„Kablio“ figūros nominacinės sistemos raiška lietuvių kalbos tarmėse

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA XLVI (2002), 81-119 The concept of the ‘hook’ is an instance of a linguisticROLANDAS MIKULSKAS ally relevant prototypical figure. The concept of the ‘hook’ is an instance of a linguistically relevant prototypical figure. Each Lithuanian dialect has its own system of names for implements of curved shape, correlated with this figure or with the most general term capable of expressing it. Such onomasiological systems are hierarchically ordered: there is a relationship of hyponymy between the individual members and the general term dominating the system. The geographical borders of the onomasiological systems of the dialects are defined by the areas of expansion of the general terms denoting the figure of the ‘hook’. A principled approach is needed to establish these general terms for the particular dialects on the basis of the vast body of data contained in the cardfiles of the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language. The aim of the present article is to formulate these principles. It is hoped that, mutatis mutandis, they will also be helpful in establishing the general terms for other linguistically relevant figures. 1. FIGURATIVE NOMINATION SYSTEMS 1.1. The basis of language as a phenomenon is the innate ability of human intellect in reality! treated symbolically (Karaliūnas 1997: 200). Symbolic treatment of reality can be understood as a certain form of its perception. The perception, or capture, of continuous reality occurs in consciousness through certain discrete elements—images. They should be perceived as internal schemes, models, which express themselves as genetically or culturally defined expectations and determine the selective nature of perception of reality. The visuals, by generalizing the fragments of reality, become symbols of their primary representation in consciousness. This initial embodiment of reality creates the prerequisites for the emergence of language as a system of conventional signs. 1.2 Many researchers of the phenomenon of language agree that among other representations of reality in our minds, visual images are perhaps the most important (see Karaliūnas 1997: 228-229, Greimas 1989: 118-122). It is visual images that are characterized by figurative synthesis, when certain general images are created from specific images, acquiring an abstract symbolic value. The objects of space, which arise before our eyes as an objective reality, can become a source of language symbolism only after acquiring the invariance of the natural sign. This is achieved by reducing the concrete objects of reality to what is possible.'- Reality is understood here and hereafter as everything to which the perceiving individual's attention is directed, i.e. as a certain pre-linguistic dimension of perception. 82 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS inferior geometric figures, without paying attention to their purpose. The event-related and random level of the object world is thus replaced by the level of the figure world, which encompasses a finite inventory. Thus, the aforementioned figurative synthesis is essentially a reduction operation, during which the general figures are obtained. These figures can already follow certain schemes of handling and organizing the substance. Further analyzing the general figures, oppositions consisting of elementary spatial categories are predicted, having their equivalents in language, e.g.: straight vs. curved, convex vs. concave, closed vs. open, full vs. empty, etc. 1.3 Individual figures of the world understood in this way (usually important to the linguistic community in one way or another) can become the core of the structure of various nominative systems. Let's say this is the "circle" figure. In categorical vision, the “circle” is perceived as a closed curve, i.e., its concept requires categorical oppositions already present a priori in the mind: curved vs. straight and closed vs. open. The “circle” as an essential figure is recognised in the semantic structure of many words – names of real objects. For example, let us take the names wheel, wheel (spinning), ring, bow, rim, wheel (such a tool), flying, ball, etc. The basis of the meaning of the latter two words probably consists of the concepts of more complex spatial figures — the “circle” and the “sphere” — which, in addition to the previously mentioned categories of space, are respectively supplemented by other oppositions: full vs empty, concave vs convex. Some of the words listed here denote very specific objects of reality, e.g.: wheel, wheelchair, bow, — others can be used to name several or more such objects, e.g.: wheel (carriage, water mill, machine, etc.), ring (wedding, snow, chain, etc.), ball (string, smoke, game, etc.). The latter are said to have a broader reference and a more general meaning. As a result, they easily acquire derivative meanings and are also often used in a figurative sense. The transfer of meaning in the spoken case usually takes place on the basis of figurative similarity of the named objects. Thus we can talk about the mint circle, the ratq of time (closed cycle), the ring of encirclement, etc. The more general the meaning of the word, the more opportunities it has to become the name of one or another figure, its representative in the linguistic level. This representative can become the unifying structural core of other names if the objects they refer to have an essential figurative similarity. 1.4 From what has been said, it is clear that in language there are correspondences not only for the elementary categories of space that form the form of expression of the natural world. In the system of nominal units of language, the figures constructing the semiotic code of visual expression of this world, which consist of combinations of these spatial categories, also have their corresponding. In a sufficiently homogeneous ethnolinguistic space, which would ideally be made up of dialects of one language, it is possible to speak quite reliably about the universality of the repertoire of these figures. This, in turn, leads to the emergence of nominative systems in dialects that are correlated with the names of those figures. The concepts corresponding to the figures of the horizon of figurative vision become the unifying factor of the members of the nominative systems, and the names that are best able to represent these figures become the dominants of those nominative systems. The name most closely associated with the concept of a visual figure has the most general meaning and the widest reference compared to other members of the nominative system. The latter not only includes the reference of the remaining members of the system, but can also be extended by nominating new objects of reality on the basis of figurative similarity. 83 Not one of them already has more established names in the language, which are composed on the basis of another nominal feature. In this context, the most commonly used names are those with the highest nominal power. 1.5 Linguistic nomenclature systems are formed in the sphere of nomenclature of the common name by including other names of objects of the corresponding figure. Between the name that unites such a system and other names there is an INCLUDED or hyperonymic-hyponymic relationship. This means that in certain communication situations, when making statements, names of general meaning can be chosen instead of names of specific meaning. For example, the speaker (addressee) may use the name of a broader reference to describe the denotative when addressing the listener (addressee) who he thinks is less knowledgeable. This is called the "common knowledge base". In this respect, we can talk about the relation of NAME between names. The hierarchically arranged inventory of names covered by the concept of one figure is convenient for the language user in its economy. From the point of view of the selection of names for the construction of statements, this systematic model seems to be more efficient than other analogues based on the rules of construction or logical deduction. 1.6 One of the figures that are significant for the linguistic community, and usually well reflected in the vocabulary of different languages, is the prototypical “hook” figure. The naming system formed by the concept of the “hook” figure was chosen for the study not by chance. First of all, because of its simplicity, the figure itself is easily recognizable in the corresponding forms of reality. Secondly, the objects covered by its concept form a list of easily countable work tools. Thirdly, because of the similar nature of farming activities, representatives of all Lithuanian dialects have used the same tools since ancient times. It is no coincidence that the names of these tools are well reflected in the Lithuanian Language Dictionary (hereinafter — LLD). From the examples of use collected here, it becomes clear not only the specificity of the specific rivet-shaped tools, but also the work for which they were used only recently, and sometimes still are used today. This makes it convenient to judge the semantic structure of these words-names. In addition, the LCCE is full of examples of contexts (predictable communication situations) in which one spoken term replaces another. From them we can judge about the systemic (subordination) relationships of the names. The members of the nominative system of the “hook” figure are united by the image of a rippled object (tool). It is important for the formation of its concept the opposition of the elementary categories of space curve vs. straight. However, the “hook” figure relevant to linguistic nominations is not a deductively postulated geometric figure, but rather an abstraction-induced invariant of all tools of a rist shape. This is not only the concept of weight, but also the overall hanging function. In different regions of the Lithuanian language, the nominative system of the “hook” figure has a distinct expression. Therefore, we can talk about arealic, or dialectal, hook-shaped tool naming systems. The geographical boundaries of the expression of individual nomenclature systems are drawn by the distribution of generic names. These names (which we will later define as COMMON NOMENATORS) are not so obvious to the Lithuanian language dictionary researcher. From the abundance of data provided by LKŽK on various names of rist-shaped tools, they have to be determined according to a certain methodology. The formulation of the principles of such a methodology is essentially the subject of this article. Card 84 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS It is hoped that these principles will also apply mutatis mutandis to the determination of common names of other figures of significance for the linguistic community. Furthermore, the methodology uses dialect data to verify the functionality of the hierarchical structure name model in general. 