Postpozicinių vietininkų sistema Chylinskio Naujojo Testamento vertime

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA XLIX (2003), 33 – 49 The System of Postpositional Locatives in Chylinski’s New Testament Translation Gina Kavaliūnaitė Institute of the Lithuanian Language The article deals with the structure of the system of local cases in Old Lithuanian as reflected in Chylinskis’ translation of the New Testament. It is argued that the traditional descriptions of the Lithuanian system of local cases should be revised in several important respects. As shown in earlier publications, inessive and adessive are not opposed in terms of case meaning, their distribution depending on the categorial properties of the noun phrase (animacy and individuation). The subsystem of lative cases shows no opposition between an internal (illative) and an external (allative) case either. It is only the illative that is marked in this respect; the allative is actually a general lative case, unmarked with regard to the opposition ‘internal: external’. The system of local cases is thus, in fact, ternary: it consists of one locative case with two varieties (inessive for inanimates and adessive for animates) and two lative cases, one of which is additionally marked as illative. This article continues the study of locative usage in Chylinski’s language, the first results of which were published in earlier publications (Kavaliūnaitė 2001, 2002). First, the use of the inessive and adessive was examined (Kavaliūnaitė 2001). The study confirmed the conjectures of Zigmas Zinkevičius (1982) and Wojciech Smoczyński (2001) concerning the association of the adessive with the category of animacy, and refined the nature of this association. The aforementioned article showed that the adessive and inessive are used according to the animacy hierarchy formulated by Silverstein, and that the relationship between these cases is characterized by complementary distribution determined by semantic features. A later publication (Kavaliūnaitė 2002) discussed the use of lative cases—the illative and allative. It was established that animacy is also of some significance in the system of lative cases, but that the allative has functions not directly associated with animacy. This article refines the conclusions formulated earlier and sets out the general structural features of the locative system. As established earlier, the use of the inessive and adessive is determined by the position of a noun or its pronominal substitute in the animacy hierarchy. Nouns denoting inanimate things (places, etc.) have only an inessive form, whereas the adessive form is used exclusively with nouns denoting animate beings or other nominals that occupy a high position in the animacy hierarchy (for more on this and the animacy hierarchy, see Kavaliūnaitė 2001). Since the use of case forms is conditioned by the categorial properties of the nominal, there is no semantic opposition between these case forms. The question arises whether similar factors also determine the use of the corresponding lative cases—the illative and allative. At 34 | GINA KAVALIŪNAITĖ first glance, it appears that a connection with animacy exists: only illative forms of nouns lacking the feature of animacy are used. The following presents statistical data showing the distribution of the illative and allative. To make it possible to compare this with the distribution of the inessive and adessive, the table from the earlier article is first reproduced, showing how the adessive is associated with parts of speech and their subcategories (cf. Kavaliūnaitė 2001: 99): TABLE 1. FREQUENCY OF ADESSIVE USE IN CHNT BY PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR SUBCATEGORIES Category Attested forms Adessive forms of first-person pronouns sg. manimp (44x), pl. musimp (21x) Adessive forms of second-person pronouns tavimp (21x), pl. jusimp (59x) Adessive forms of the reflexive pronoun savimpi (61x) Adessives of proper names Kristusiep (65x), Viešpatiep (55x), Jėzusiep (47x), Dieviep (44x), Tėviep (11x), Sunumpi (4x), Simon iep (4x), etc.; 177 adessives of proper names in total Adessives of demonstrative and third-person pronouns in me, in you, in another (90x) Adessives of relative pronouns in which, where (23x) Adessives of personal nouns žmogumpi (8x) Adessives of adjectives gyvampi (1x), tikrampi (1x), išmint ingampi (1x) Adessives of names of animate (non-human) beings and inanimate objects none Total 507 Regarding the dependence of inessive forms on the categorical properties of nouns, it is important to emphasize that the ChNT translation makes almost no use of inessives of parts of speech occupying a high position in the animacy hierarchy; there is not a single singular inessive of first- and second-person pronouns, which occupy the highest position in the animacy hierarchy. Of the several thousand inessives in ChNT, only 17 are names of animate beings, 14 of