LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XXXIII (1995) GRAMATIKA IR LEKSIKOLOGIJA

ADELĖ VALECKIENĖ

THE PLACE OF IDEOPHONES AND MIMETIC WORDS IN THE SYSTEM OF WORD CLASSES

1.1. For a long time, Lithuanian grammars did not distinguish particles and ideophones as separate word classes. Particles, previously discussed among adverbs, were first presented as a separate word class in the three-volume “Grammar of the Lithuanian Language” (by V. Labutis, LKG 1971: 543–576). B. Labutis justified the distinction of this new word class and described it in detail in his doctoral dissertation, “Particles of Contemporary Lithuanian” (1965).

The term ideophone was coined by J. Jablonskis. However, J. Jablonskis did not distinguish ideophones as a separate word class. They are discussed among interjections (Jablonskis 1918; 1922). In J. Jablonskis’s 1901 Grammar, ideophones are called sound-words (Jablonskis 1957: 158). In the earliest Lithuanian grammars, words of this kind were also generally mentioned among interjections (Schleicher 1856: 338; Miežinis 1886: 51). The ideophone was distinguished as a separate word class in J. Žiugžda’s school grammar (1961: 221). This grammar is a revision of J. Jablonskis’s grammars and apparently relies incautiously on J. Jablonskis’s use of a separate term for ideophones. The ideophone was first described extensively in the three-volume “Grammar of the Lithuanian Language” (by I. Jašinskaitė, LKG 1971: 734–746). Here, too, it is distinguished as a separate word class. In addition, I. Jašinskaitė published a separate booklet on ideophones, discussing their formal, semantic, and syntactic features and emphasizing that this word class is specific to Lithuanian and that “of all Indo-European languages, only Lithuanian distinguishes ideophones as a separate part of speech” (see Jašinskaitė 1975: 12). Later Lithuanian grammars based on the three-volume “Grammar of the Lithuanian Language” also present the ideophone as a separate word class (see Jakaitienė, Laigonaitė, Paulauskienė 1976: 247–251; ГЛЯ 1985: 73–76, 406–414).

1.2. Ideophones are words that depict or imitate the sounds and appearances of actions, e.g.: būbt, šast, trākšt. They usually occur before verbs and lend liveliness and vividness to speech. Ideophones are especially common in spoken language, where they vividly describe the nature of actions. No one doubts that, because of their depictive meaning, ideophones constitute a distinctive group of Lithuanian words; but whether this warrants distinguishing them in grammars as a separate word class (part of speech) is highly questionable.

2.1. In grammars, word classes (parts of speech) are usually distinguished on the basis of three criteria: syntactic, morphological, and semantic. Much has already been wri-

43

tten that the grammatical classification of word classes is neither uniform nor logical: some word classes are distinguished according to one set of criteria, and others according to another (Fries 1951: 65—69; Lyons 1968: 317 ff.; Стеблик-Каменский 1954: 147—157; Кузнецов 1961: 56). Yet even modern grammars of various languages cannot do without word classes, since such groups of words exist in language and have distinctive features in how they combine with other words, how various morphological forms are selected, and how semantic functions are realized. In recent years, efforts have been made to base the distinction of word classes on more uniform criteria (see further Valeckienė 1984: 188 ff.).

2.2. In Lithuanian, there is a clear boundary between inflecting and uninflecting word classes. Inflecting words have certain morphological categories and various forms for realizing them. The related forms of the same words constitute separate subsystems of morphological categories. (In Lithuanian, the adverb is classified among inflecting word classes because it has special forms for the category of degree.) Uninflecting words have no morphological categories and therefore function in language in only one form (apart from variants). The ideophone belongs with the uninflecting word classes (conjunction, preposition, particle, interjection). Uninflecting words do not function as sentence constituents (parts of a sentence). In this respect, therefore, they approach the status of morphemes, and some authors do not regard them as separate word classes (Мухин 1968: 176; Савченко 1968: 187) or, unlike the true word classes (noun, verb, adjective, adverb), describe them as certain functional groups of words (Fries 1951: 72—109). Uninflecting word classes are often called non-autonomous, semantically incomplete, or functional, in contrast to autonomous and semantically complete classes, thereby seemingly implying that they are less important and play a lesser role in language. In fact, because of their special differentiating function in the sentence, uninflecting word classes are no less important than the so-called autonomous (semantically complete) word classes. Language often cannot do without a preposition, and frequently cannot do without a conjunction either. Particles and interjections also perform an important function in the sentence.

