Aukštesniojo ir aukščiausiojo laipsnio būdvardžių valentingumas

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA XLVI (2002), 131 - 144 LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ The article deals with the valency of Lithuanian adjectives in the comparative and superlative. This valency is determined not only by the meaning of the adjective, but also by the grammatical properties of the degrees of comparison. In addition to the (obligatory and optional) participants determined by the meaning of the adjective as a lexical unit, the forms of comparison open a syntactic position for a comparative phrase. Whereas the adjective as such assigns a case form (with or without preposition) to its syntactic participants, its degrees of comparison may either assign a case form (with preposition) to the comparative phrase, or the form of the comparative phrase may be unpredictable in terms of valency. 0. INTRODUCTION 0.1. The study of the valency of Lithuanian adjectives has only just begun?. The article takes the view that the valentia of an adjective is a decisive feature of the meaning of an adjective to open up a certain number of free spaces, which in the sentence (or word combination) are occupied by words of a certain meaning or their equivalents (cf.: Sommerfeldt, Schreiber 1983: 15; Piitulainen 1983: 87-89; Lee 1994: 66). Thus, the valency properties of an adjective are semantically motivated by its meaning, which is revealed in a certain syntactic environment. Valentinity is associated with three domains: the abstract domain of logical semantics and two specific domains of language — syntax and lexical semantics. The method of predicate analysis in the field of logical semantics determines how much a predicate word (in this case an adjective) opens up free spaces for arguments. In addition, in the field of logical semantics, the predicate word provides semantic functions of arguments (free spaces), which depend on how the descriptive situation is interpreted, and presents certain aspects of the situation we perceive. Thus, the semantic valency of an adjective as a predicative word is a certain semantic interpretation of the situation described by the adjective, which is described as a certain semantic function. 4 The article distinguishes the semantic forms of adjectives from the genitive forms of adjectives, which are “usually not associated with nouns and indicate a characteristic in a general way” (Ambrazas, ed. 1996: 169; Ambrazas, ed. 1997: 137; cf. Vaičiulytė-Semėnienė 2001: 123-125). * For more information, see : Tekorienė (1983; 1985; 1986), Vaičiulytė-Semėnienė (1998; 2000; 2001). 132 | The valency of LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ can be determined by examining the sentences composed with that adjective. It is only in the sentence that it becomes clear in what sense the adjective is used, how the descriptive situation is interpreted and what the semantic functions of the arguments are. In the syntax field, when examining sentences, it is determined by what form of — words the semantic actants of the predicate adjective are t. y. realized, as well as the necessity and optionality of syntactic actants, words of a certain form or their equivalents. The need to join a certain number of words (or their equivalents) of a certain form, conditioned by the meaning of the adjective, is called the syntactic valence of the adjective. As the predicate —adjective — has arguments semantic actants, ir there are syntactic actants. Therefore, there is a relation of isomorphism between semantic and syntactic valence. 0.3. According to the number of syntactic actants, adjectives can be classified as monovalent and polyvalent. Single-valued adjectives denote the characteristic of the object and open one free (1) Ją place for the argument that is the descriptor of the characteristic: ir ji was caught in general anxiety KTLPV 325. (2) A clear and bright day was hit by warm windy rain ŠvAŠ 30. (3) Lucius is extremely sensitive to his ambition and insults M-PTR, 110. Most adjectives in Lithuanian are univalent. For them, as for other ir adjectives, the realization of the descriptive is necessary, because the adjective syntactically depends on the noun, i.e. the descriptive word, is combined with it. A number of Lithuanian adjectives describe a characteristic as a relationship between two or more objects. The adjective, by opening two more free spaces for the arguments of the predicate, itself controls the words ar denoting the