2. METHODOLOGY FOR THE TERMINOLOGICAL DETERMINATION OF THE COMMON NAME OF THE ‘HOOK’ FIGURE 2.1.A quick review of the LKŽ and LKŽK data makes it clear that the nominative system of the “hook” figure has its own different expression in different regions of Lithuanian language use. When we talk about different expressions, we first of all have in mind that different regions have their own word of the most general meaning, which is best able to identify the “hook” figure. Other regional names of hook-shaped tools are arranged (acquire status) in relation to this most common name and thus create a distinct nomenclature system of this figure, characteristic only of the speakers of that regional language. The boundaries of the areas in which one or another nominal system of a spoken figure is established do not completely coincide with the boundaries of dialects. The latter, as is known, are determined by language researchers according to certain phonetic correspondences. But dialects, of course, differ not only in their phonetics. Rather, they are to be regarded as regional variants of the same language, which are characterized by specific systemic features of all the dialects, thus not only phonological or morphological, but also syntactic, as well as lexical. The formation of dialects is determined and their stability is maintained by the distinctive ethnicity of individual regions. This in turn is shaped by social, political, administrative and other factors. Dialect is not the only manifestation of ethnos as a historically formed human genotype. It also expresses itself in peculiar customs and a peculiar material culture. The latter is closely related to the dialect vocabulary. This is the most mobile layer of the language (dialect) system. In the event of interference, the structural elements of one dialect can spread to another dialect. Most of the mixing of dialects occurs in the border areas. A dialect, as a language system, is a closed system. One dialect borrows a phoneme or a morpheme from another dialect only in the event that “the prerequisites for the introduction of a new element arise, namely to correct the disrupted structural balance, fill the empty cages of the system, etc.” (King 1997: 343). The most common form of loan is the loan of money. Words denoting material objects (e.g., various tools) can easily travel from one dialect to another with the adoption of the latter. Over time, borrowings, by inserting themselves into semantically close lexical groups, can acquire a certain status* in them, often pushing their own names of the corresponding objects to the periphery. 2.1.1. The limits of the nominative systems of the “hook” figure in dialects are determined by the spread of the central name of these systems. In anticipation of the teaching behind the scenes, we will say that the areas of use of these systems more or less extend within the boundaries of the major dialects, although in border zones they sometimes exceed them. An example could be the western Highlanders + * —We understand the status of a name as its position in relation to the central system name. The nominal power of the word (nominal value, nominal weight) in the system directly depends on it. 85 Kauniškiai is the common name of the VGSO used on the western side of Kaunas, which far intersects with the southern Zemgaly Raseiniškiai dialect area. In some dialects, even two nominative systems are used. Let’s say that the Samogitians, as we will see, have nominal systems dominated by two common names — kebin and kebek*. They are spread in different dialect areas. Other, narrower references ‘kabinimas drabužiams sienoje’ are used throughout the Žemaičių area, thus both in the nominative systems of kabinė and kebėklis. The same word can acquire a different status in the nominal system when crossing dialectal boundaries. Let’s say, vgs, being the central name of the nominative system of the “hook” figure of the western Kaunas Highlanders (western side), in the Žemaičių dialect only means the stationary attachment of the boiler over the firewood (vak. aukšt. vąškaras). The common name of the Eastern Highlanders was hook, the East Prussian Lithuanians used it only to name a tool for turning manure, etc. 2.2 I would like to dwell a little longer on the issue of the expression of the central name of the spoken nominative systems, as well as to examine in more detail the related concept of the word NOMINATIVE POTENCY. Thus, each dialect has one or more hook analogues that divide the territory of the Lithuanian language into certain zones of their dominant nominative systems. It seems that these words of the most general meaning differ both in their origin and in their internal form, as well as in the semantic properties that result from it. For example, the eastern Highlander hook, the Zemgallian kobinys or kebėklis* are in adjective relation to the verb kabinti: they are respectively derivatives of the suffixes -lys, -inys, -eklis, still retaining the meaning of the construction of the names of tools (nomina instrumenti). As names they are still motivated by the nominal character of the hanging function. Similarly, in the eastern corner of the western Kaunas Highlands, the word kūkis is derived from the verb kūkti, meaning ‘to bend, to bind’. This general name is therefore directly motivated by the nominal feature of the rist form. The semantic character of the hanging function is here implied from the character of the form. The significance of the vgss pronunciation, which is common in the western part of this dialect, is hardly traceable today. For the modern user of the language, this name is completely deethnologicalized. There is no point in talking about the motivation for the creation of the borrowed word kriūkas, which has established itself in the dialects of southern and eastern Vilnius. Later we will explain how much the semantic characteristics of these words led to their rise to a dominant position in their nominative systems. However, we can already now assume that the above mentioned differences in internal form and nominative motivation could have slightly diverged their internal semantic development. After all, the semantic derivation of words that have retained the meaning of the verb (at least for some time) can also be directed to the initial nominal meaning. And words that have lost their structural motivation or had no such motivation (borrowing) acquire new meanings more freely, their number depends more on nominative needs and convenience of use. In the northwest corner, the more commonly occurring kibek is considered a phonetic variant of the same name. * kebékel <kebékel due to regressive assimilation of vowels; The latter form is recorded in Skirsnemuna and Merkinė respectively as the meaning of hanging doors and hanging on the wall. 5 For phonetic differences between kriūkas, kriūkas, kritkas, krūgas see Mikulskas (1995: 64); for convenience we will continue to use one form, kriūko. 86 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS 2.2.1. Despite the different internal semantic structure of spoken words and the apparently different paradigmatic relationships with other lexical units that follow from this, the position they occupy in their nominative systems is the same — they are the most general names that encompass the reference of all members. It seems that they have acquired such a status not because of the peculiarities of their internal semantic developmtarp figūratyvinio pasaulio regėjimo ir kalbos, šio regėjimo figūros (mentaliniai vaizent. After all, due to the existing mutual connection, diny) have their equivalents in language – language signs (words). If we agree that the representative function is an essential function of language, then the emergence of such words, which can best describe the figures mentioned, is simply programmed by the genesis of language. Thus, the language user inevitably finds one or another “most appropriate” word for the most common name of the “hook” figure under consideration. The latter is the dominant of the hierarchical nominative system, as a hyperonym relating to the remaining members of the system. This inclusive name system, like the role of the generic name, is a priori determined by our way of thinking. As is known, the cognitive mind divides the perceptions of the external world into logical classes of objects on the basis of comparative relations. The hierarchical nominative systems are examined and would be a fragmentary reflection of these logical classes at the language level. 2.2.2. To talk about the nominal power of a word is to talk about its reference®. It is easy to understand that the reference of the most common name in the nominative structures in question includes the reference of all members of the system. Speaking about the nominal potency of this name, we should find out how much it depends on its central position in the system, and how much on the semantic structure. The latter concept presupposes semantic derivation of the word, its polysemanticity. Defining the essence of nomination as the marking of objects of reality during the generation of statements, we consider words as the main units of nomination. We understand these as two-sided signs of language—- having their own expression and conceptual meaning. During the act of nomination, these language signs refer to objects of reality (denotating them) or, in the case of abstract concepts, to themselves. In this way, the words in the sentence acquire a specific meaning. On the other hand, when referring to concrete realities during the act of communication, only one meaning of the “polysemic” word is realized. Thus, the so-called ACTUAL FUNCTIONAL WORD (see Jakaitienė 1988: 28) appears during the act of nomination. 