2.3. The criterion for distinguishing uninflecting word classes is their specific differentiating function in the sentence, that is, the way words of this type help the sentence fulfill its communicative role without themselves functioning as sentence constituents. Conjunctions connect words, groups of words, and clauses, and express the relations between them (simultaneity, opposition, distinction, condition, etc.). A preposition does not itself function as a sentence constituent, but governs cases and forms prepositional constructions with them; these constructions function as sentence constituents and usually have adverbial meanings (in these constructions, the preposition plays the primary—organizational—role and determines the case form). Particles, too, do not function as sentence constituents, but modify and specify words and emphasize their meanings. In terms of their differentiating function in the sentence, which has communicative significance, uninflecting word classes do not essentially differ from inflecting (semantically complete) word classes; uninflecting words likewise perform in the sentence

44

a differential function, but one of a different kind. In short, the syntactic (syntagmatic) criterion encompasses all the conventional word classes.

2.4. In Lithuanian grammars, the ideophone is distinguished according to a semantic or, more precisely, lexical criterion. It is defined as a class of words that depict and imitate the sounds or images of actions¹. Clearly, such a criterion is insufficient for distinguishing a new word class. For this reason, formal, “morphological” means are sought to reinforce the classification of ideophones as a separate word class (see Jašinskaitė, LKG 1971: 734; Oginskienė ГЛЯ 1985: 406). The final formatives characteristic of ideophones are usually cited as such means:

a) - (most often): kàpt, krėst, krùst, šàst, sliùkšt;

b) -s, -š: bàks, kìls, klibìnkš, pýkš;

c) -i, -y; -u, -ū: braškì, brazdý, šlamù, girgždù;

d) -(i)à: klebetái, lapatái, makalái.

A prefix pa- is characteristic of a considerable number of ideophones, especially when they are used alongside the same ideophone without the prefix, e.g.: pabaškšt, pataūkšt; blinkt pablínkt, strik pastrik, šmákšt pašmákšt.

Such formatives are clearly analogical, having arisen as more ideophones were formed on the basis of a particular model. The imitative meaning of ideophones provides the basis that gives rise here to analogical formation. These formatives are in no way morphological features of ideophones: they are unrelated to one another, do not form a system, and express no morphological categories. Nor do they have a derivational meaning, and thus they are not derivational devices. When a new formative is added, the meaning of the ideophone remains the same. Ideophones with the formatives listed above and without them are often used, and their meanings do not differ, cf.: šmákš and šmákšt, tàkš and tàkšt.

It is a different matter when Lithuanian contrasts between long and short vowels, vowel quality, and the phonetic properties of particular consonants are used in forming ideophones. For example, ideophones with short vowels sometimes denote the sounds of brief, non-intense actions, whereas those with long vowels denote the sounds of long, intense actions (grìbš and grýbš); ideophones with front vowels denote weaker, higher-pitched sounds, whereas those with back vowels denote lower-pitched sounds (din and dan). Ideophones containing consonants with particular phonetic properties are also of imitative origin, e.g.: cvìnkt, džaṅgt (see Jašinskaitė

¹It is often noted that numerals are also distinguished semantically. They are a class of words that denote the number of objects and other quantitative properties. However, numerals also differ from other nominal parts of speech in their syntagmatic (distributional) properties. For example, nominal numerals do not take adjectives (modifiers), but govern the genitive case of nouns (a thousand years, a trio of horses). Such government is characteristic of only a small subset of nouns (a group of children). Adjectival numerals function as modifiers, but do not take adverbs, as adjectives typically do (cf. very good children, but *very two children is not possible). Numerals also have morphological (paradigmatic) properties that differ from those of other nominal parts of speech. On the other hand, on the basis of features they share with nouns and adjectives, numerals, like pronouns, are often regarded as subclasses of nouns and adjectives (Щерба 1974: 83, 85; Пешковский 1956: 154—155; Панов 1960: 14; Савченко 1968: 187; Кубрякова 1978: 45; Harris 1964: 174 ff.; Helbig 1977: 107; Flämig 1977: 47, 50).

45

1975: 44—54). This is entirely understandable, since ideophones are usually imitative words. Moreover, the relationship between meaning and the phonetic properties of sounds is not constant.