objects to which the attribute expressed by the predicate is assigned, except for the descriptive word with which the adjective is combined. — su Therefore, according to the number of opened free places, which depends on the meaning of the adjective, it is possible to distinguish the following polyvalent a) adjectives: (e.g. suitable for), b) trivalent (e.g., grateful to už someone for something), c) four-valued (e.g., owed to someone something for (4) Va something), e.g.: in one corner — there is a ir harp, maybe there will be something suitable for a fire in it KT. (5) I'm really very grateful to you for the son, but still left such a bitterness that Auris was better with you... KT done your work owes me at least (6) Už thanks tu KT. 0.4. All syntactic actants of an adjective have a support in the logical semantic domain, because they are syntactic implementations of semantic actants. On the other hand, syntactic actants are the necessary optional ones. ir These syntactic actants of an adjective, which are not omitted in the sentence because omission of them would make the sentence ungrammatical and incomprehensible, are called ir imperatives (cf. Sližienė 1994: 31; 1995: 61; Helbig 1982: 24; 1992: 99, 103; Gladrow 3 Decryption term borrowed iš D. Teacups (1983: 97-107) ir E. Yakaitienés (1988: 62). 1984: 20-21; Jakaitienė 1988: 64). The syntactic imperatives describe the part of the situation that is most important for the meaning of the adjective. Optional actants are those that can be omitted from the sentence, while the sentence remains grammatically correct and understandable. However, the optional syntactic actants, although unsaid, correspond to the actants of the semantic valence of the adjective as well as the necessary syntactic actants.’ Sentences without optional actants mean roughly the same as those with them, since the optional actants are implied in the predicate meaning itself. Therefore, the absence of optional syntactic actants does not make the sentence incomplete in terms of structure or semantics. Facultative syntactic actants describe the part of the situation that is less important for the meaning of the predicate (see Sližienė 1986: 56; Emons 1974: 104). 0.5. The purpose of this article is to discuss the valence of adjectives in the upper and uppermost forms. 1. THE SUPERIOR AND SUPREME OF THE OFFICE FUNCTIONS OF DEGREE FORMS 1.1. Adjectives describe the characteristics of objects. In this case, the object can be compared to another object (other objects) or two properties of one object can be compared. The morphological forms of adjectives of the higher and upper degree are used in Lithuanian to describe quantitative differences of characteristics." 1.2 The superior forms can be used when one wants to say that one thing has a certain characteristic more than another. In such cases, the prepositional after construction with the suffix or the comparative construction with the conjunctions as, not as, than, than, without comparison is usually used together, e.g.: (7) My heart beat louder than all the clocks in CKBD 113. (8) The virtues of Mrs. Christina are stronger than all the tricks of Mr. Jurisconsul M-PTR, 197. (9) Vilius slightly weaker in the pelvis, compared to Anskis, but higher in height SMNVK 178. (10) There is no bluer sky than our sky) KT. The higher forms of adjectives are also used when comparing two properties of the same thing. Then, with the forms of the higher degree of the adjective, the comparative constructions with the conjunctions as, than, neither, etc. are used (cf. 1961: 57; Ulvydas, red. 1965: 520), e.g. : (11) This student is more capable than the diligent BK. 4 Optional syntactic actants are written in parentheses in illustrative examples. The author of the article does not separately distinguish between the higher and the highest degree (as is done in Lithuanian Grammar, Volume 1 (Ulvydas, ed. 1965: 515; 522)), since she relies on the concept of the category of degree presented in Contemporary Lithuanian Grammar (Ambrazas, ed. 1996: 170; cf. Ambrazas, ed. 1997: 138), as well as on the opinion of A. Paulauskienė (1994: 230), that the latter degrees are only a kind of variants of the higher and highest degrees (cf.: Valeckienė 1998: 254; Jablonskis 1957: 206; Balčikonis 1982: 36). Page 134 | LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ 1.3. Forms of the superior degree are used when one wants to say that one object of a group of objects has a greater degree of particularity than all the others