRAEs.3 Kaunas: GEN Criminal Investigation Officer: Name. PL ‘... that the Kaunas criminal investigation officers have been investigating for a month after his Look for a car.’ (KT) (4) For ths months I have not spoken to him. three:Name of month: be:NEG.PRAES.1. SG er:The word: spreName. PL Gen. SG chen PPP: Name. Sc. F ‘I haven’t exchanged a word with him in three months.’ (KT) In example (4) one could add to Valiulytė’s formulation that the nominative occurs with and without attribute- ®, that although formal valanda kein Attrii Valiulyté (1998: 260):,,Vardininkas esti be pazyminio ir su pazyminiu arba su valdomu kilmininku*. THE NOMINATIVE IN TEMPORAL ADVERBS | 45 but has, but that such one, namely the numeral vienas ‘one’ (or here naturally the feminine form viena) is implied. This is evident from the grammatical characteristics of nominal time terms in Lithuanian, as they can only contain certain nouns of the time term to indicate the duration of time (e.g. diena “day, valanda ‘hour’, ménuo ‘month’, etc.), and in Lithuanian (as in Russian, for example) there are neither definite nor indefinite articles, and thus the quantifying number one is only used when one wants to emphasize it. 1.1.1. jau + ordinal number A subgroup of the nominative time indications discussed here are the time indications with ordinal numbers of the type jau treti metai ‘already for three years (literally already the third year)’. In official language (documents of government agencies) the accusative is used almost exclusively- ". In the corresponding examples from KT, both nominative and accusative time determination with ordinals were found. (5) In the square Salia fountain already three o'clock Platz: Lox. SG next to fountain:Gen. Sc already third:Nom.- SG. F Hour: Nomin. Sc be perstogés dainavo nacionalinés estrados veteranai ohne Unterbrechung singen:PRAET.3 national U-Musik Veteran: Name. PL ‘On the square, at the fountain, the national U-music veterans have been singing for three hours without interruption.’ (KT) The sentence quoted here further shows that the construction jau + ordinal/kelintas can also be used with the praeteritum. Here we can see that the semantics corresponds to that in example (2). Instead of an ordinal number, the noun in the nominative in the temporal adverb can also be connected with the pronoun kelintas ‘the how manyth’. Sentences of the type nuo Verbiny girininko jau (schon) kelintas (wievielt:- Nom.SG.M) ménuo (Monat:Nom.Sc) nedvelkia degtine ‘the forester of Verbunai has not spread the smell of brandy for months’ (KT) are also quite common in written language. We can assume here, as above in the statements with ordinal numbers, that the nominative is set by * The semantic difference between jau treji metai ‘already for three years’ and jau treti metai ‘already the third year’ is that in the latter case the three years are not quite over. So auch Sukys (1998: 83):,,In official language styles, only the endings of length are used*. The analysis of the examples from KT also suggests this, for the investigated time designations no example was taken from state documents (LR Valstybiniai dokumentai), which make up 8% of the corpus, for the two in 1. and 2. 1.1. discussed structures were found, while some from the Seimas transcripts reflect the friendly language of the parliamentarians. 46 | MARKUS RODUNER the conjunction of kelintas present in the consciousness of the speaker/- writer is conditioned by this case. Another example herefiir is (1). 1.2. Interim conclusions The in 1. and 1.1. discussed examples allow me to draw the following conclusions regarding this construction: 1 It is a construction with the structure (yes) + quantifying pronoun or numeral + noun in the nominative. Jau can be omitted if the noun is named by a modifier'!, but must be present if there is no attribute (I haven't found any counterexamples in KT, as far as I've looked). In addition to the observations made by Valiulyté (1998), we can find that in some statements, namely when the numeral vienas ‘one’ is implied but not set, the above-mentioned rule of the mandatory setting of jau is observed, but that in our opinion it is not the setting or non-setting of jau that is decisive here, but the semantics of quantification that restricts the nominative. 