2.2.3. There is no point in talking about the nominal power of the word realized in the text. However, some linguists, for example Nikitin (1983: 9-11), speak of its nominativeness, understanding the latter as the ability of the word (nominator) to express (by perception —actualization) the meaning associated with it independently, without other elements of the statement. Thus, the nominativity of the word in the realized text is considered as a function of its syntactic autonomy. There is even talk about the different nominativity of individual parts of speech that determine future syntactic roles. In this respect, the nominality of the noun and the noun compounds is the greatest. The nominator realized in the text, in Nikitin's view, is grammatically marked. * Linguists who understand reference as the concept of the plane of speech, here speak of the REFERENCE WORDPOTENTIAL (Telija 1977: 136), THE REFERENCE HYPERONIM AREAS (Nikitin 1983: 29), DENOTATIVE NOMENING POTENTIAL (ibid., 31). RELEVANCE OF THE NOMINANT SYSTEM OF THE “HOOK” FIGURE | 87 mine existing unmarked nominator. Further, Nikitin (ibid., 22) states that this nominator can be described as a lexem having an invariant meaning for many nominators of speech. The meaning of the unmarked nominative is not just an abstraction of the words used in specific sentences. This value is to be nominated by the unmarked nominator as one of its values. 2.2.4. The concept of the unsigned nominative is close to the concept of the VIRTUAL WORD. According to Jakaitienė (1988: 28), this is also not just an abstraction of words expressed in a specific speech, but “an objectively existing unit of the language system, associated with a certain content in the consciousness of the speaking members of society”. When studying the nominal units of the language system and their systemic relationships, the term virtual word would be very useful. In language, this virtual word performs the function of the nominator not as a multi-meaning word, but as a single word-sign, characterized by a certain PRIMARY MEANING- ”. This primary meaning is an integral part of the word as a two-sided sign of language. It is simply known and recognized by the language users as its meaning. It is this meaning that plays the most important role in specific linguistic situations in selecting suitable nominators for objects of reality. Virtual words therefore constitute the inventory of nominal units of the language user. Considering the virtual word as the starting point of the nominative act, other meanings should be spoken about as concrete realizations of the primary meaning in speech. Some of these meanings are established in language usage, become regular, and thus are also considered part of knowledge, language competence (i.e., language system). Between them and the original meaning there is often a connection of semantic derivation. Language competence through derived meanings is expressed in the fact that the language user, by memorizing them and perceiving the relationship between them and the primary meaning, learns the rules according to which he can generate other meanings, i.e. (on the basis of similarity or proximity relationships) to name the corresponding objects of reality with the same word (see Nikitin 1988: 72). In order to investigate the expression of nominative systems of the “hook” figure in Lithuanian dialects, it is important to learn to identify virtual words of the most general meaning — the main nominators of the systems. This is done by examining specific statements in which the actual functional words appear as nominators. The latter's meanings are determined not only by the syntax of the statements, but also by the circumstances of the conversation (communication situation) predicted from them. For the research we use statements recorded in the LKŽ database. In addition to the synchronous system, the nominal system is also a synchronous system. Since the material accumulated by the LKŽK covers almost the entire twentieth century”, it undoubtedly records the lexical changes that have taken place in the dialects. However, in trying to construct a model of spoken nominative systems, we will inevitably have to abandon the diachronic approach to the collected material, i.e. we will consider that it reflects a certain static beness of the Lithuanian dialect lexicon’. This does not mean that we use the term of primary meaning without the diachronic shade, which is not appropriate here when speaking about language as a system. Here it simply means (as we will see later) the precedence over other, derived, meanings. 8 K. Būga began collecting material in 1902. * Karalilinis (1997: 45), commenting on E de Saussure- ’s statement that in static linguistics no proof is possible without conditional simplification of data, says that, although the absolute state is characterized by the absence of changes, in practice the state of language is not a point, but a longer or shorter time interval when the amount of changes is minimal. This interval could be ten years, a generation of people, a century or even more. 88 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS Some aspects of the historical development of the names under investigation should not be taken into account. After all, when looking at the language synchronously, not only the systemic connections between the names are palpable. In the semantic structure of common names, the connections of operative motivation or semantic derivation are still vividly felt. They are the result of the historical development of the word and are already studied by the special etymology science, but if they are felt by the language users and used for new designations, then they are also the reality of language synchrony. 2.3.1. The inventory of the investigated “hook” nominative systems consists mainly of various names of agricultural implements or household items, as well as the names of craft tools closely related to agricultural activities. Often these tools or devices have several names based on different nominal features. Let us take, for example, the names of the claw for hay from the side pešti (long claw with one, and sometimes even with three claws at the end). In the LKŽ we find the following examples: pešėklis, peštūkas, šienpešys (Siénpesis, Siénpesa, šiėnpešė) —referring to the purpose, and kobinys, kablys, kūkis —in the nominative form (in the eyes of today’s language user) in the riesta form. Even in the same dialect, several names for the same tool can be used. For example, in the northern Zemgallen, besides the word „Koobinis“ (Žarėnai, Telšiai, Alsėdžiai, Žemaičių Kalvarija), the words „šiėnpešis“ (Plateliai, Šatės, Skuodas), „sienpešys“ (Alsėdžiai) are also used; In the western highland Kaunas dialect, besides peštūk (Veliuona, Serédžius, Aukštėji Panemunė), kūkis (Zapyškis, Darsūniškis) is also spoken. The name chosen by the speaker to refer to one or another tool in the form of a rist depends on the prevalence of the name in the dialect as well as on the circumstances in which the communication takes place. 2.3.2. If we want to distinguish the most commonly used names from the variety of these tools, we have to consider two things when studying the individual statements. First of all, we need to establish the broadest reference of such names. Due to this (a priori determined) position in the nomenclature system, these names can replace more common, more specific names of tools in certain communication situations. These communication circumstances, in which one more general term replaces another, more specific, can be different. For example, the respondent tries to describe this "unknown" term to the questioning note-taker with a more common, general-meaning hyperonym. This speaking situation, for example, becomes clear when reading the sentence written in Varniai: Linų galvas nukirsta, nuškuoja su komžučiais, atseit su 6—7 kobiniais. Or another example: Manor manure with such cobblestone value[a] (Stone). In this case, the broader term is used instead of the narrower term to "level out" the discrepancy in the speaker's and listener's awareness. In other cases, the speaker uses the general name without remembering (rarely used) the name of a tool, for example in a sentence from the Kantautiniai: Juk turėjo vardą tas kobinys? There may be more similar conversational circumstances that encourage the change of terms. 2.3.3. On the other hand, when determining that one or another name has the widest reference, we must also pay attention to the semantic structure of this name, i.e., to reconstruct it as a multi-meaning word. Since in speech acts this general word expresses many specific meanings, we must determine which of them are regular (established in usage) and which are occasional, derived from the context of a specific case of speech. NOMINAL SYSTEM RESOLUTION OF HOOK FIGURE | 89 primary values after applying the value transfer rules. Some of the regular values are so well established in usage that they are usually directly associated with the word by the language user as a significant with a significant. The number of regular values not only testifies to the nominal power of the word, but also establishes it in the language system. Here it should not be forgotten that the general (or in terms of nomination — primary) meaning of the words under consideration is not some abstraction of visual meanings, but is one of the meanings of the word that actually functions in language. The word is not only used in the above mentioned cases of designation, but also expresses itself in comparative constructions as a standard of comparison, e.g. : Motka toj susisukus kap kriūkūtis (Jieznas); It dried up like a cowshed (Klykoliai) and so on. In other cases, words of general meaning are used to describe, e.g. : From the cobby tree (i.e. from the “hook”-shaped bifurcation) they work the ocks for furs (Židikai). This general meaning is also commonly exploited in metaphors (see the sentence from The Lambs: The Crane's Hook Went to the South). In addition, here we should add the so-called determinative stitches: hooked (Papilys, Palėvenė, Ėriškiai, Miežiškiai, Pagriai), cringing (Rūdninkai, Pelesa), cucking (Prienai), hooked-toothed (Krekenava), cringing-headed (Rudamina) and so on. In these, the first sandh also represents the general meaning of the object in the form of a ribbon. Thus, when trying to construct a model of the meaning system of colloquial names, this general meaning of the object in the form of a ribbon should be put in the first place. Despite the synchrony, the other regular values should be considered derivatives of that common one, although from a diachronic point of view some of them would have appeared earlier in usage." And although often nominations of regular meaning may appear to participate directly in the acts, even in such cases the researcher should see the primary meaning in the second plan. 2.4 Deepening into the semantics of such a homogeneous nominator, we will inevitably have to answer the question of where the derivative power of the primary meaning comes from, how it relates to the nominal power of the name (the latter presupposes systemic connections beyond the word), what is the semantic structure of this primary meaning. 