with which that object is compared (Ambrazas, ed. 1996: 172; Ambrazas, ed. 1997: 139-140; Paulauskienė 1994: 229-230; Balčikonis 1982: 36; Jablonskis 1957: 207; cf. Paulauskienė, Valeika 1994: 193; Valeckienė 1998: 126). In addition to the uppercase forms, the prepositions from, za, medzi(u) are often joined with the genitive or adjective, adverbs zavis, pervis, pronouns, etc., e.g.: (12) Vilius yra stropiausias (iš) visų SMNVK 111. (13) You were the strongest (of) all of us M-PTR, 98. (14) But the best of all is the black-eared cow — the merciful S. Nēris for Sigutė; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 253). (15) But among all the famous men of that family, among all those who sat in the high castle of Merkinė, the most famous was the baron Mykis V. Krėvė; Ulvydas, red. (1965: 522). 1.4 The unequal degree of an adjective is the opposite of the higher and highest degrees according to the comparison/uncomparison of the quantity of the property. The non-comparative form of the degree indicates only the characteristic of the object, without showing the differences in degree (Ambrazas, ed. 1996: 171; Ambrazas, ed. 1997: 138; Valeckienė 1998: 254—255; cf. Bierwisch 1987: 101; Paulauskienė, Valeika 1994: 193). 1.4.1. There are also cases where the non-comparative grade form of the adjective is used together with the adverb of the higher grade grade when comparing two objects with respect to a certain characteristic. Then the non-comparative degree form of the adjective is used with comparative constructions and denotes the greater (lesser) degree of a certain characteristic of one thing. The greater (lesser) degree of a characteristic is determined by certain words with an emphasis meaning, for example, not such as, not less, etc., and the comparison of the degree of characteristic itself is expressed in an analytical way” (cf. Paulauskienė, Valeika 1994: 194-195), e.g.: (16) He is not as smart as his friend (cf. he is not smarter than his friend) BC. (17) She was no less happy than her husband, because while he was handling the beer affairs in Kraštupėnai, Black Bige came to Mari (see she is even happier than her husband) AvžSTM 452. (18) You [you] are no less ambitious than me, and after openly crossing the bars I will no longer have a place in your team (see you are even more ambitious than me) KT. (19) The pain of separation is no less painful than the pain of a twisted leg or a sore tooth (cf. the pain of separation is more painful than the pain of a twisted leg or a sore tooth) in CT. 6 Although the linguistic literature states (Paulauskienė 1994: 226; Valeckienė 1961: 58, 62; Ulvydas, ed. 1965: 520; Klimavičius 1969: 7, 10), that the degrees of adjectives in Lithuanian are most often expressed in a synthetic way, we should agree with A. Paulauskienė (1994: 226) that a particularly rapid influx of analytical forms is currently observed. In some grammars, analytical forms of degrees are not mentioned at all (see Ambrazas, ed. 1985: 116-121; Valeckienė 1998: 254-259). It is true that in the practice of language culture many analytical forms of degree expression, which denote gradation, are proposed to be replaced by synthetic ones (Klimavičius 1969: 7-15; cf.: Pupkis, ed. 1985: 141, 143; Jakaitienė, Laigonaitė, Paulauskienė 1976: 67, 71). 135 (20) An event not less responsible than the election comes (cf. comes an event more responsible than the election) KT. It is important to note that in order to differentiate the lower degree of specialty of an object more clearly when comparing it with another object, we cannot do without analytical forms of degree (Klimavičius 1969: 13; Pupkis, ed. 1985: 143, 153), e.g. : (21) Mr. Commissioner, [he] crouched in his chair without a word, and at that moment looked far more pitiful than Socrates—even his eyes became less expressive than Socrates’ empty eyelids in the KT. 1.4.2. The non-comparative forms of adjectives are used when comparing two properties of the same thing. Then the degree of one property of the same thing is higher (lower) than the other property. In such cases, only comparative constructions with the conjunctions as, neither, than, nor, etc. are used together (see 1.2.), e.g.: (22) Once I had a funny adventure, —he continued, —perhaps not as funny as a pig's KT. (23) John was more angry than cheerful BC. (24) Gintaras Leonavičius, head coach of Panevėžys, was not so happy with the victory, as he was surprised by it. 2. THE SUPERIOR AND SUPREME OF THE OFFICE VALIDITY OF DEGREE FORMS 2.1 