2 In the case of this construction, the conjecture” of Jablonskis (1957: 560) might be true, that it may have arisen from an abbreviation of a two-sentence structure, that jau trys metai nebebuvau gimtinéje is to be understood as abbreviated from jau trys/treti metai (bus: the verb is not mandatory- ), kai(p) nebebuvau gimtinéje. Sentences of the latter type with kai(p) are evidenced in both spoken and written language and are quite common, cf. the following example: (6) Jau trys meénesiai, kai guli partijos valdybos Already three:Nom month:Nom. Pt that lie:Praes.3 Party:Gen. SG Board of Directors: Gen. SG's drawers contain my _reconciliation. Drawer: Lox. PL my request:No. SG ‘It’s been three months since my application has been in the drawers of the party leadership.’ (KT) 2. CONSTANT REPEAT TIMES 2.1. statements of the type kas ménuo ‘every month’ In large parts of Lithuania, the time of a regularly repeated action is set in the nominative, whereby the noun is always kas ‘every’ (in this case i Vgl. Valiulyté (1998: 261):,,In the case of a nominative with an attribute or a genitive governed by it (e.g., Simtas mety ‘hundert Jahre’), the presence of the partikel is either optional or may be absent altogether“ (,,Im Falle eines Nominativs mit Attribut oder von ihm regierten Genitiv (z. B. Simtas mety ‘hundert Jahre’) ist die Partikel schon fakultativ oder kann ganz fehlen“). 12 2 The use of the modal bus there shows that it is such. THE NOMINATIVE IN TEMPORAL ADVERBS | 47 indeclinable), newer also kiekvienas ‘every individual- ’, dialectally instead of kas also the equivalent, borrowed from Slavic koznas precedes. The written language avoids the nominative in the combination kas + time. The review of corresponding examples in the text corpus of the contemporary Lithuanian language (KT)® revealed greater variations in the ratio of nominative and accusative: TABLE 2: KAS + ZEITANGABE ZEITANGABE if SG Nom PL SG AKK PL metai (kas metai | kas X metai) 173 4964 -66 ménuo 8s 105 315 92 valanda 2 26 73 48 minute 8 45 47 28 It is obvious that the accusative in the singular by far predominates. In the plural, the position varies from lexem to lexem, but the two cases are somewhat balanced. Completely out of the ordinary is metai, which by far gives preference to the nominative. The combination of kas with the nominative, especially in generalizing statements such as proverbs, is not restricted in Lithuanian to temporal adverbs, but is also used for adverbs with a spatial meaning: (10) Kas namai —«ai dimai. what:Nom House:Nom. PL das:Apv smoke:No. PL ‘Where there is a house, there is smoke.’ While in the latter example the two parts of the sentence are still considered as autonomous, in which the two nominatives are syntactically intelligible as dependents of the imaginable copula yra ‘is’, this is problematic in example (9), where kas metai is fully integrated as a temporal adverb in the sentence. The question arises whether the nominative is not simply evoked by the pronoun kas? Kas is then the questioning pronoun for persons as things in the nominative (‘who / what’), but also relative pronouns as well as generalizing (kas nors ‘someone’- ). In ‘8 Four time terms in conjunction with kas have been exemplified, namely ménuo ‘month’, metai ‘year’, valanda ‘hour’ (with the exception of the plural tantum metai, both singular and plural) and minute. ‘4 Only the documents were paid for which at least 5 documents were available in the accusative. The supremacy of the nominative is very clear here. ‘°_ Fiir ménuo only the documents from the national and regional press were picked up, as the circumstances are clearly visible. 48 | MARKUS RODUNER all these functions it is declinable. Lastly, it is used mainly in spoken language for ‘everyone’, whereby the pronoun itself is not declined. So we say kas (NoM.SG) metai (Nom.PL) ‘every year’ without a congruence in the numeral between kas and the noun. Against a causal connection of kas and nominative, however, speaks the fact that the noun where kas stands can appear in different cases, as in: kas treciame (third:LoK.SG) posédyje (session:- LoK.SG) nedalyvauja ‘he does not take part in every third session’'- ®. 