2.4.1. We should admit that the highest status of the names in question in the nominal systems, or the highest paradigmatic value (for the term see Ufimceva 1977: 24.), depends largely on the derivative power of the primary meaning or, in the field of onomastics, on the strength of the nominal sign. Most often, such words have mostly derivative meanings or can name most objects of reality on the basis of the same nominal attribute. It is these words that are best suited to represent the images of figurative vision. This suitability follows from the fact that the concept of the primary meaning of these words is CLOSEST to the corresponding figure. In our case, it should be assumed that the primary meaning of the concept of fatness is most closely related to the figure of the “hook”. It is therefore obvious that the derivative power of the primary meaning of colloquial names stems from the dominant structure of riestu- **—This seems to be the case with the horseshoe—the abundance of inscriptions seems to indicate that this word used to mean primarily a claw for hay-shearing or a long bit with a ripped end used for other purposes. This name is still used in the dialect to compete with the name of Šiėnpešis or Vertėkėlis. Similarly, the use of the word „vašas“ in the dialects of the Žemaitija and Southern Highlands, i.e. farther away from the area where it is expressed as the main name of the “hook” figure, as if it indicates that earlier this word was used by Lithuanians to name the device of HANGING. 96 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS riant, we geographically record the use of the six words mentioned with the following regular meanings: “tool for turning manure from a cart”, “tool for pepping hay from a cone or a sidewalk’, ‘meskeriojimo jrankis’, “krokio jrankis’, “device for winding ropes’. To these we add a more general meaning — ‘tool for pulling hangers’. Thus, we could define the meaning of the word, which refers to a more general-purpose tool. We would describe it as a long knife with a bent end, used to pull logs from the river, draw water, remove a sunken bucket from a well, break down the walls of a cave during a fire, etc. To make it clearer what we are talking about, we give some examples from Eastern Aukštaitija: 1. They were used to bring people with hooks, wherever there was fire (Leliūnai). 2. Bucket unhooked, gave grabs with hook (Krinčinas- ). 3. Hook, where the linen is pulled from the mark (Naujamiestis)'®. However, this meaning was also chosen because it determined the meaning of numerous verb derivatives, the base words of which are some of the nouns we have selected. Let's take the derivative verbs vgsuoti (: vąšas) and habliūoti (: hook). One, the meanings of these Vedic words further illustrate the spread of the respective meanings of their base words in dialects. Secondly, we could even say that the latter have “rooted” in one or another dialect during the first. This idea is supported by the use of the aforementioned derived verbs in figurative meanings, which indirectly testifies to the expansion of the meanings of the base words and, at the same time, to their wider nominal possibilities in the respective dialect. For example, in two distinct dialects (Western and Eastern Highlands) derived verbs with the action meaning “to manipulate the object (a tool in the form of a spoon) named by the base word” associatively begin to mean another outwardly similar action “hang (a spoon), greedy eating”, only in each of the dialects mentioned above they have “their own” word for it: in Western Highlands this is (out)washing, in Eastern Highlands — (out-, pa-, for) hooking. 2.6.7. Places where the common names of the “hook” figure are recorded with the above 6 meanings are listed in the table and on the map at the end of the article. Ideally, using this methodology, the use of the corresponding common name should be recorded for all six values in each location included in the table. Unfortunately, due to the uneven and unsystematic filling of the database, its data are lacking in this respect." Therefore, assuming that dialects, and therefore their vocabulary, are characterized by a certain consistency, we consider that in the places recorded in the table and marked on the map® the spoken names are regularly used in all six meanings (we can even introduce a uniform symbolic notation on the map to emphasize this fact)”. Thus, we obtain a preliminary analogue of "hook" in dialects of compact distribution 18 Also cf. the widespread phraseology with a hook to pull the word (out of the mouth) “difficult to speak, e.g. : Just talk when you're gone, so you don't have to pull a word out of your mouth with a hook (Deaf). 9 For example, in the distribution area of the hook, this use is more or less sufficiently recorded only in Kupiškis district. For several years in a row, the LKZ staff led by Dr. K. Vosylytė organized expeditions to this region. 0 Provided that these locations are not far from the compact area of use of the name. ta !-Accepting this assumption, judging about the degree of regularity of a meaning from the number of its fixations in the dialect should be careful. Only unusually abundant fixations of LKZK in this case liudyty about the popularity of the meaning and vice versa. „KABLIO“ FIGŪROS NOMINACINĖS SISTEMOS RAIŠKA | 97 image. The limits of the use of common names, and thus of the spread of the nominative systems dominated by them, are later refined by recording those dialect statements in which these names directly refer to their significant meaning. 2.7. Previously, when discussing the structure of nominative systems, we talked about substitution relations. Now, before we take JŲ NOMINATORIŲ* paplitimą tarmėse, norėtume atidžiau pažvelgti į PAVADAVIMO teranother step, which allows us to clarify the possibilities and benefits of the application of GENERALIZE to our research. However, we should first discuss the closely related term REFERENCE in more detail. The latter, as it should be clear, we use to describe the nominative possibilities (nominal potency) of the word-name. Words, as signs of language, represent or — during communication — substitute objects of nonverbal reality. As we have already mentioned, they do so in general terms by expressing the latter. The word therefore symbolizes not a specific object of reality, but a certain ideal of it, which consists of the essential features of that kind of objects. These features or signs are the conceptual content of the word as a sign of language. In terms of language use, the word-sign is characterized by intentionality. When expressing one or another concept, it is always directed to a certain class of objects of reality, i.e., as a name it is suitable for all the elements that make up that class, it is able to name them. Moreover, the capacity of some concepts expressed by words (the commonality of their constituent characteristics) determines that they can name elements of another class of objects according to similarity. In this way, a class of objects of a narrower scope is included in a class of a wider scope during nominative activity. As possible objects of naming (wide or narrow) elements of the class and form a word-name reference. It is a quantitative characteristic of the word, reflecting its circle of possible nominations as a name. We could say that the reference of the name exists in the linguistic consciousness as a memory of its past communicative roles and (partly dependent on these) as a conception of its future communicative roles. However, it is defined not only by all previous instances of use, but also by the paradigmatic value or status of the name in its nomenclature system. 2.7.1. From what has been said, it is clear that we understand the word reference as the concept of the language plane. It defines the scope of the name as a unit of the language's nomenclature system. Nikitin (1988: 50) uses the term extensional (defining the content of meaning as contingent) when speaking about the scope of concepts and meanings (he does not distinguish between them). Well, the reference for this linguist is the concept of speech plane, i.e., he calls it that to which the word refers (which it names), realized in a specific sentence. Since these things will also be relevant to us, we will apply the term DENOTATION to them. A word, as a name, having a broader or narrower reference, realized in a statement, indicates or denotes (signifies) a specific object of reality or their class. So here it can have a specific denotation (denoting a specific object) or a general denotation (denoting any member of the class or the whole class in corpore). Below we present three examples of the Žemaičių dialektas sayings where the same name of a word has different denotations: # We believe that this newly introduced term more strictly defines the central name of the hierarchical nomenclature systems under consideration as a means of secondary nominations. However, in the further exposition we will not completely abandon the old term — the general name. 98 | Rolandas Mikulskas 1. With the verteklė liuob translate manure [from the carriage] field (Gitdiske). 2. That arrow, so these nails were bumped (Endriejavas). 3. She took [something] out there with her spoon (Seda). The tipper, as we can see, is a tool for turning manure out of the carriage. The locals describe it as a fork with folded teeth (more often) or as a horseshoe or knife (rarely). In fact, this would be the contentious meaning of the word, or the semantic content. The reference for this name is the class of fertilizer tools. It is hardly possible to use it for a broader nomination (at least not recorded). In the first two cases, the blade represents the whole class of these tools, so its denotation is the blade class. It corresponds to the sui generis reference of the name.’ The third example deals with specific resources used to perform a specific task. In this case, the denotation of the name is specific, it does not coincide with its reference as a unit of the nomenclature system. By the way, here you can see a reference to the aforementioned class of tools. Only in the case of a specific denotation does this reference seem to go into the background. We would say that in the field of communication it does not open up, because for the conveyed information, the communication task, it would be superfluous to refer to the classroom. For the recipient of information, the listener, only the content of the message is important. However, for the researcher of the narrative, it is always important what represents that content. Therefore, it is difficult for him not to notice that in speech, units of wider semantic scope are always used to indicate specific things. He also looks at a specific statement from the point of view of the language system: in the elements of the statement, in the words, there are always realizations of units of the nominal system with a broader or narrower reference. In short, for the ordinary participant in the act of communication, words usually only represent the objects of reality that are being spoken about, and for the language researcher, in addition to representation, they also perform a descriptive function. 