them are plural- CHYLINSKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 35 These are inessives occupying a low position on the scale of the hierarchy of individuation (for a fuller discussion of these exceptional cases, see Kavaliaunaitė 2001: 101–103). There are no inessive forms of any personal name, of the pronouns aš ‘I’ and tu ‘you’, or of lexemes such as Dievas, Tėvas, Jėzus, Kristus, etc. TABLE 2. USE OF THE CHNT INESSIVE BY PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR SUBCATEGORIES Category Attested forms Total Inessive forms of names of inanimate objects 1234x sg., 383x pl. 1617x Inessive forms of demonstrative and third-person pronouns aname (45x sg., 27x pl.), jame (1x), 216x; joje (7x), jose, tame (77x), tose (22x), šiame (6x), šiose (1x), tokiame (2x) 216x Inessive forms of place names 142x 142x Inessive forms of indefinite pronouns cielame (9x), kožname (5x), kožnoje (3x), niekame (1x), tūlame (2x sg., 2x pl.), visoj (26x), visose (41x), visokiame (25x) 114x Inessive forms of interrogative-relative pronouns katroj (6x), kitame (1x), kitoj (3x), kok iame (3x), kokioj (2x), kuriame (38x), kurioje (19x), nekuriame (2x sg., 2x pl.) 76x Inessive forms of adjectives 47x sg., 20x pl. 67x Inessive forms of numerals 52x 52x Inessive forms of names of animate beings 1x sg., 15x pl. 16x Inessive forms of participles 11x 11x Inessive form of the emphatic pronoun pačiame (1x) 1x No inessive forms of first- and second-person pronouns Total 2312 36 | GINA KAVALIŪNAITĖ In Tables 3 and 4, we reproduce the correspondingly grouped data illustrating the use of the illative and allative (Kavaliūnaitė 2002: 84–86): TABLE 3. USE OF THE ILLATIVE IN CHNT BY PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR SUBCATEGORIES Category Attested forms Total Illatives of inanimate object names 611x 611x Illatives of proper names (place names) 212x 212x Illatives of adjectives 22x 22x Illatives of demonstrative pronouns and third-person personal pronouns jan (9x), juosna (3x), anan (1x), šian (1x), tokian 1x 15x Illatives of numerals 11x 11x Illatives of interrogative and relative pronouns kurian (5x), kuriosna (1x), katrian (2x), katriosna (1x) 9x Illatives of indefinite pronouns kitan (4x), nekurion (1x), nekuriosne (1x), cielon (1x) 7x Illatives of participles 2x 2x Illatives of possessive pronouns savon (1x) 1x Illatives of personal designations žmogun (1x) 1x Illatives of names for animate beings (non-persons) none – Illatives of reflexive pronouns and first- and second-person personal pronouns none – Total 891x CHYLINKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 37 TABLE 4: USE OF THE CHNT ALLATIVE BY PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR SUBCATEGORIES Category Attested forms Total Allatives of demonstrative pronouns and third-person personal pronouns jop (344x), josp (33x), jump (305x), anop (11x), top (23x), tosp (2x), tump (16x), topgi (1x), tokiop (1x) 736x Allatives of inanimate nouns 327x 327x Allatives of proper names (personal names) 235x 235x Aliatives of personal names 164x 164x Aliatives of second-person personal pronouns tavėsp (20x), jūsump (99x) 119x Aliatives of the reflexive pronoun savėsp (57x) 57x Aliatives of first-person personal pronouns manėsp (40x), mūsump (7x) 47x Aliatives of indefinite pronouns kitop (9x), kitump (14x), visop (2x), visump (7x), cielop (2x), nekuriosp (2x), nekuriump (2x), niekop (3x) 41x Adjectival aliatives 37x 37x Allatives of relative pronouns kuriop (12x), kuriump (2x), kop (8x), katrop (2x) 24x Allatives of participles 16x 16x Allatives of numerals 10x 10x Allatives of possessive pronouns savump (1x), saviškiump (1x), tavump (1x) 3x Allatives of names of living beings (non-persons) 2x 2x Total 1818x 38 | Gina Kavaliūnaitė These data partly correspond to those obtained by comparing the use of the adessive and inessive. The illative forms of first- and second-person personal pronouns, which occupy a high position in the animacy hierarchy, are unattested. Illative forms of nouns denoting living beings are also unattested: only one exception is observed here—the illative žmogun (for discussion, see Kavaliūnaitė 2002: 95). On the other hand, one marked difference stands out: the relatively large number of allative forms of names of inanimate objects (inanimata) (327). As Table 1 shows, adessive forms of such nouns are unattested. The significance of this difference will be discussed further in this article. The tables show that the animacy category affects the distribution of interior and exterior locatives. The fact that nouns denoting living beings (animata) lack an illative indicates that the use of the illative, like that of the inessive, is associated with the nominal feature [–animate]. Since the adessive is associated with the marking [+ animate], we would expect the allative to be marked similarly. However, the allative is not subject to this restriction. It is therefore possible to expect