It could be argued that the higher and upper forms of both monovalent and polyvalent adjectives, in addition to the syntactic actants (both necessary and optional) that determine the meaning of the adjective, should have at least one more syntactic actant — one of the comparative constructions. However, the presence of this syntactic actor in the sentence would not be determined by the meaning of the adjective, but by the morphological form of the adjective — the suffix -esner, -erste (about the forms of the degree of the adjective in German, see Bierwisch 1987: 174, 183-184, 186). Thus, univalent adjectives used in the higher or superior form should be bivalent, bivalents should be trivalent, etc. 2.2. The analysis of the material collected shows that this is often the case. In other words, most of the univalent Lithuanian adjectives, used in the higher or upper degree form, are divalent (about the degree forms of the univalent German adjectives, cf. Sommerfeldt, Schreiber 1971: 228; Piitulainen 1983: 17; Bierwisch 1987: 174; Lee 1994: 29), e.g. : (25) Be [you] smaller than a grain of poppy seed, do not show off to anyone BiTR, 21. (26) People in the forest were before life, after death in the NT. 7 Although the Lithuanian adjectives, which denote non-simultaneity relations, e.g.: ankstesnis, -ė “before being', anksčiausias, -ia, sekansnis, -ė ‘more rapidly going, later', paskutinis, -ia “the very last, later', ankstesnis, -ė ‘previous’, pirmasis, -ia “the very first’, vėlesnis, -ė “later, after being, happening’, vėlesnis, -ia ‘the most recent’, etc., have a higher and a higher 136 | LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ (27) I want to be [aS] superior už tą to me, bitter to the bone Warsaw sorcerer... MisevC 76. (28) Tu workséième (from) other children SMNVK 110. (29) The greatest director of these games was Catheri- — ne the Elder (of) all girls, very beautiful, brave, dominant KT. 2.2.1. There are some univalent Lithuanian adjectives whose upper-degree forms are trivalent. Such higher-grade forms of adjectives, necessary be comparative constructions, require a third optional syntactic actor, which can be expressed by the noun pronoun pronoun ar (single or dependent su word) or quantitative adverbs, e.g. : (30) A stranger came, (all head) me taller man with a huge už belly KNN 125. (31) Klebonas Merkulis was younger už Grigalių, (but not many, maybe five years), looked nice, full face BUBTTA 64. (32) Leonardo's hair shone like fire, himself was (meters) už A little lower ir never raised his voice KT. (33) Kunigas Simon, (much) lower už Angele's husband, first enters the barn, stops, į raises his hand to the left side, as if to restrain a pounding heart, looks around in wonder KT. (34) O cousin už ją (even two years) older SMNR, 225. (35) I was [as] group leader, so like ir superior už to others, ir iš Represenį tatives who came to visit Moscow courses spoke su first of (o all to me, aš maybe because of my naivety I just thought so) KT. 23. Bivalent adjectives are also used in the upper superior forms. ar Such divalent adjectives (as ir monovalent) also, the adjective be meaning determining necessary optional ir syntactic actants, often connect another additional syntactic actant, e.g. : (36) In the village, her godmother, who was closer to her real mother, fell seriously už ill, apologized for academic — ji activities, and, to her surprise, the dean immediately agreed KT. (37) O these slaves of their own farms, for [...) whom a liter of skimmed milk is more dear than human dignity už AvZSTM 558. (38) The rationally inexplicable minister K. Kristinaitis’s conception that the court is more competent to resolve ethical issues than the High Commission on Ethics KT. (39) She] did not believe that the things of the soul, ji which had been taught to respect už more than everything in the world (hours) [German's father) would be more už important carnal KNDKHG 54 (40) Things of the Garden (Rapolui) were not alienated už from their home things VZR, 90. , degree forms, they are considered separate words, adjectives o ne early, late — morphological forms. — As separate words, these adjectives are presented in the Contemporary Lithuanian Language Dictionary, an academic Lithuanian language dictionary, except for the earliest, -ia, latest, -ia, which are In the modern English language, the word is not used. As can be seen from the iš examples, these univalent adjectives are used in comparative constructions su when comparing things in terms of