2.7.2. Statements in which the names of a broader reference denote classes of objects of a narrower scope, or specific elements of those classes — objects of reality — allow us to speak of a relation of nomination during the nominative act. Specifically, we are interested in cases where the function of substitution is performed by the general names of the broadest reference — the dominants of the nominative systems under consideration. But first we should clarify how justified the use of the term pronoun is. When generating a statement, the speaker chooses the words-names (from the inventory of the nominative system) depending on his intentions, the level of awareness of the listener, the communication situation, and, in general, the circumstances in which the conversation takes place. For example, when speaking about the tools we are examining, he will choose one name when communicating with the person in his circle, when language is only a component part of their collective work, a means of coordinating actions, another name of the same tool he will choose when speaking with a person from a strange environment (in the statements of LKŽK, the listener is often a word recorder, a linguist, thus a person from the urban environment). When talking with the latter, the speaker tries to indicate the object not so much as to describe it. Thus, by appealing to the “common knowledge base”, the uneven awareness of the participants in the communication act is “equalized”. In such cases, the most commonly chosen is ben- # In the second case, the general denotation is still fixed by a demonstrative with the meaning of existence. NOMINAL SYSTEM RESOLVE OF THE FIGURE “HOOK” | 99 dress meaning word, indicating the species dependence of the spoken tool. This name refers to the belonging of the tool to a narrower or wider class of tools of that kind (constituted by the similarity of the feature or feature and function). Sometimes the common name only serves a descriptive function, without meaning anything*- *. This is usually in predicative descriptions, e.g. : Vertyklė —manure turning from the wagon horse (Židikai). Thus, if the speaker manages to adequately solve the task of communication, it can be said that in the case of each speech act the “appropriate” name is chosen. Therefore, it would be inaccurate to talk about replacing one name with another in the field of communication. If you deliberately choose a different name, the general meaning of the statement would also change. However, a researcher who has before his eyes a hierarchically arranged model of the nominal system can say that in certain communicational circumstances some units of the system (usually broader references) can replace other (narrower reference) units. In this sense, the term substitution describes the speaker's choice of names as a one-way movement of linguistic consciousness: names of a more general meaning (a broader reference) substitute specific terms of a narrower reference, but not vice versa. Our immediate task would be to learn to recognize these cases of pronoun in sentences, as well as to show, at least in general, the communication circumstances in which this “change” of names usually takes place. 2.13 The examples of dialect statements collected by the LKŽK are those minimum contexts that allow to judge at least approximately about the circumstances of the conversation: about the speaker’s communicative dispositions, the type of listener, the speaking situation, etc. By comparing the statements of the same nominative system, in which the names of different references (hyponymically related) are chosen, we can often anticipate the motives of the different choice. For example, cf. sentences from Viekšniai: 1. Where'd you put the translator, you gotta go get the manure truck? 2. Fertilizer is worth with a horseshoe. In the first case, in the usual linguistic situation, when the addressee is a person from his environment, participating in common agricultural activities, the specific tool is named by the word usual in this place (more northerly still used vertyklė, yesterday — vertėklė- ). Here, a specific object of reality is denoted. And in the second case, the speaker, apparently, when asked by a person from another environment (city), explains with what tool manure is pushed (from the carriage in the fields). The denotation here is general — it indicates (describes) the class of a certain type of tool. The denotation of the name in the latter sentence is made clear by the implied circumstances of the conversation, it is not fixed in the text, as in many similar cases. However, such fixation is also possible. In general, the belonging to a class of objects is indicated by the indefinite or demonstrative pronouns having the meaning of existence, e.g. : ** We will talk about the benefits of such non-referential usage of words for our research later. 100 | ROLAND MIKULSKAS 3. Manor manure with such combatants worth (Shakina). The denotation can also be fixed by grammatical means, for example by using the past tense, cf.: 4. With the verteklė LIUOB VERSTI (= was turning) the manure [from the carriage] in the field (Gitdiske). In the examples (2, 3), where the tool is named by the same word that plays the role of common denominator in this area, the relationship between the name reference and its denotation is not obvious. In theory, these two dimensions can be double. Kobinys in this area refers primarily to the whole class of rist-shaped tools. In this case, its reference would be broader than the class of manure translation tools denoted in the aforementioned sentences. However, it is only after further investigation of the usage that it can be made clear whether this word can also have the meaning of a regular speech tool. In this case, its reference would be equal to the reference of another name of the same tool, the translator (vertyklés), and this would be equal to the volume of the class of tools denoted in the aforementioned statements (see example 4 in this regard). 2.7.4. When examining the distribution of several names of the same tool in a given area, it becomes clear that one name usually dominates in one area, and another (or others) occurs much less often. It does not necessarily have to be the specific name of the tool, usually referring to its function. The main name of one or another tool (or device) may also be the common denominator that is common in that area. We are talking about its regular values. In this case, the essential features of a class of tools that constitute the content of the latter “fit” into the primary meaning of the generic name, which, as we have already explained, is usually a reflection of the figurative perception of objects. We will illustrate these statements with a few examples. The northern Žemaites of Telšiai and the north-eastern outskirts of the southern Žemaites of Varniškiai (the area could be defined by the line Šatės —Alsėdžiai —Plūngė —Rietavas —Laūkuva —Karklėnai —Šaukėnai —Kuršėnai —Šakyna —Zagarė; see the map at the end of the article) use the word kobinys for the common name of the rist-shaped tools. The same word is also regularly used in this area to refer to a hay-picking tool. Some respondents, when asked what a horseshoe is, refer directly to this tool (this testifies to the status of significance), e.g.: 1. The blade is a tool used to cut hay (Telšiai). Plg. but: 2. The battleship was large. There are three such cobinuk (the latter word has a general meaning) (Akmėnė). In the northwest of the area mentioned, there is another name that directly indicates the purpose of the tool. There are several variants of it: šiėnpeša (Mažeikiai), šiėnpešis (Satės, Seda), šiėnpešė (Šatės, Barstyčiai, Gegrénai- )?. In this sense, the denotation of the verb realized in the sentence can be both specific and general, referring to the whole class of speech tools. In the latter case, the denotation of the horseradish shall not exceed that of the specific name used analogously, for example, the common denotation of the chard. For example, pa- * The variation of the stem of this form would indicate that the name is not settled and very widespread. 101 in the sentence: Siénpesiuo reik kieto o kieto akmens (Šatės) in place of šiėnpešio the name of the hook can be used. However, since in the area in question the horseshoe is also the general name of the "hook" figure, it is often used to specify the purpose of the named tool®, e.g.: 3. Your nose is like a stall for hay (Žemaičių Kalvarija). 4. Kobinys siennapešis (Shates). 5. Forge a horse-cage to beat hay (Luokė). In this regard, see another sentence from the range of the buckwheat: 6. The old one is broken, the new one is forged. Similarly, it is possible to speak about the kablj, used to translate the meaning of a tool for manure. Examples show that this use of the name is common. The regularity of the meaning is confirmed by the corresponding derivative used in this area: kablitioti “to turn manure with a hook” (Dūsetos, Surviliškis). Plg. dar: 1. Take a hook, or you won't have anything to turn the manure into the soil (Kamajai- ). 2. You'd see Adolph hooking manure — well, father won't match! (Survivor). There is also another name for the speaking tool, the mélakablis (Siménys- ). The appearance of such a puncture is easy to explain. Since the hook is also the general name of the "hook" figure in this area, for the sake of clarity the tool is called a "méslakabl", i.e. one of the types of hook. 2.7.5. It should already be clear that in the cases discussed, it would be difficult to talk about substitution relationships. More useful in this regard, we should probably pay attention to those names of the plucked-shaped tools, which are not at the same time the general area nominator. For example, in the area of use of the squeegee, the regular name of the above-mentioned tool for hay shearing is squeegee. This means that in ordinary speaking contexts, this name will most likely be used, cf. : Fish with a fisher — much easier and faster (Buliai). In other communication situations, the pešėklis in this area may be referred to by a more general reference name — kepėklis. 