instances in which a noun has both illative and allative forms. In fact, there are quite a few such instances. The following forms are attested in the ChNT text: with honor and glory: Lk 9,26 ChNT your glory, and (glory) of the Father, and the holy angels StB when he shall come in his glory / and [in the glory] of the Father / and of the holy Angels GdB when he comes in his glory / and in the Father’s / and of the holy Angels Jn 11,4 ChNT the illness is not unto death, but unto the glory of God StB This sickness is not unto death / but unto the glory of God GdB This disease is not unto death / but for the glory of God to the kingdom and into the kingdom: Lk 18,24 ChNT How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the Kingdom of God StB How hard it will be for those who have goods to enter the Kingdom of God GdB How difficult it is for those who have money to enter the kingdom of God APD 1,3 ChNT and speaking → speak<ing> about things pertaining → which pertain to the Kingdom of God StB and speaking of the things that concern the Kingdom of God GdB and speaking about the kingdom of God to the tree and into the tree: Rom 11, 24 ChNT If you were not [...] wild [...] by nature, you were grafted into the good olive tree: StB For if you [...] are [...] against nature grafted into the good olive tree CHYLINSKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 39 GdB For if you, contrary to nature, were grafted into the good olive tree LK 17, 6 ChNT you would say to this mulberry tree: Be uprooted and be planted in the sea, and it would obey you. StB you would say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea,’ and it would obey you. GdB and if you said to this wild fig tree: ‘Be uprooted and plant yourself in the sea,’ it would obey you. into perdition and into destruction: LK 8,31 ChNT Then they begged him not to command them to go into the abyss. StB And they begged him not to command them to go into the abyss. GdB Then they begged him not to order them to go from there into the abyss. HEBR 10,39 ChNT But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe, for the preservation of life. StB But we are not among those who withdraw to destruction, but among those who believe for the salvation of the soul. GdB But we are not of those who turn back to destruction, but of those who believe for the gaining of the soul. into life and of life: 1Jn 3,14 ChNT We know that we have passed from death into life, because we love the brothers. StB We know that we have passed from death into life, because we love the brothers. GdB We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brothers. 2Kor 2,16 ChNT To one indeed an aroma of death unto death, but to the other an aroma of life, unto life. StB For to these indeed a fragrance of death unto death; but to those a fragrance of life unto life GdB To these, a fragrance of death unto death / but to those, a fragrance of life unto life There are cases where the choice at least at first glance seems to depend on whether the noun denotes a living being or an inanimate object. One such example is the word church, which can mean either a building or a community of believers. When the building is meant, the illative is used, whereas when the word refers to the believers, the allative is used: ApD 13,14 ChNT and they came into the church on the Sabbath day, and sat down StB And when they had entered the synagogue on the Sabbath day / they sat down 40 | GINA KAVALIŪNAITĖ APR 3,6 GdB and they came into the synagogue on the Sabbath day / and sat down ChNT Whoever has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches StB He that hath an ear / let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the congregations GdB Whoever has ears, let him hear what the Spirit says to the congregations However, in this case it cannot be claimed that the opposition between the illative and the allative is based solely on animacy or inanimacy. It is difficult to determine what factors govern case selection in the phrase speaks to the churches. Constructions with the verb to speak, that is, speech predicates, at least in prototypical cases presuppose an animate addressee, so their meaning is characterized by a certain mixture of directional features (the speech act being directed toward an addressee) and addressee animacy; therefore, it is not easy to determine precisely which factor motivates the use of the allative. Thus, to reduce the number of differentiating features and identify a “minimal pair” by which the criterion for case selection could be determined, it is first necessary to examine at least several examples in which allatives of nouns denoting inanimate objects occur with verbs of pure motion (avoiding the combination of directionality with animacy found, for example, with speech predicates). To investigate the functional relationship between the allative and the illative, several more frequently used spatial nouns were