2.1.1. Interim conclusions Fraenkel (1928) argues that the structure discussed here is actually a,,relative sentence* consisting of a pronoun and a noun, which,,.can be considered by the speaker as an adverbial determination of the ruling sentence” and, to support his theory, draws parallels from Polish such as co raz (= lit. kas kartas) ‘every time’, co rok (= lit. kas metai) ‘every year’. If I understand Fraenkel- ’s hypothesis correctly, one should assume an underlying correlative structure of the type kas metai, tas... ‘what year <is>, that...’’. However, this must have been integrated into the sentence almost consistently as an adverb in an earlier phase of language development, since there are hardly any examples of the two-sentence structure in contemporary Lithuanian. Temporal adverbs of the type visas laikas ‘all the time’ Temporal adverbs in which the noun is modified by visas ‘all, (PL) all’ can be divided into three groups, the first of which is in direct relation to the ones in the section 1.1. discussed statement types, the second to those in section 2.1. and the third to those in section 3. a. The first group consists of statements of the type jog mokyklos nelankas jau visas (ganz:Nom.SG.M) ménuo (month:Nom.Sc) ‘that he has not been attending school for a month’ (KT). Such sentences, due to their structure and semantics, can be found in section 1.1. treated equate, whereby the time here is additionally modified by visas. Instead of jog mokyklos nelankgsjau ménuo ‘that he hasn’t been attending school for a month’, it now has jog mokyklos nelankgs jau visas ménuo ‘that he hasn’t been attending school for a whole month’. Both sentences are probably in © However, in colloquial or dialectal speech, the nominative is also necessary: kas trecias posédis nedalyvauja. 7 The possibility of borrowing the structure from Polish should be examined in more detail. 8 I have not encountered such statements in Lithuanian in terms of time. On the other hand, the example kas namai —tai diimai (e.g. 10) fits well here. Similarly, Fraenkel (1928: 32) quotes an example from Polish with a correlative two-sentence structure: co (what:Nom) autor (author:Nom.Sc), to (that:Nom) osobna (special:NoM.SG.F) metoda (method:Nom.Sc) ‘each author has his own method’. THE NOMINATIVE IN TIME ADVERBIALS | 49 their statement structure hardly to separate from each other, whereby the above in section 1.1. Said sinngema® also applies here. The verb is here as there usually in the present tense; therefore here is also described an action / a state that begins at a certain time in the past and extends tiber the whole period of time up to the present time (or in the case of a verb in the Prateritum to the reference time in the past), or in the case of actions tiber the whole period is repeatedly performed "". b. The second group, which in my opinion should be separated from this, consists of statements of the following kind (photos from Musteika, Varénos rajonas): (11) All time séjom. ganz:Nom.Sc. M Time said: PrRaeT.1. P1 “We sat tired all the time.’ In the previous example, the Lithuanian equivalent of the German is used all the time with the Prateritum. Semantically, this statement does not indicate whether the long-lasting action (visas laikas) still continues or not. However, based on the course of the conversation, it is to be assumed that this means a long period of time up to an unspecified time in the past, because the statement is to be understood as an answer to the previous questions of the interviewer (namely whether one had sown rye). Of the under 1.1. discussed structures and there especially from example (2), which agrees with the examples mentioned here with regard to the tempo, they differ in that here no starting point is mentioned and it is also not clear whether the action is possibly. is not repeated until talk time. Also to the example quoted further below (12) we cannot put it, since there a, although not clearly located, closed