Thus, ideophones have no formal classificatory features and differ from other word groups only in their depictive and imitative meaning.

2.5. Ideophones also do not belong among interjections, with which they were formerly grouped. In all Indo-European languages, interjections differ from words of other classes in that they express subjective human feelings or expressions of will and have no naming function. They are close to signals and exclamations expressing the speaker’s multifaceted emotional state. Interjections have no connection with the constituents of a sentence. They are peculiar insertions and appendages that lend emotional coloring to the thought of a sentence. Ideophones, by contrast, are generally linked semantically in a sentence to verbs and indicate certain objective nuances of actions.

Given the differential function ideophones perform in a sentence—which is the main criterion for distinguishing invariable word classes—in our view, ideophones fit best among particles. The aim of this article is to try to prove this.

3.1. Particles have various meanings, but what these words have in common is that, without serving as sentence constituents, they indicate semantic, modal, and expressive nuances of o t h e r words in the sentence, groups of words, sentence constituents, or entire sentences. Particles seem not to wield their lexical force themselves, but to transfer it to other words, their groups, or individual sentences, clarifying, modifying in various ways, emphasizing, and even forming and defining a particular sentence type or lending sentences emotional coloring. This is the differential function particles perform in a sentence, on the basis of which they should be distinguished as a separate word class.

3.2. In performing their general differential function in a sentence, particles acquire various specific meanings in particular contexts. Therefore, particles are very difficult to classify. A detailed semantic classification of particles is presented in the three-volume “Grammar of the Lithuanian Language” (1971), and a somewhat different one in the single-volume grammar in Russian (ГРЯ 1985). This article also presents a somewhat different classification of particles, with particular attention to the relationship between their specific meanings and their general differential function.

According to the specific ways in which the general differential function is realized, one can distinguish modifying, defining, and expressive particles.

1. Modifying particles

3.3. These particles clarify and variously modify the meanings of words, their groups, or sentences. They can be divided into several groups.

a) Specifying particles: almost, nearly, still, already, what(ever), almost, how(ever), almost, nearly, exactly, more than, only, scarcely, still, hardly, barely, e.g.

O n l y just escaped from the cart Užp; He waited and waited, but his father still did not return BsRP; In the cold, in December, b a r e l y barefoot, I drove the little mare to chase the beast... Krėv; Old Gugis had been in Merkinė s i n c e early morning Krėv.

b) Restrictive particles: at least, especially, and, even, not even, unless, even, although, only, just, e.g.:

E v e n blindly, a grain can hit the mark PP; E v e n if you smash a stake on his head PP; I remember Šmukštaras e s p e c i a l l y well Vien; Of all my treasure to me

46

like only glasses Sruog.

c) Demonstrative: ana, antai, aure, šit, štai, tai, va. They are all of pronominal origin. E.g.:

A n a there, on the hill, our homestead Al; A n t a i look! There Vilnius’ palaces loom broadly among the hills Mair; — Take it, Augustinai, v a, and bury it Vien.

d) Expressions of uncertainty and comparative meaning: perhaps, as if (that, seemingly, also) like, as if, I wonder whether, supposedly, perhaps, as though, as if. Many of them formally coincide with comparative conjunctions (as, like, as though, as if), but differ from the latter in the nuance of meaning they convey: they always indicate uncertainty, doubt about what is being compared. E.g.:

He perhaps does not even know rš; I wonder whether he knows Kp; Perhaps he does not know either Skp; The place is seemingly known Skp; As though sleepy Plk; Perhaps the sun will shine into our window PP.

In sentences with interrogative intonation, some of these particles acquire an interrogative meaning (I wonder (whether), perhaps, maybe, as if, see §12 b).

2. Defining particles

3.4. These particles characterize sentence types from the speaker’s point of view (declarative, interrogative, and directive sentences) or mark sentence boundaries, their beginnings in the text. According to the specific meanings they give sentences, these particles are divided into 4 groups.

a) Affirmative particles, which form declarative sentences: positive or negative. Positive particles occur in positive sentences, while negative particles occur in negative sentences.

Positive particles: taip, tagi. They affirm what is asserted in a sentence, e.g.: Are you Polish? — Y e s, Polish Vien. These particles often stand for entire sentences and function as their equivalents. This happens because the actual sentence constituents, clear from the context, are no longer stated but omitted, and the positive particles, affirming the meaning of these constituents, assume their function—they represent the whole sentence, e.g.:

— Did the little fir tree get what it wanted? — Y e s! (it did) Balč; — Do people speak that way in public? — I n d e e d (they do) Marc.