selected. We will discuss examples of the nouns grave and boat. The allative to the grave occurs 10 times, while the illative into the grave occurs 8 times. All the illatives, with one exception1, correspond to Dutch constructions with the preposition in, and they denote situations in which the deceased’s (most often Jesus’s) body is placed in a grave, or the disciples go to Jesus’s tomb, which is in a cave. In both cases, it is clear that the endpoint of motion is inside the grave: Mk 6,29 ChNT they came and took his body, and laid it in the grave StB they went and took his dead body away / and laid it in a grave GdB they came and took his body / and laid it in the grave Jn 20,6 ChNT Simon Peter then came and followed him, and went into the grave StB Simon Peter then followed him / and went into the grave GdB Then Simon Peter also came, following him / and went into the tomb The cases of allative use correspond to Dutch constructions with the prepositions naar and tot. The situations described here are those in which the disciples go to the place where Jesus’ tomb is. Such localization could be considered allative (at the outside), that is, when the endpoint is a place beside the tomb: Mk 16,2 ChNT they came very early to the tomb ∠ and →, the sun having risen 1 ApD 8.2: they carried Stephen (together) to the grave (ChNT), droegen Stefanus te samen [ten grave] (StB), Y buried Stephen (GdB). CHYLiNSKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 41 StB they came to the tomb when the sun rose GdB they came to the tomb when the sun had risen A few sentences further on, it is described how the disciples, having come to the site of the tomb, enter the tomb itself: Mk 16,5 ChNT And having entered the grave, they saw a young man sitting on the right (side) StB And having entered the tomb / they saw a young man / sitting on the right GdB And having entered the tomb / they saw a young man sitting on the right These examples do not contradict the assumption that the illative denotes direction when the endpoint of movement is inside an object, whereas the allative denotes a place beside an object as the endpoint of movement. However, it should be noted that this meaning has no counterpart in the system of static locatives, since the adessive does not have the meaning ‘being beside an object’. This fact has already been noted in the literature (Gelumbeckaitė 2002:120), and Chylinski’s data also confirm it. In Chylinski’s language, the corresponding meaning is conveyed by the preposition pas with the accusative2: Jn 20,11 ChNT But Maria stood outside by the tomb weeping, and as she wept, she looked into the tomb StB And Maria stood outside by the tomb / weeping. And when she wept / she bent down into the tomb GdB But Mary stood outside the tomb, weeping. And while she wept / she bent down into the tomb Lk 24,22 ChNT But also some women from among us astonished us, who early in the morning were by the tomb StB But some women from among us also unsettled us, who had been early in the morning at the tomb GdB But some women from among us bewildered us, who had been early in the morning at the tomb 2 The preposition pas occurs in ChNT altogether 41 times: 26 times with nouns lacking the feature of animacy (inanimata), and 15 times with nouns denoting persons (animata) or their pronominal substitutes. When the preposition pas is used with a person’s name, its meaning was probably close to that of the adesyve, since we find: idad hume → ume ßyrdies at ßliktu Wießpatiep → paſ Wießpati ChNT (Acts 11:23); with a purpose of heart they would remain with the Lord (StB); they continued with the Lord with a firm purpose of heart (GdB). In other instances the adesyve Wießpatiep almost always corresponds to the construction in the Lord ‘èv χωρίῳ’; compare speaking boldly by the Lord ChNT (Acts 14:3), speaking boldly in the Lord (StB), speaking boldly in the Lord (GdB); so also be alive to God in Christ Jesus the Lord must ChNT (Rom 6:11), but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord (StB), but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord (GdB), and so on. There were certainly certain differences between the adesyve and the prepositional phrase with pas; the adesyve is used when speaking of residing in someone’s home, and this nuance is also apparent in 2 Cor 5:8: we desire → prefer to live away from the body, or to live with the Lord (ChNT), we have greater pleasure in departing from the body and dwelling with the Lord (StB), we would rather depart from the body and go to dwell with the Lord (GdB). It seems that Chylinski distinguished “(re)settling in someone’s home” as a variant of the inessive from the incidental, temporary “being by (beside) someone”—the latter meaning is conveyed by the construction with the preposition pas. 42 | Gina Kavaliūnaitė If there is no static case meaning “being at something,” then there is also no reason to assume that the allative, in