period in the past is described, whereas here we have to do with an open period of time after two pages in the past (possibly continuing up to the present time). On the other hand, these examples, with their semantics of a long, unfinished period, fit well with the examples in 2.3. treated temporal adverbs of the type diena naktis “day and night’. The last discussed construction comes almost exclusively with the noun /aikas ‘Zeit’ (or the loanword ¢ésas ‘that.’) before, which suggests an already fixed phrase. In addition, I could not find any example from the written language in KT, only one, clearly dialectal: Dainavau (singing:- PRAET.1.- SG) visas laikas per visy (ganz:AKK.SG) gyvenimy (life: AKk.SG) ‘I have sung all my life’. ce. In LKT (199) there is also an example of a statement in the past, which covers a defined period of time: For such statements, compare with the Prateritum: jau visas ménuo nelijo ‘it had not rained for a whole month’. 56 | MARKUS RODUNER it with Lithuanian statements of the type kas vakaras ‘every evening’. These, however, could in turn be an imitation of a corresponding expression in Polish (cf. footnotes 17 and 18). Nau (1998: 15) notes that in Latvian, in colloquial language, nomina modified by the numerals 2-9 may stand in the nominative instead of in the case required by their syntactic function: (24) Four years mes only of the ten vier: NoM Jahr:Nom. PL we:only of this:there. PL zehn nodzivojam there, then miis released majas leben:PraAetT.1. PL there then we:AKK let go:PRAET.3 home ‘We spent only four of these ten years there, then they let us go.’ (Well, right there.) 8. CONCLUSIONS In the course of the discussion of the different types of statements in which nominative temporal adverbs appear, three different interpretations of how the nominative in adverb function could be limited or at least motivated were addressed. These are: a. The nominative was originally part of its own nominal sentence or subject of a paratactical sentence, which was then integrated as an adverb into the main sentence. b. The nominative is motivated by a definite pronoun modifying the noun (possibly as part of a fixed phrase). c. The nominative occurs in quantifying statements (especially but not only with Numbers) on. The first way of reading is followed by Jablonskis and Fraenkel, among others. Thus Jablonskis (1957: 560) regarding the nominative in temporal adverbs in Lithuanian:. loji circumstance of the noun or Siaipjau secondary part of the sentence will have appeared in the speech mainly by abbreviation or iSleidimo way —i§ the whole of a certain sentence, in which the noun could go as a factor, or i8 the insertive sentence: i Sie metai negeri, maza tebus Sieno...; brother, will be all year, sick (how sick)...; jis, jau kelinti metai baigiasi, kai jq lankauja..- .“ (,,This nominative adverb or other secondary part of the sentence will probably have mostly been created by abbreviation or omission —from a whole sentence in which this nominative could be the subject, or from an inserted sentence: aus Sie metai negeri, maza tebus Sieno...; brother, will be all year, sick (how sick)...; he, it's been a few years since jq visited...*). The same hypothesis is also represented by Fraenkel (1928, chap. 5, 30ff.), where he deals with the nominative in inserted, originally self-contained sentences. A plausible explanation they form fir the in 1.1. and 1.1.1. discussed statements, cf. the interim conclusions in 1.2. The statements of the type jaw trys ménesiai or jau trecias ménuo both designate as the additionally still by visas modifi- THE NOMINATIVE IN TIME ADVERBS | 57 The nominative in time adverbs (jau visas ménuo) indicates a period of time from a point A in the past to the reference time or, in the case of the present, to the speaking time and beyond darliber, not a closed period. This particular semantics may be attributed to the nominative in addition to the quantification. Some phrases like you /kiti metai are probably already completely frozen, since they can no longer be formed productively by other time designations. The restriction to certain lexemes suggests a lexicalisation, as