time. du BŪVDARDŽIO DEGREE APPROPRIACY | 137 (41) Of the winter cereals, rye is the most winter-resistant, but there are significant differences between varieties in terms of this characteristic. (42) But it can not be said that he was the most to blame for not knowing what would happen when a bomb falls in the middle of a city of thousands ta į KT. It is true that in cases where a bivalent adjective, used in the higher superior form, requires an ar optional syntactic act, it may be omitted from the sentence (see 0.4.), e.g. : (43) However, the day is ši more favorable than tomorrow, so it is advisable to take more important matters (plg. still a day ši (you) better than tomorrow) KT. (44) — It's all right, palely smiling — at the man, said in English, I'm sure your ji pipe will be — much more pleasant than my passenger's cigarettes (plg. your pipe will be (for me) much more pleasant than my traveler's cigarettes) KT. (45) Už everything more pleasant word Lithuania (plg. už all (us) a more pleasant word Lietuva) KT. 2.4. Trivalent adjectives of ar the higher superior degree, which would be used in the sentence with all su syntactic (necessary optional) actants determining the meaning ir of the adjective and still ir connecting the comparative construction, were not found. There ir are no examples of a trivalent adjective in the higher superior ar form used in a comparative construction with syntactic su imperative actants determining the meaning of the adjective. ir Tą the same could be said of the four-valued adjectives of ir the higher superior degree. ar However, in theory, such examples would be possible. The fact that such examples have not been found is probably due to the fact that the range of adjective-dependent words would then be greatly extended, e.g. : (46) (For sincere advice) I am [as] more grateful to my mom than to you, my best friend (for the book of advice brought) BK. 3. MORPHOSYNTACTIC COMPARER CONSTRUCTION IMPLEMENTATION 3.1. As mentioned above, both the adjectives of the higher superior and ar the adjectives of the non-comparative grade, which describe the comparison, usually connect one additional syntactic actant comparative construction. — However, unlike the adjective itself (as a part of speech), the forms of the adjective of the higher ir superior degree always determine ne the form of the comparative construction of its — syntactic actor. — 3.1.1. In cases where the comparison du ar more objects in relation to the object of the descriptive word, the higher-degree forms control the prepositional construction with the su preposition za. The superior forms control prepositional constructions with the prepositions su iz, med(u), za. Preposition už requires a suffix, o from, between(u) — a suffix (plg. 1.2.— 1.4.), e.g. : 138 | LORETA SEMĖNIENĖ (47) Trouble heavier už than a pebble, word už sharper than a dagger Vrn; Ulvydas, red. (1965: 515). (48) Then it's the first jo song, the saddest of the groves už Maironis; Ambrazas, red. (1996: 171). (49) It would be hard to find a man quieter už than him: he almost did not speak at all J. Balčikonis; Ulvydas, red. (1965: 519). (50) Spruce the happiest of iš all marciy; does not ji shed abundant tears bitterness S. Neer; Ulvydas, red. (1965: 522). 3.1.2. Meanwhile, adjectives of the higher degree usually do not determine the form of comparative constructions used with conjunctions su as, than, than, etc. ir (plg. 0.2.). The aforementioned conjunctions of the comparative su construction are reduced sentences", in which formally expressed only that which differs in the degree of the described characteristic, that which is compared t. y. su (plg. 1.4.2.). To predict what form will be said ir in the comparative construction is difficult enough. However, it is possible to distinguish several cases where the adjectives of the higher superior degree ir determine the comparative constructions with the conjunctions su as, than, than and so on. ir form: a) In the case of comparing objects with respect to the du object denoted by the descriptive word, the comparative construction is used with the su conjunctions as, neither, than, etc. ir usually has the nominative form, although the object on which the comparison is based can be described by other vowels, e.g. : (51) Better a father than a ir cruel, not a stepfather, even if he's sweet as sugar V. Krėvė; Ambrazas, red. (1996: 171). (52) There's no sky (me) more pleasant than the sky of my homeland E. Mieželaitis; Ulvydas, red. (1965: 519). (53) The