addition to expressing direction, should also mark “being at something” as the endpoint of movement. A much more convincing assumption is that the allative marks a place as the goal of movement. This place is described in relation to a particular reference object, but the case does not specify whether the endpoint of movement is inside this object or not. A similar meaning is conveyed by the preposition naer (tot) in the Dutch original, similarly German nach, zu, English to, and so on. This interpretation is also supported by the use of the forms eldijos, eldijon. Here the numerical ratio differs from that of graban, grabop: the illative of the word eldija is used 19 times³, whereas the allative is used only twice (John 6:19 and Acts 20:13). The examples show that most instances of illative use involve verbs with the prefix į-. In Chylinskis’s NT, the illative eldijon is used with the verbs įeiti (12 instances), įžengti (2 instances), and įimti (1 instance). The Dutch preposition in expresses the same movement with an endpoint inside the object. Where naer occurs in the Dutch text, the allative is used in one instance: Acts 20:13 ChNT But we having gone ahead on foot to eldyofp, sailed to Assos StB But we, having gone ahead on foot to na het ſchip, sailed to Assos GdB We, having gone ahead to do okrętu, set out for Assos In this case, the whole sentence makes clear that Paul’s companions not only reach the place where their ship is, but also board it in order to sail on. This was the goal of the movement, but crossing the object’s boundary (boarding the ship) is not expressed. However, in another passage where the Dutch original has the preposition naer, the illative is used: Acts 20:38 ChNT and accompanied him eldyon StB and they accompanied him na het ſchip GdB And they led him do okrętu This time, the final stage of the movement—boarding the ship—is also taken into account. It seems that the system of lative cases allowed Chylinskis, in such cases, to use as the goal of movement either a generalized lative case indicating a reference object or an interior case indicating a point inside the reference object as the goal of movement. He could base his choice on the preposition used in the Dutch text, but did not do so in every instance. Thus, there is no complete dependence on the construction in the Dutch text. Rather, the Dutch constructions with naer and the meaning of the Lithuanian allative were similar. 3In fact, 20 times, but in one instance (Jn 6,16) probably by mistake, since the original has by the sea: His disciples went to the sea (ChNT); his disciples went down to the sea (StB); his disciples went to the sea (GdB). Although in Jn 6,17 the illative is used to translate a construction with the preposition in: And they went to the sea (ChNT); And having gone into the ship (StB); and having entered the boat (GdB). CHYLINSkIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 43 When location is described not in relation to a reference object, but instead by using a noun with a more abstract meaning vieta, the contrast between “being inside” and “being near something” should be neutralized. Nevertheless, the forms vieton and vietosp are attested in Chylinskis’s text: the first form emphasizes reaching the goal, whereas the latter indicates only direction (it is not known whether the goal will be reached): Mk 14,32 ChNT They came then to a place [whose name was → called Gethsemane StB And they came to a little place / whose name was Gethsemane GdB And they came to a place which was called Gethsemane G καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς χωρίον οὗ τὸ ὄνομα Γεθσημανί Phil 3,14 ChNT but reaching for what lies ahead, I run toward the marked-out place of the goal of God StB and reaching toward what is ahead / I pursue the goal / for the prize of the calling of God GdB and toward what is before me I strive / I run to the finish line, toward the prize of that heavenly calling of God G τοῖς δὲ ἔμπροσθεν ἐπεκτεινόμενος, κατὰ σκοπὸν διώκω εἰς τὸ βραβεῖον τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως τοῦ θεοῦ The constructions with illatives and allatives of abstract nouns, which are used extensively in ChNT, could alter or supplement only slightly the definitions obtained by examining constructions with concrete nouns. If we consider the assumption correct that the allative denotes a location as the goal of being, when the endpoint is not specified, we could readily explain why there is such a large group of allatives of abstract nouns. The meaning of goal does not indicate whether the goal was fully reached or merely approached, for example: 1 Thess 4,7 ChNT For God did not call us to uncleanness, but to holiness StB For God has not called us to uncleanness, but to sanctification GdB For God did not call us to impurity, but to consecration Hebr 6,11 ChNT But we desire that each of you show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope, until