can be observed in Russian dialectal zima ‘winters’. Likewise, it probably applies to visas laikas and rytas vakaras. For the other groups of nominative temporal adverbs, the explanation situation is somewhat more difficult, since there, at least in modern language, hardly any more remains of the postulated paratactic structure exist. In the discussion under the individual points it turned out that the statement kariuomenéje prabuvau trys metai in Bsp. 14 and the statements of the type visas laikas sédavom ‘we sat all the time’ (this, as mentioned above, probably already frozen phrase) from the approach of the integration of a paratactic sentence. We must assume that the quantifying modifiers here involve the nominative, which is confirmed by the colloquial examples from Latvian. QUELLEN KT — Textkorpus der litauischen Gegenwartssprache des Zentrums fiir Computerlinguistik, VytautasMagnusUniversitat, Kaunas, donelaitis.vdu.lt LKT - Lietuviy kalbos tarmés. Chrestomatija. Sudaré E. GRINAVECKIENE, A. JONAITYTE, K. MORKUNAS, B. VaNaGIENE, A. Vipuairis, Vilnius: Mintis, 1970. LTCu — Lietuviy tarmiy chrestomatija. Sudaré R. BAcEvici0TE, A. IVANAUSKAITE, A. LESKAUSKAITE, E. Trump, Vilnius: Lietuviy kalbos institutas, 2004. LKZe-elektronische Variante des Wirterbuchs der litauischen Sprache, www.|kz.It LITERATUR AMBRAZAS, V., red., 1996: Dabartineés lietuviy kalbos gramatika. Antrasis pataisytas leidimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijy leidykla. AMBRAZAS,V., ed., 1997: Lithuanian Grammar, Vilnius: Baltos lankos. AmbrRAzas, V., 2001: On the development of the nominative object in East Baltic. In: Dahl, V., Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., eds., The Circum-Baltic Languages. Typology and Contact 2. Grammar and Typology, Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. FRAENKEL, E. 1928: Syntax der litauischen Kasus, Kaunas: Valstybés spaustuve. Gaters, A. 1993: Lettische Syntax. Die Dainas. Herausgegeben von Hildegard Radtke, Frankfurt etc.: Peter Lang. Ho tvoet, A., SEMENIENE, L. 2004: Linksnio teorijos pagrindai. In: Holvoet, A., Semeniené L., red., Gramatiniy kategorijy tyrimai, Vilnius: Lietuviu kalbos institutas, 11-33. JABLONSKIS, J. 1957: Linksniai ir prielinksniai. In: id., Rinktiniai rastai 1, sudaré J. Palionis, Vilnius: Valstybine politinés ir mokslinés literatiros leidykla. Kar sson, F. 2000: Finnische Grammatik. Ubertragen aus dem Finnischen von K.-H. Raabe. Bearbeitet von C. Hasselblatt und P. Jéasalmi-Kriiger, Hamburg: Buske. Kuz’mina, I. B. 1993: Sintaksis russkix govorov v lingvogeograficeskom aspekte, Moskva: Nauka. 58 | MARKUS RODUNER Lasutis, V. 1998: Lietuviy kalbos sintaksé. Antrasis pataisytas leidimas, Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. Laritte, P. 1978: Grammaire basque (Navarro-labourdin littéraire), Donostia: ELKAR. Nau, N. 1998: Latvian, Miinchen—Newcastle: LINCOM Europa. PAULAUSKIENE, A. 1989: Gramatines lietuviy kalbos vardazodziy kategorijos, Vilnius: Mokslas. RatHert, M. 2000: A semantics for durative adverbs. web.uni-frankfurt.de/fb10/rathert/publikationen/ downloads/Proc-Band-Artikel/console-pr-mB.pdf Soko s, E., red., 1962: Miisdienu latvieSu literaras valodas gramatika 2. Sintakse, Riga: LPSR Zinatnu akadémijas izdevnieciba. Suxys, J. 1998: Lietuviy kalbos linksniai ir prielinksniai: vartosena ir normos, Kaunas: Sviesa. TIMBERLAKE, A. 1974: The nominative object in Slavic, Baltic, and West Finnic, Miinchen: Sagner. (Slavistische Beitrage, 82.) Utvypas, K. 1969: Vienaskaitos vardininko kilmés prieveiksmiai. Lietuviy kalbotyros klausimai 9, 7-15. Uxvypas, K., red., 1976: Lietuviy kalbos gramatika 3. Sintaksé, Vilnius: Mokslas. VALECKIENE, A. 1998: Funkciné lietuviy kalbos gramatika, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijy leidybos institutas. VaLiuLyTe, E. 1998: Dabartinés lietuviy kalbos sintaksiniai sinonimai. Vietos, laiko ir priezasties raiska, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopediju leidybos institutas. Markus Roduner received 2005 06 01 Institute of Lithuanian Language P. VileiSio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lithuania markus@splius.|t