sun descended už in a warmth darker than night KT. Plg. : (54) A better father than ir cruel, no way is a good stepfather, even if it is as sweet as sugar. (55) There's no sky (me) more pleasant, as pleasant is (my) native sky. (56) The sun has už descended darker than the night is dark, warm. Separately mentioned are cases when the comparative construction su with the aforementioned conjunctions ma is combinedwith the form of the word on the basis of which it is compared. Then it would be possible to talk about a funny attraction, e.g. : 5 Redukuotais lyginamaisiais sakiniais straipsnio autorė laiko visas lyginamasias konstrukcijas jungtukais su kaip, nei, negu pan., kurios akademinėje tritomėje ir Lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje yra aptariamos arba kaip lyginamieji posakiai, arba kaip lyginamųjų sakinių šalutiniai dėmenys. On the other hand, the same Grammar of the Lithuanian language (Stewart, red. 1976: 656-657) recognizes that, according to their grammatical ir structure, comparative expressions are close in meaning to the subordinate elements of comparative sentences. As stated in grammar, the most important difference between ir comparative su sentences and comparative phrases is that comparative phrases do not have a grammatical sentence form. But, it seems, a reduced sentence can be seen in ir such a sentence as: Širdies skausmas skausmingesnis buvo negu kūno suspaudimas, negu sudegintas rankos žaizdas KrēvP 131. Plg. : The pain of the heart was more painful than the pain of the body. 139 (57) I'd like a man more handsome than this stupid one 1. Simonaitytė; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 688). Example: (58) I would like a man more handsome than such a handsome man. b) In cases where two or more things are compared not in relation to the object of the descriptive word (as shown in the previous examples), but in relation to the object of the multivalent adjective-controlled word, although only the comparative constructions with the conjunctions as, neither, than, etc. are used. ; the form of comparative constructions is the same as that of the adjective-controlled word, i.e. the valent actant, e.g.: (59) He knew that (to the ladies) [he] was more open than to his sinful questioner V. MykolaitisPutinas; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 688). (60) Alena was more favourable to him than to anyone else A.. Monk; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 688). (61) And let no one condemn us for stealing our history from strangers, grain by grain, — it is much more necessary (for us) than for those who have not yet returned it to us in the CT. As can be seen from the examples, when comparing an adjective with its optional syntactic act in relation to the object of the denotation, it must necessarily be said in the sentence (see 0.4.), cf.: (62) * He knew that [he] was more open than his sinful questioner. c) In cases when a different quantity of a certain characteristic of one thing is compared at one time or under one circumstance than at another time or under another circumstance, comparative constructions with the conjunctions as, neither, than, etc. are used with words of circumstantial meaning (time, place) or their constructions, e.g. : (63) One morning the sick man woke up more refreshed than usual. V. Mykolaitis-Putinas, Ulvydas, ed. (1976: 688). (64) Better I am torn, I will live hungry, but still I will be happier than here J. Paukštelis; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 688). (65) The hunting was done so that the son would have fun, would fly through the forests, but in the hunting Ilgis would ride alone by the side, not taking a pin in his hand, no longer turning the hooks, he would return niuer than V. Krėvė would leave the house; Ulvydas, red. (1965: 518). d) When comparing different degrees of a certain characteristic of one thing in different “possible or imaginary worlds”, comparative constructions with the conjunctions as, than, than, etc. are used with another predicate (e.g.: look, think, think, expect, etc.), stating in which “possible” world is observed that degree of characteristic with which it is compared, e.g.: (66) Something is more unhappy than I was myself V. Mykolaitis- -Putinas; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 906). (67) The father lay in bed, and the unshaved gray beard together with a brush of gray hair above the forehead made him look much older than he really was A. Venclova; Ulvydas, red. (1976: 907).