the end StB Maer wy begeeren / dat een yegelicx van u deſelve neerſtigheyt bewiſje / tot de volle verſekerheyt der hope / tot den eynde toe GdB A ʒądámy/ áby káždy ʒ was toʒ ɫtáránie pokázował / ku nábyćiu ʒupełney nadźieje áż do końcá 2Tes 3,5 ChNT But may the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God, and to the patience of Christ StB Doch de Heere rechte uwe herten tot de liefde Gods / ende tot de lijdtſaemheyt Christi 44 | GINA KAVALIŪNAITĖ GdB A PAN niech ſpráwuje ſercá wáſbe ku miloſći Bożej / y ku čierpliwemu ćzekawániu Chryſtuſá 2Kor 9,11 ChNT Idand butumbite bagoteŋ wifame wiſokioſp gieribeſp → gieradeiſteſp, kuria → kuriÿ per mug daro dekudaryma diewop StB That you may be enriched in every respect for all generosity / which through us produces thanksgiving to God GdB And that you may be enriched in every measure for all simplicity / which works through us / so that thanks may be given to God In general, it can be said that the illative marks a transfer into a new, different state, whereas the allative marks a goal that may or may not be reached. This description corresponds to the same scheme presented in the discussion of constructions with concrete nouns. In each particular case, the Dutch text helped Chylinski choose one interpretation or the other (and accordingly one case or the other), since it used the prepositions in (rendered by the illative) or tot (rendered by the allative). The Greek original generally has the same preposition eis in every instance, which could not provide Chylinski with a basis for choosing between the two cases. The choice of one interpretation or the other is often also reflected in the prefix added to the verb, e.g., the prefix į- is naturally associated with the illative: Mt 25,21 ChNT Jeyk linxmiben Wieβpatieç tawo StB Gaet in in de vreughde uwes heren GdB wnidӡ do rádosći páná twego G Enter into the joy of the Lord. 1Tim 6,9 ChNT But those who want to become rich fall into temptation → into temptation and (into) ∠ into ≥ traps StB Doch die rijck willen worden / vallen in verſoeckinge / ende [in] den ſtrick GdB Bo ktoryӡ chcą bogátymi bydӡ / wpadają w pokubienie / y w sidło G But those who want to become rich fall into temptation Such illatives may be regarded as required by verbs: they are attached to verbs denoting a change into another state (not coincidentally having the prefixes į-, at-). The allatives of abstract nouns are generally not required by verbs⁴, but function as adjuncts of purpose: 4 There are, of course, cases in which an allative may be regarded as required by a verb, e.g., with verbs bearing the prefix pri-, e.g., Lk 9,62: Zednaǧ kurſey prydeſi ſąka ſawo jungop (ChNT); Niemand die ſijne hant aen den ploegh ſlaet (StB); Žaden ktoryby pryłoӡył rękę ſwoję do pługa (GdB). CHYLIŃSKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 45 Ef 1,14 ChNT Which is the pledge of our inheritance → into our inheritance, igitop from <pirkimop> → into redemption and the praise of his glory StB Who is the pledge of our inheritance / until the acquired redemption / to the praise of his glory GdB Who is the pledge of our inheritance / for the redemption of the acquired possession / to the glory of his fame G which is the pledge of our inheritance, for the redemption of the possession, for the praise of his glory 1 Pt 1,22 ChNT Having therefore purified your souls [...] in sincere brotherly love StB Having purified your souls [...] unto sincere brotherly love GdB Ponieważeście duβę wáβe oczyścili [...] ku nieobłudney bráterſkiey miłości G τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἡγνικότες [...] εἰς φιλαδελφίαν ἀνυπόκριτον This more abstract purposive meaning corresponds to the directional meaning established for concrete nouns, and to the meaning of transfer into a new state—the meaning of entering the interior of an object. The contrast between the illative and the allative can be formulated as follows: both cases mark direction, but the illative has an additional semantic feature—it also marks crossing the boundaries of an object and entering its interior. The allative marks an object as the goal of a direction (movement), but does not specify whether the object's boundaries will be crossed and the final point of movement will be inside the object, or not. Compared with previous definitions of the functions of the illative and allative, this description differs in terms of markedness⁵. Earlier definitions described the contrast between the illative and allative as symmetrical (equipollent): the endpoint of movement is inside the object (illative) or not inside it (allative) (cf. Zinkevičius 1980: 254–261; Range 1995: 96–102). In fact, the allative is unmarked in this respect. Unlike the illative, which unambiguously indicates that the endpoint is inside the object, the allative provides no such information. The endpoint of movement is often near the object, but this is not a feature of the