2.7.6. The examples discussed allow us to define the concept of substitution more strictly. Thus, it is meaningful to talk about the NAME when, first, the usual dialect name is replaced by the name of general meaning in certain communication circumstances, and second, the meaning of the usual name is not one of the regular meanings of the general name. * For our further investigation it is important to note that the need to clarify the name testifies to its general use in this area. 102 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS 2.8 It is easy to understand that the cases of substitution testify to the use of common nominators in one or another dialect. Obvious examples of this change of name may help to more accurately determine the limits of the prevalence of general reference words. In this regard, the study of dialects of sentences that use the name of a clothes hanger (a “hook” on the wall) can be very useful. Because this simple bykla, be abejo, buvo ar tebėra kiekvieno lietuvių valstiečio namuose. Daugelyje tardevice for hanging clothes has its own names: according to the LKŽK, the word used by the western, northern and southern Žemaites in Varna is gėmbė, and the western Kaunas Highlanders, part of the southern Highlanders (southwestern corner), eastern Highlanders in Utena and the neighboring Vilnius people call the hanging of clothes vagii. Next, we will have to register those dialects in which these common names are replaced by common names, i.e. habliū, vąšū, kukiū, kebekliū or kriūkū. 2.8.1. Gémbes and thief substitutions can be added to the table of regular values of common names by listing them in a separate column. As we have already mentioned, substitution cases do not provide detailed information about the use of common nominators in Lithuanian dialects. They merely clarify the limits of the spread of generic names established by other means. However, in this respect, too, this method cannot help us everywhere. First of all, because in some Lithuanian regions, it seems, the mentioned names are not used at all or occur rarely. If we believe the LKŽK data, neither the thief nor the thief is the main name of the hanging on the wall for the western Highlanders of Šiauliai. The thief (0, even more so, the thief) seems to be unknown neither to the eastern highlanders of the south corner of Vilnius, nor to the eastern side of the southern highlanders. In the absence of data from these regions, we can also not say what words are most commonly used here for the talking device. 2.8.2. When looking for pronoun cases in dialects that use the name of a thief or a thief, some reservations must also be made. For example, in the area of dominance of the hook (which could be defined by the line Žeimėlis —Linkuva —Pakrūojis —Šeduva —Baisogala —Surviliškis —Pagiriai —Siesikai —Širvintos —Kriaūnos —Molėtai —Labanėras —Linkmenys —Salakas —Zarasai; see map at the end of the article) hanging clothes on the wall is undoubtedly one of the most regular meanings of this word. This is evidenced not only by numerous examples, but also by the widespread here measured derivative of the adverb kablinė (pamergė) of this meaning, as well as by phraseologisms related to this situation, e.g.: planted on a hook (Salamiestis), sitting on a hook (Anykščiai- ), left on a hook (Surdėgis) and so on. Only in the eastern part of the area, mainly in the Utenis dialect, in addition to hook, there are still the names of thief (Šimėnys, Duokiškis, Sudeikiai) and cabélio (Utena, Alanta, Antazavė). Therefore, in the area of dominance of the hook, as we have already determined earlier, it would be tricky to talk about the substitution of the name of the speaking device. Thus, when we list the places in the table where hook is recorded as being used in the meaning of hanging on the wall, this time we do not mark the cases of pronoun, but another regular meaning of this word, together with others, which testifies to the spread of the common denominator in the region. 2.8.3. Cases of subordination can be found without hesitation in dialects where thief is the main name for hanging on the wall. The bride-to-- be is usually (was) planted at the back of the table, near the clothes hanger, so not in a particularly respectable place. NOMINAL SYSTEM RESOLUTION OF THE “HOOK” FIGURE | 103 southwestern corner of the southern Highlands. In these dialects, vūgi is replaced by vgsas, kūkis or kriūkas respectively in certain communicational situations. 2.84 The most common name of a clothes hanger in the region of Žemaitija, as we have already mentioned, is gėmbė. Other names are less common®. The common name of the gamba in the Žemaičių dialektas can be replaced by the common names of the kebėklis (kibéklis) or kobinis, respectively. 2.8.5. Both cases of gembė and vogio substitution ultimately testify to the proliferation of common nominators in their own dialects. However, a closer look at the semantic structure of these words seems to suggest that the substitution of these two names is not always equally motivated. For example, the word thief in many dialects has retained the old meaning of a wooden nail, peg, wedge, etc. Therefore, the clothes hanger thief is primarily perceived as a wooden stick HAMMED into the wall (cf. : "Include a hawk on the wall, there will be no gunča on what to hang (Seirijai)"). Undoubtedly, such a suspension device is more convenient when it is folded. But in the LKŽK writings there are extremely rare contexts, in which the semantics of fatness in this name is manifested (apparently, it is not the main one for this word), cf.: 1. Vūgis —KŪKIS for hanging clothes or other objects (Daukšiai). 2. I saw —yr RIESTA cherry branch, will be a good steal (Sudeikiai). It is therefore necessary to assume that although the name of the thief is included in the nomenclature system of the rist-shaped tools, due to the vagueness of the rist-shaped semas it occupies a peripheral place in it. It is not because of the similarity of the form, but because of the common hanging function. The latter, as we have found out earlier, necessarily implies the semantics of fatness in general names." It is not by chance that the cases where the thief is replaced by vgs or kriūkas, which are name without adjective motivation (deetymologizuotasi- ), are written more than similar cases with kukiū. Because of the active relation with the verb kūkti ‘to bend, to lift', the latter is too obviously associated with the characteristic of weight. 2.8.6. It is quite different in the case of the hindquarters. There are many contexts in the LKŽK that show that the dominant position in the semantic structure of this word is occupied by the characteristic of fatness. In particular, statements in which the lemma serves as a comparison standard, e.g.: 1. It is formed as a ridge. 2. Pigs are dry (i.e. overheated, curled up) like legs (Telšiai). * Of these mentionable are kenge (Plūngė, Eržvilkas) and in the west occurring kabinokslis (Palanga, Kretinga, Endriejavas), kabinoklis (Židikai, Mosėdis), kabinėklis (Švėkšna). The latter names are obviously motivated by the nominal character of the function, i.e. they relate to the verb (pa)hangti. They can identify the clothes hanger independently, without intermediating the sign of fatness. The name of the boy is still recorded in Mažeikiai. This word, due to the lively operative connection with the verb knabti ‘to bend, to lift down’, may have a more general meaning. Due to the predominant semantic structure of flexibility/- rigidity, this name can refer to many objects of similar appearance, including hanging on the wall. It is possible that this time it replaces the more common name of the gamba. For example, in a typical communication situation that encourages pronouns, it is said: Dresses HANGINDAVOM on the cock, no wardrobes or hangers had (Gižai). 29 104 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS Also so-called determinative punches, e.g.: 3. Nose like a griffin, all griffins are called DūnŽ (Dirvonėnai). In the aforementioned statements, the word gets the general meaning of an object in the form of a ribbon, apparently because of the more frequent occurrence in similar contexts of the words kobnis or kebėklis, and therefore the synonymic relationships established between the latter names and the word gety®, cf.: 1. Dried, twisted — a real horseshoe (Kuršėnai). 2. That pig is dried up like a stall (Klykoliai). 3. When a person gets old, all the fingers bend into the knuckles (Laūkuva). 4. If I had called the doctor, I would have been stuck in such a mess (Judrėnai). 5. The fingers are just the stops (Kvėdarna). Perhaps because of the general meaning acquired in this way, the word gėmbė is rarely able to identify some tools with a rippled shape, such as a fishing rod hook (Salantai, Kuliai) or a device for winding ropes (Tirkšliai, Akméné). The latter can be transferred to the name of the gambe because of the similarity of the denotations - both are installed in the wall. Gémbe has long had the characteristic of flexibility/bending in its semantic structure, which is also shown by the meaning of this word in the dialects of the eastern Highlanders of Kupiškis, Anykščiai and northern Utena, which is “vingis, linkis' and the verb (iš)gemb(i)ūoti* used next to it. In this respect, see the pėr(si)gembti ‘to turn over, to turn over’**, which is still used in the Panevėžys dialect. Thus, it is obvious that the name of the cobblestone or kebek (kibek) is called on the basis of the general characteristic of the riest shape. Finally, it does not matter whether the substitution is due to the function of the speaking device or to the similarity of the form —going along this path in both cases we get additional information about the prevalence of common nominators in Lithuanian dialects. 2.9. Now we will discuss in more detail those cases, where the spoken names are used in the most general sense, i.e. simply by naming the “hook” figure. 3 The synonymic connections are strengthened by the use of gembė in the aforementioned durini gembnosa (Dirvonėnai), gembnasis, -ė (Gegrėnai). Although the *kobinianosis, -ė or *kebeklianosis, -ė of the stitches is not recorded (cf. analogous kablianésis, -ė, vąšanėsis, -€, kukiandsis, -ė, kriūkanėsis, -ė in other dialects), due to the similarity of semantic structures between such stitches and comparative statements (these stitches are easy to transpose into comparative constructions. —See Mikulskas 1995: 69-70 for more details) the context of the stitch is adequate in the spoken sense to the context of the respective comparison. By the way, the absence of stitches, the first string of which would consist of the mentioned generic names, could be explained by the operation of the restrictive creation (creation) rule. This rule would limit the occurrence of punches with longer than two syllables in the first sand. On the contrary, similar punches with a two-syllable first and second konsonant occur more frequently in the Žemaičių dialect, e.g.: oknosa (Žemaičių Kalvarija, Šatės, Barstyčiai), knabnosa (Ylakiai). However, this rule does not seem to work in other dialects of the Lithuanian language, e.g.: vąškarnėsis, -ė (Vadžgirys, Skirsnemunė, Gelgaudiškis, Plokščiai, Ketūrvalakiai), kabėlianosis, -ė (Dūsetos, Tauragnai). 