Negative particles ne, nė, nebe, nei. Their use is broader than that of positive particles. The particle ne asserts the negation of a sentence and, like the particle tai, often stands for a sentence and functions as its equivalent (when the actual sentence constituent, understood from the context, is omitted), e.g.: — Didn’t he come back? — the mother asked. — N o (he didn’t return), — Marytė replied LzP.

In addition, the particle ne, as well as other negative particles, is used before individual words and groups of words to negate their meaning, as a modifying particle. They then occur in both negative and positive sentences, since they are often unrelated to sentence negation, e.g.:

After all, you don’t have ten sons, but only one... Krev; It was not today, not yesterday, but in ancient times that there was a king BsRR; By now Brisius’s senses have been deceiving him more than once Bil; There is not the smallest white cloud in the sky Bil.

Negative particles ne, nebe also often have a word-forming function—they serve as prefixes and change a word’s positive meaning to a negative one, e.g.: works — does not work, no longer works; happiness — unhappiness; large — not large; young — not young; no longer alive; much — not much, no longer much.

47

b) Interrogative: ar, argi, ar ne, ar taip, be, bene, gal(gi), gal ne, ką, kažin, kažin ar, ko, negi, nejau(gi), rasi, tarsi. These particles help form a question, i.e., interrogative sentences are formed with them. Question-forming particles usually occur at the beginning of a sentence or clause uttered with interrogative intonation, e.g.:

Is he telling the truth? Myk-Put; Could it be that Father is angry about something? Žem; Come inside, surely we won't eat you? Krėv.

The particles gal(gi), kažin, kažin ar, rasi, tarsi retain a sense of uncertainty along with their interrogative function, e.g.:

So perhaps you are expecting guests? Paukšt; I wonder if the cow wants to drink? Grz; As if I won't get a younger one? Žem.

Cf. the corresponding particles, which have only a sense of uncertainty and are uttered without interrogative intonation, §3.3 d.

The particles (ar)ne, (ar)taip, (ar)ką, gal ne, uttered with interrogative intonation at the end of a sentence, reinforce a question to which an affirmative answer is expected, e.g.:

The evening was quite nice, wasn't it? Saj; Are you going home, then? rš.

The interrogative particles argi, negi, nejaugi, gal, kažin (the last two also express uncertainty), like the affirmative particles, function as sentence equivalents when the actual constituents of the sentence are clear from the context, e.g.:

They say he has left. — Really? (Could it be? Surely? Perhaps?) (has left) rš.

The particles ar, argi, bene, when used in sentences without interrogative intonation, give the sentence an opposite meaning: they turn an affirmation into a negation and vice versa—a negation into an affirmation, e.g.:

Is a dog with a tail really alone! Jabl (not alone); Surely he understands! rš (doesn't understand).

c) Encouraging particles, which (together with other forms) give a sentence an encouraging meaning. According to their different shades of meaning, these particles can be divided into two groups: desiderative particles: kad, te, tegu(l), and urging particles: šė, te, tekėt, nagi, e.g.:

May nothing bad happen to you! Sruog; Let the gentleman pay us for our work Myk-Put;

Here, take it for yourself Lnk; You lazybones, do take an egg! PP; Come on, tell me how it happened rš.

The encouraging particles tegu(l), nagi can also serve as equivalents of sentences and clauses, e.g.: If he likes it—let him, then (do it, take it, go) Simon.

d) Introductory particles: na, nu, tai. These particles mark the beginning of a sentence or of a larger text segment unified by its meaning. They are used most often in colloquial speech and in literary works that reproduce it. In addition to the introductory particles listed above, combinations of two or more particles, or of particles with adverbs close to them in meaning, are common: na(nu) ir, na jau, na tai, na čia gi, na jau ir, na tai ir, na tai dabar, na tai jau, na ar tai jau, na čia tai jau, na jau dabar tai, tai dabar, tai ir, tai jau, tai šit(štai), tai tik, tai va, tai visgi, tai čia ir, tai jau čia, tai štai ir, čia tai jau, taigi tatai, va jau, va jau ir, va tai jau. These particles have not previously been included in the classification of particles. Their function, however, is the same—descriptive. Introductory particles and their