allative's meaning. Typologically, this kind of semantic relation between lative cases is entirely common. A good example is the English prepositions to and into: the first indicates an object as the goal of movement, and this feature is also part of the meaning of the preposition into; this is reflected in the fact that the preposition to itself is a component of the prepositions in-to. The latter is the marked member of the opposition, since it adds the allative meaning of the preposition in to the general meaning of the preposition to. We can now clarify the relationship of the illative and allative to animacy. In this respect, unlike what was established in the study of the use of the inessive and adessive, animacy is not essential to the differentiation of the cases. In the case of the marked illative, the case semantics appear to be poorly compatible with animacy, probably because the meaning of the case—movement whose endpoint lies inside some spatial object—is not usually applied to living beings 5 Only Hamp (1997) draws attention to the difference in markedness. 46 GINA KAVALIŪNAITĖ (although the metaphorical expression kitan žmogun neįlisi ‘you cannot get inside another person’ is entirely possible in present-day dialects). However, the absence of a direct connection is shown by the use of the allative with nouns that do not have the feature of animacy. The meaning of the allative is unrelated to the animacy hierarchy. With all this in mind, it can be argued that the relationship between static and dynamic locatives is asymmetrical. As established in the previous article, the opposition between the inessive and adessive is based on animacy, not on the spatial relation denoted. Thus, the choice depends on the categorical properties of the noun. If so, then the inessive and adessive are essentially not different cases. This is also confirmed by purely morphological facts. As noted in the literature, the inessive and adessive can occur within one noun phrase; for example, in a two-word phrase whose syntactic relationship (e.g., adjective–noun) requires agreement, one word may have the inessive form and the other the adessive form. Such cases are attested in Daukša’s Postilė: nė regi Dwasios s. žmogup atgimdėtame DP 25535–36 žmonele bediewiufém͂p ir neybtikumūlémp DP 4452–53 (Examples quoted from: Palionis 1967: 170) Instances in which the adessive and inessive are used within one noun phrase can also be found in Chylinski’s language: Ef 4,6 ChNT Wienų Diewaś ir Tewaś wifu, kurſey yra and wilo, ir per wiś, ir juſimp wiſoſe StB One God and Father of all / Who is above all/ and through all/ and in you all GdB Ieden Bog y Ocėc wʒbyſtikich / ktory jeft náde wʒbyſtko / y po wʒbyſtikich / y we wʒbyſtikich was This means that the inessive and adessive are variants of one case. The adessive is a variant of the inessive characteristic of nouns with the feature of animacy. Formally, the adessive marker includes the inessive marker as one of its components, and for agreement purposes it is sufficient for a noun to be marked with the inessive marker common to both variants. In this way, nominal phrases arise in which only one constituent bears the case marker assigned to the entire phrase. This type of case marking, quite usual in agglutinative languages, is otherwise not characteristic of Lithuanian. Postpositional locatives are generally used like all cases—their markers are borne by all constituents of a nominal phrase (e.g., anon eldyon ChNT Jn 6,22; top katnop ChNT Mk 11,23; neweydamayniβkoβp broliβkoβp meitęβp ChNT 1PETR 1,22; tump źmoniump ChNT APD 28,26, etc.). Therefore, those instances in which the second adessive marker -p(i) proves to be optional, and the use of the inessive alongside the adessive meets the requirements of agreement, are indeed significant and attest to the particular closeness of the inessive and adessive. The relationship between the illative and allative is quite different. They are undoubtedly different cases. From the perspective of case semantics, they form a clear opposition. Therefore, one noun may have both case forms, the illative and the allative, and there is a semantic CHYLINSKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 47 opposition between them, which can be attributed precisely to the cases themselves, since it is not based on the categorial properties of the noun. Prisiminkime ankstesniame straipsnyje (Kavaliaūnaitė 2001: 104) cituotą Wojciecho Smoczyńskio apibrėžimą (Smoczyński 2001: 215): “The co-occurrence is observed of (I) the illative with the locative and (II) the allative with the adessive, depending on the meaning of the stem: with inanimate place names – (I), with animate (especially personal) nouns and personal names – (II). There is, however, no stem that would form both loc[ativus] and ill[ativus], as well as ade[ssivus] and all[ati-vus]. In reality, then, we are dealing with two pairs of forms with identical