3! Analogue derivative from gėmbė instead of the correct *gembėti, since the nouns *gembas or *gembis are not recorded. w t Historically, gémbe could be a derivative of this verb ending -gerūbti, which still retains the meaning of the result of the action (nomina acti). The geographical distribution of the verb and noun indicates that this relation of action is now broken. The meaning of the word used in this way, as a unit of the nominative system of language, is equal to its original meaning, and in terms of semantics, it constitutes its significance. We will see that in most such statements these names perform the INSTRUCTIVE function® in relation to the denotate already entered into the act of communication under another name. In this case, the designation of the character does not have a specific meaning. In other cases, they denote the denotative intermediately, by assigning it to a broader class of objects of that kind or (in the case of subordination) by referring to that class. 2.9.1. The denotation function is related to the property of noun names not only to represent the denotation, but also to describe it (see Nikitin 1988: 25). For example, when the denotated by this name is introduced into the act of communication, usually in the position of the subject, it performs both functions. The same name, used in the position of a predicate, only performs a descriptive function. It performs this function under a different (or the same!) name in relation to the denotate already introduced into the statement, signifying a deductively defined concept. The latter consists of the essential characteristics of the described object (in our case, it would be the flexibility, the ability to perform any hanging action). Therefore, even such statements as city is city, village is village, are not tautologie and have a meaning — their subjects are defined through their own significant meaning (cf. Nikitin 1983: 73-74). However, such supposed tautologies obviously belong to the periphery of communication. These expressions are used as a stylistic tool to convey a message in a concise way. The absolute majority of such predicative** descriptions have the name of a wider reference in the predicate position than in the subject position. It is precisely the analysis of such statements that would be useful for our study. Having reviewed the relevant dialect statements of similar structure, we can conclude that the descriptive function in the predicate position is usually performed by the general dialect nominator — the name of the “hook” figure. In this way, we directly obtain data on the spread of these names in one or another dialect area. However, in addition to the assertion of these facts, it would be interesting to consider how much the choice of such names for the description is determined by the internal logic of the solution of communication tasks, and how much is obeyed here to the requirements of syntactic positions. 2.9.2. In order to try to answer this question, let us first remember that the essence of such predicative descriptions is that the same denotation, already introduced into the statement by the name of a narrower reference, is defined (or described) through the genus name of a wider reference. In other words, the act of predication establishes a relation between these names. While remaining in the realm of the realized statement (i.e. syntax), we can only state that certain roles played by names in the sentence FIX their significant meaning. In these positions, the intentional of the multi-meaning word becomes the simplest, and the extensional the broadest. * The Russian linguist Arutjunova (1977: 304) calls it an ATTRIBUTIVE or QUALIFICATIVE function. The most commonly used term in Lithuanian linguists is the DEFINITION function. ** To focus more on the indirect nature of the description, we could use the term PREDICTIVE description. We chose the term PREDICATIVE (not predicative!) description in order to emphasize the descriptive purpose of certain kinds of syntactic constructions. In the case of the prepositions, the prepositions are essentially the same as the prepositions themselves. And the predicate is only the conceptual partner of this act. 112 | ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS standard. The denoting object (or the basis of comparison) in such compound words is usually the human nose, cf.: 27. It's not a good-looking old man, hooker. 28. Oh, what an ugly, what a cuckold (Prienai). 29. how could I marry you, when you are so ugly and crying? (Screaming) 30. And the father was a washer, and all the children were like him. However, it is also possible that this similarity is found in other parts of the body, and not only in humans, cf. : 31. That the hooker won't do anything! (Krekenava). 32.Crowhead, where are you going? (spoken about a horse) (Rudamina). Examples show that such punches have a pragmatic orientation, are negatively connoted. However, in most cases, the first syllable has a neutral semantic meaning of a generic name. It does not denote a specific tool in the form of a hook, one or another eye-catching feature of which could motivate a pragmatic nomination, but represents the general figure of a “hook”. Of course, every major dialect area has its own representative here, and we can see this from the examples given. Such names of the most general meaning, based on one or two essential characteristics of the referent, are best suited to describe him in figurative terms. However, the determined punches of these names are not memorable from the point of view of expression — their negative connotation, apparently, stems from the speaker- ’s pragmatic disposition and previous appropriate uses. Perhaps this is why in dialects there are often analogous punches with the first verses denoting a specific tool in the form of a rist. For pragmatic reasons, of course, representatives of more relief features are chosen. It appears that in this way in the Žemaičių dialect the enriched names gembnasis, -ė, oknosa, in the Western Aukštaitijos dialect —vąškarnėsis, -ė, in the Eastern Aukštaitijos dialect —kabelianėsis, -ė have emerged. For this reason, the reference of some narrower terms, such as gamba or cabello, may be expanded, and they may occasionally or constantly refer to various other ripped-shaped jranki®. 2.10.9. In its own way, the spread of the common name is also evidenced by other kinds of punishments — vąškara, vąškaras, which in the dialect of western Kaunas Highlands refer to the device for hanging the boiler when boiling on fire (the second can also mean the bit of the well lever with “kab- ** For example, the western Kaunas Highlands vgskara (vąškaras) acquires the general meaning of the comparison standard not only in punishments vąškarnėsis, -ė, but, respectively, also in comparative constructions or metaphorical nominations, cf. : 1. Nose like a vaskara (Syntauti). 2. Already your baskets, prayerful, don't throw! (Luxembourg). Here, the vashka (vashkaras) performs the functions of figurative modeling of objects of reality, as does the vashka, which occurs much more frequently in analogous contexts. However, the broader circle of meanings of the word vashka (vashka) is not characteristic this time. Apparently, due to the still-living meaning of the work, the overall potential of the name remains unrealized. „KABLIO“ FIGŪROS NOMINACINĖS SISTEMOS RAIŠKA | 113 liu’). As we already know, for the Žemaites, vgsas only means a talking device to hang the boiler. On the western side of the Kaunas Highlands, vgsu can be named any tool of a rippled shape, which, by the way, is usually freely manipulable. So it is obvious that the name of the vessel is not suitable for the aforementioned boiler suspension (or similar) device for at least two reasons: because of its ambiguitčios referencijos, ir dėl įtaiso specifikos — stacionaraus tvirtinimo. Todėl pagrįstai y, or because of plagiarism. This is what a vąškaras or vgskara appears. The meaning of their making could be defined as follows: “a device for (hanging) with the end of a rope”. The first work foundation sand vgsh Here has a general meaning of the hanging tool, which, of course, necessarily implies the semantic pozymi of the rist form. In this case, the fatness sema is expressed indirectly. In that these punchings differ from the ones previously examined (specifically — the wool), in which this sem of analogous sands was expressed directly- ." 2.10.10. It is more commonly used in foods such as sausages and stir-fried meats (such as stir-fried pork). They also testify to the spread of common nominators in their own dialects. The reasons for their emergence could be explained as in the case of the previously discussed punches: too broad reference generic names are not always suitable for narrow-- purpose tools, so their scope is narrowed by the way of punching. 2.10.11. A common name that embodies the characteristic of a ridged shape may be used metaphorically to name an object that is distinguished by that characteristic. Metaphors, as we know, are created and used in language from pragmatic motives. They are not used to represent the denotations that are nominated in speech acts, but to describe them in some respect. This does not mean that the objects are inherently different, but rather that the objects are inherently different from each other. This is possible by establishing similarity relationships, or, in everyday language, by seeing a certain similarity between the two objects of reality. Thus metaphors are essentially hidden comparisons (cf. Nikitin 1983: 56; 84). In our case, the circle of metaphorically named objects is rather narrow — most often these are the same things that are the basis of comparative phrases: the human body, some of its parts, less often other things (e.g., a string of flying cranes), cf.: 33. What were the hands, and dab hooks (Saiikotas). 34. I can't even see that old man. "Donz (Raudėnai)". 