functions and complementary distribution, regulated by the semantics of the noun.” The first part of this claim concerning the inessive and adessive is entirely correct, but the Chylinski data do not support the second part concerning the use of the illative and allative. This article does not undertake to determine whether Smoczyński’s generalization about the use of the illative and allative can be applied to the language of other old writings or to those Lithuanian dialects in which remnants of postpositional locatives still remain. Atsižvelgiant į šio ir ankstesnių straipsnių (Kavaliaūnaitė 2001, 2002) duomenis, Chylinskio NT vertime vartojamų postpozicinių vietininkų sistemą galima apibūdinti taip: funkciniu požiūriu ši sistema iš esmės yra trinarė, t. y. ji susideda iš trijų funkciškai (linksnių semantikos atžvilgiu) diferencijuotų linksnių. Vienas, statinis, turi du vardažodžio kategorinių savybių sąlygojamus variantus – inesyva (gyvumo požymio neturintiems vardažodžiams) ir adesyva (gyvumo požymį turintiems vardažodžiams). Pagal požymį „statiškas: dinamiškas“ (arba „vieta: kryptis“) jam galima priešinti du linksnius: iliatyvą, kuris be bendros krypties reikšmės turi dar „įsiveržimo į objekto vidų“ reikšmę, ir aliatyvą, kuris turi tik bendrą krypties reikšmę, be papildomo „išorinės lokalizacijos“ (lokalizacijos prie objekto) semos. Šį linksnį būtų tiksliau vadinti „liatyvu“ negu „aliatyvu“. Schematiškai ChNT vartojamų postpozicinių vietininkų sistemą galima pavaizduoti taip: FIGURE 1. THE CASE SYSTEM IN CHYLINSKI’S LANGUAGE 48 | GINA KAVALIŪNAITĖ As can be seen, the results of the functional analysis differ from the picture of the structure of the local case system that one might form by mechanically transferring morphological features to the semantic level. At first glance, the system of postpositional local cases is four-membered and symmetrical. It is based on two features: the present and directional cases are opposed, while another feature distinguishes interior and exterior local cases. In fact, the latter semantic opposition is absent in Chylinski’s language. The meaning of external localization (“being near some object”) is non-essential, or it may be entirely absent. ABBREVIATIONS ChNT – CZESŁAW KUDZINOWSKI, JAN OTRĘBSKI, eds., Biblia litewska Chylińskiego. Nowy Testament 2, Tekst, Poznań: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1958. G – NESTLE-ALAND, ed., Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th ed., Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1975. GdB – The Holy Bible, that is, the Books of the Old and New Covenant, carefully and faithfully translated into Polish from the Jewish and Greek languages [...], [Dantzig], 1632. StB – The Bible, that is, the complete Holy Scripture, containing all the canonical Books of the Old and New Testaments. By order of the High and Mighty Lords, the States General of the United Netherlands [...] faithfully translated from the original languages into our Dutch tongue [...] and, by common order of the Dutch Churches, corrected for printing errors and mistakes found in the first printing. Amsterdam, printed by the widow of the late Paulus Aertsz van Ravesteijn [...] in the year 1657. SIGNS [...] superscript žmog[us] abbreviation restored → corrected to ⌜ beginning of correction ∠ deleted〉 deleted LITERATŪRA GELUMBECKAITĖ, J. 2002: Linksnių ir prielinksnių konstrukcijų sintaksė Jono Bretkūno Biblijos Evangelijoje pagal Luką, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla. (Opera Linguistica Lithuanica, 1.) HAMP, E. P. 1997: The in- and ad-forms of case in XVI and XVIII c. Baltic. Baltistica 32 (1), 40. KAVALIŪNAITĖ. G. 2001: Adesyvas Chylińskio Naujojo Testamento vertime. Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 45, 93–111. KAVALIŪNAITĖ, G. 2002 [2003]: Die postpositionalen Lokalkasus in Chylinskis’ Übersetzung des Neuen Testaments. Linguistica Baltica 10, 81–97. KUDZINOWSKI, Cz. 1964: Biblia Litewska Chylińskiego. Nowy Testament 3, Indeks, Poznań: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. LAIGONAITĖ, A. 1957: Pašalio vietininkai dabartinėje kalboje. Lemchenas, Ch., red., Kai kurie lietuvių kalbos gramatikos klausimai, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, 21–39. PALIONIS, J. 1967: Lietuvių literatūrinė kalba XVI–XVII a., Vilnius: Mintis. RANGE, J.-D. 1995: Allativ und Adessiv in altlitauischen Texten des 16. Jahrhunderts. Linguistica Baltica 4, 96–102. SMOCZYŃSKI, W. 2001: Przypadki lokalne języków bałtyckich. Id., Język litewski w perspektywie porównawczej, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 214–216. CHYLINSKIO POSTPOZICINIŲ VIETININKŲ SISTEMA | 49 ZINKEVIČIUS, Z. 1980: Lietuvių kalbos istorinė gramatika, Vilnius: Mokslas. ZINKEVIČIUS, Z. 1982: Lietuvių kalbos postpoziciniai vietininkai. Baltistica 18 (1), 21–38. Gina Kavaliaūnaitė Gauta 2003 10 04 Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lietuva [email protected]