35. The winch hook turned to the south (Lambs). The common characteristic of the ridged shape is particularly obvious when comparing the nose and the ridged tool. Therefore, it often becomes the basis for the transfer of meaning, when vgs, hook, etc. directly begin to mean the nose (or beak). For example, in the sentence Why did you drop your hook? (Šiauliai) in this way replaces the well-known phraseology nuléisti nosį ‘to sneeze’, cf. also: * All-rounded things are evidenced by formally similar punchings used in the Šiauliai dialect of the western Highlands. As we mentioned earlier, here vąškaras, vąškaris or vaskarys means the bow of a cauldron or bucket, a pasait. Thus the meaning of making such punches is "the place for which the sword is fought (hanged)- ". The latter name is almost not recorded in the dialect, but most likely during the production of the punch, the people of Šiauliai, as well as the neighboring people of Žemaitija, called the aforementioned boiler hanging device. 114 | 36. I sleep hanging a hook [at the sisters' cradle] (Deaf). Common semantic features are often used to create riddles. This is how their essential denotations are encoded by metaphors. If you guess these signs, you can memorize a riddle. Two different versions of the same riddle from different places: 37. One end of the fork, the other všas, and the middle kap ball (Didvyžiai) [swallow]. 38. at one end a fork, at the other end a cup, Latin clothes, Advernian language (Pilviškiai). It is important for our study to note that in these variants of one riddle, the common names represent their own areas of dominance. General names can also metaphorically refer to corresponding graphic figures, such as letters, cf.: 39. It is difficult to read in Russian — one kebėkliai (Priekulė). 40. He wrote THIS little story, drew the bird, taught the child (Taurage). Some of these names measure verb derivatives, for example: 41. A letter a little bit packed up, well, I couldn’t [write] nicely (Endriejavas). Having discussed the appearance of common nominators in dialectal sentences, it is finally possible to present a whole table, which clearly shows the geographical distribution of their dominant nominative systems. The area distribution of common names is even clearer on the map based on the data in this table. Places where these names are recorded in all six regular meanings and places where they are recorded with only a significant meaning are marked on this map with the same symbols. More regular substitution cases are also noted. 3. CONCLUDING REMARKS 3.1 The suitability of the names dominant in the nominative systems of figurative similarity to name the concepts of spatial figures is derived from their semantic structures ISOMORFICITY to those figures. The core of the meaning structure of such names consists of the essential (i.e., important for the members of the linguistic community) characteristics of the figures named. These features form the nominal (primary) meaning of those names, which is recognized by language users as their symbolic meaning. The nominal meaning of the name plays the main role in speech acts when denoting objects of reality that are connected by figurative similarity. The regular meanings of the word formed from these denotations are to be considered secondary (derived) to the nominal meaning. 3.2 The common names of the “hook” shape in dialects are the dominants of the names of tools of the same shape that have developed through INCLUDATION. In the dimension of synchrony, the greatest nominative power (nominal potency) of common names arises from their 115 assumes the highest position in the hierarchy of the system, which in turn depends solely on the adaptation of the semantic structures of those names to represent the “hook” figure properly and is independent of their origin or internal form. The latter assumes that the relationships between the names can be actualized at the level of the realized text, by using those names alongside the verbs that form the basis of their construction. This means that the phrase is more important for the recipient (the addressee) than for the author (the addressee). This is the most commonly used taxonomic classification of the genus. 3.3. The boundaries of larger dialects or dialect groups have the greatest influence on the spread of the common denominators of the hook figure. For example, the names kebėklis (kibėklis) and kobinys used by the Žemaites have decisive significance for the territorial distribution of the border between the northern Žemaites of Kretinga and Telšiai. Accordingly, the difference between the Zanavyks and Kapsai ethnic groups is significant for the geographical distribution of the names vgsas and kūkis used by the western Kaunas Highlanders. Historically, it can be affirmed that the same political, administrative, physical and other factors that determined the differences in phonetics of dialects also formed their distinctive nominative systems. From the point of view of synchrony, the fact that certain nominative systems, despite the lexical mobility, more or less remain within dialects, should be explained by the fact that dialects have the characteristics of a closed language system. In terms of nominal units, they are therefore expressed as separate languages. This means that people whose speech is markedly different from that of their neighbors identify themselves as a separate ethnic group, as “others”, who in communicating with each other use the usual names of real objects and unnecessarily do not allow other, “other” equivalents to be used in their place. The distinctive nomenclature system of the dialect means that similar names of other dialects (or languages) are not accepted without greater or lesser adaptation. In other words, the latter, if taken over, must find their place (to occupy a certain position) in the hierarchy of the respective nominative subsystems. DŪNŽ-VITKAUSKAS, V. 1976: Dictionary of the North-Eastern Dune Snakes, Vilnius: Mokslas. LKA, —Lithuanian Language Atlas 1. Lexikon, red. New York: HarperCollins, 1977. LKŽ= Lithuanian Language Dictionary 1—19, red. J. BALČIKONIS, J. KRUOPAS, K. ULVYDAS, V. VITKAUSKAS, 1941— 1999. LKZK -Lietuvių kalbos žodyno kartoteka: Lithuanian Language Institute. Z1Z -VIDUGIRIS, A. 1998: Zietelos šnektos žodynas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijy leidybos institutas. LITERATURA AMBRAZAS, V., ed. 1996: Grammar of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla. ARuTIUNOVA, N. D. 1977: HoMunanus u texct. Cepe6pennuxros, b. A., Youmuesa, A. A., eg., Sl3bixoesas nomunayua: Budbi naumenosanui, Mocksa: Hayka, 304-357. GREIMAS, A. J. 1989: Semiotics. The work was commissioned by R. Paolini, Vilnius: Mintis, 2000. JAKAITIENE, E. 1988: Lexical semantics, Vilnius: Mokslas. KARALIUNAS, S. 1997: Language and Society: Psychosociological and Communicative Features of Language Use, Vilnius: Lithuanian Language Institute. MIKULSKAS, R. 1995: The envelope of words, the origin of vokiioti from onomastological point of view. Lituanistica 4 (24), 58-74. 116 | ROLAND MIKULSKAS Table 1. The name of a tool in the form of a hook Name of a tool in the form of a hook (minor form) Tool To pull Meskeriojimo (ppr. hooks Srv, KM, Ds, Kr: SKP, SDK, KLP, ND, JRB SLK NJ, KRČ, UT, LEL, Kp; SUR; INS, prk. : Srv, BSG, SKRB, VSK, PPL, VB, SLM, ALZ, Kp, SMN, SKP, PNMR, RK, C, KM, DKK, ZR, ALN, KKL, UkM, PG, ER, TR, AN, SB; JRB vgsas SNT, JRB, SKR; VST, Gs RMS, NMJ, prk. : Piv, PLv, PZRL, PNMA; AL, MRS collapsed KROK, PUN, Jz Ss, Up, Jz, PRN BGT, SKRD, SIL, JZ, Up, LDYyN kebéklis (kibeklis) KLVRZ, PLT, SINT, Trž, Kv, SINT, Prt; NM GRSL, Ms, Ss, STS mares VKS, CN; SL, BTG AKM, RDN, LK, BRS, ZR, VARN, SD, TRK, KRS, ZR VKS, TRK; VN, ŠLL, kriūkas Vs, Lš, Lz, Kv Dv; APS, BRSL KRSN, SMN, SRJ, SN, MRK, ZT, AUK; Rup, NG, ZT, Lz, SVNC, RS, UPN Dv: SYNC, SKDT, PLv Notes: 1) Place abbreviations are the same as LKZ; 2) the abbreviations of places far from the compact area of use of the names are given after the semicolon; 3) after the certificate prk. are given the places where verb derivatives such as hooked or woven abbreviations are recorded. NOMINAL SYSTEM DEFINITION | 117 Device for chasing ropes Gembe, thief Any riesto Tarme Crochet (ppr. (may be a minor form tool minor form) form) Bsa, Skp, PC Ps, SKP, Jor, ZR, SML, PAL Ps, SLM, KRKN, UPT, ER, Eastern Highlands: ZL Kp, Skp, JDP, RK, Mžš, PpL, KPR, panevėžiškiai, Ds, TRGN, Ssk, ANTS, PLVN, SMN, kupiskénai, KUR, AN, SUR; PnD, JDP, DGL, anykSténai, ŽsL SLD, KTK, SUG, širvintiškiai, ALN, KKL, ŠR, PG; Uteniškiai SNe, ŠKT, SL ERŽ, PNMZ; SN, MRr1, KT, GZ, JRB, SNT, MRJ; KT, Gs, GZ, GRS, Vakaru aukštaičių GRD, NMN VLIKV,GRS, Vik), TLZ LKS, SNT, SLv, Kauniškių vakarinė JD, GRK, BTG, EkRŽ, VDZG, RS, half VDKk; Jsv, Lbv, GRK, STAK, AR, Gpz, GRL, VV, Jp, PNMŽ, RDD, KROK LKC, VLKJ, VL, PLK; Jsv, PRN AL, BRB, MRrJ, GZ Ruš, NMJ, BRB, Vv,GzZ PNMA, PRN, UD, Western Highlands GDL, SIL KROK, DKS, MRJ, Kauniškių eastern KLVR, ALK, PLv, half SN, GRL Kip, SG, VN, Kv, Vyz SLL Ars, KLVRZ, Sp, Western Semitic, KL, PLT, SLNT, Sts, NT, PLN, END, Southern Semitic LKŽ, Ms, YL, BRS, JDR, Kv, SLL, PRK western side, KLVRZ, SD; LPL, Northern Samogitians Lž kretingiškiai SD, Sts, ŽR,Užv, ŽLB,KRš:- SLNT, STS, ŽD, SD, TRK, Northern Samogitians RDN, SKN, KRP; PRK AkM, Kirk, ZG, telšiškiai, south RD ŠKN, KRS, RDN, žemaičių varniskiy KRKL, LKV, KNT; East side Kv, TRG, SLv, MškK KLVR, KPC, DRSK, RDM, BD, PNs, KLVR, VRN, PLS, RDM, BD, LzD, Piety aukštaičiai VRN, VLK, DsM, SN,SRy, LS, Zt, Lz; SDK ŠvN, SN, Krč, LP, (except northern DG, PuN Dksk, PLs, ZT, Rup, Ps, ZT, kampa), some Lz ARM, Dv, RUD, east of Vysoké Tatry Dsm, Jz Vilniškių salos pos. Ppr. they have the figurative meanings of ‘greedy (by hanging) eating’ or ‘rushing’ and thus indirectly refer to their base nouns as the names of general-- purpose hanging tools. ROLANDAS MIKULSKAS 118 | ASAWUVL SYVWILITdVd NWINIAVAVA SOUNDIA „OTIHVX“ ArNMANTY 'AVd I AA v „I do not use; 119 NIKITIN, M. V. 1983: Jlekcuyeckoe 3nauenue caoéa: Cmpykmypa u kombunamopuxa, Mocksa: Beiciuast | 119 NIKITIN, M. V. 1983: Jlekcuyeckoe 3nauenue caoéa: Cmpykmypa u kombunamopuxa, Mocksa: Beiciuast IKOJIA. NIKITIN, M. V. 1988: Ocnoebir aunesucmuyeckou meopuu 3navenus, Mocksa: Beicias kona. ROSINAS, A. 1996: Pronouns in Lithuanian common language: functions and semantics, Vilnius: Mokslo ir ju enciklopedileidykla. Telua, V. N. 1977: BropHuHasi HomuHaums H ee Buasl. Cepebpennnkos, B. A., Youmuesa, A. A., pen. S3vikoean nomunayus: Buds naumenoeanuu, Mocksa: Hayka, 129-221. UFIMCEVA, A. A. 1977: Jlekcuueckass HomuHauusi. CepeOpeHHuKOB, b. A., Yumuesa, A. A., pen. S3vikoean nomunayus: Buds naumenoeanuu, Mocksa: Hayka, 5-85. URBUTIS, V. 1978: Theory of word formation, Vilnius: Mokslas. Rolandas Mikulskas Received 07/05/2002 Lithuanian Language Institute P. Vileišio g. 5, 2055 Vilnius, Lithuania