48

complexes help divide a text into parts, separate sentences, and at the same time connect the units of the text (sentences) into a whole. They seem more convenient for beginning a new thought, a sentence, or speech in dialogues, when addressing someone or answering questions non-categorically. E.g.:

W e l l, mother, once again we’ve lived through the year LzP; — I’m the first to come! — the wolf grumbled. — W e l l, you are! — the fox agreed Piet; S o, good health, brother-in-law (after filling the glasses)! Sruog; — S o, you’re not even getting ready to go for a walk today? — I’m telling you. — S o farewell Paukšt; He didn’t listen. W e l l, Simon fell ill; W e l l, n o w y o u are exaggerating Myk-Put; W e l l, n o w t h a t gentleman no longer knows what to do Slan; S o i t’s a good thing I didn’t end up at Akmenukas Piet; — But the hops smell so good. — T h e y d o smell good Paukšt; S o t h a t’s t h a t, I’m just chattering away Žem.

Like other sentence-introducing particles, introductory particles also function as sentence equivalents when the statement is clear from the context and there is no wish to repeat it. E.g.:

— A h, yes! I could have milked her myself, too... — W e l l, n o w! (you could have milked her). You’re not capable of it, or anything ŠRag; — Some man comes home drunk, most likely Jurgėla. — R i g h t! — Elzė agreed hesitantly (Jurgėla really is coming home) Piet.

Introductory particles are also used with affirmative and interrogative particles that function as sentence equivalents. E.g.:

— So, next spring, and you’ll have finished the gymnasium. — S o, t h a t’s r i g h t Paukšt; — Aren’t you going back? — Jurgis asked. — N o! — his brother replied Piet; — And you don’t want to lie? — W e l l, m a y b e n o t Paukšt; S o w h a t? I heard Father is already planning to take him to the seminary? rš.

3. Expressive particles

3.5. Some of these particles emphasize the meanings of words, groups of words, and sentences, as well as their intensity, while others give them emotional coloring.

a) Emphatic: indeed, also, after all, that, how, so, only, here, there, look, e.g.:

I t w a s indeed a terribly long illness Vaižg; A f t e r a l l, nothing bad happened Bil; I can’t understand why bees don’t like me. L o o k, one stung me just yesterday! Myk-Put; L o o k at the tales, l o o k at the gossip—where does it all come from Slan; S o the horse has recovered (got better) Skp; T h a t he curses you, t h a t he curses you over the forest!.. Žem; One man g r a b b e d him on the pitchfork, h e began shaking him with it! BsRP; The children o n l y danced, o n l y ran around Balč.

These particles also have other meanings in different contexts (there, look, behold—demonstrative, so—introductory, only—restrictive, that—incentive, how—comparative expressing uncertainty).

b) Emotional: oh, oh!, alas, ah!, indeed, oh yes, yes indeed, e.g.:

O h, alas, and their children... they’re screaming obscenely Don; Who taught you, child, to weave so beautifully? — O h, I did it myself Slan.

These particles are close to interjections.

4. Descriptive and imitative particles

3.6. This group of particles would consist of ideophones. In terms of their differentiating function in the sentence, descriptive and imitative words do not differ from other particles: they do not function as sentence constituents and in their own way modify and emphasize the actions expressed by verbs, before which they usually occur in the sentence, highlighting

49

the images and sounds they evoke. Thus, like other particles, these words transfer their semantic load to the meanings of other words (verbs), coloring them. The sole difference between descriptive and imitative words and other particles is that they usually occur with verbs, i.e., they have a defined usage. On the other hand, this usage can explain their specific descriptive and imitative meaning: they emphasize and foreground precisely the nature of the action expressed by verbs.

The words under discussion most often occur with verbs denoting dynamic actions (walking, throwing, falling) and sudden actions, as well as actions associated with sounds produced by animals, natural phenomena, and various devices. When placed before these verbs, the aforementioned words accentuate and specify the images and sounds evoked by the actions. For example:

V i r r r the mouse scurried into the hole Vvr; D ž ž the water began to flow Rm; Well, girls, now s i n g sing! Val; D ž i n n n... d z... d z i n n n — the telephone rang faintly Vien.

Words of this kind are often used two or three times in repetition to strengthen and accentuate the impression of descriptive and imitative sounds or images, for example:

K u r n i k u r n i the little dog runs Št; The heart keeps beating thump-thump Rd; D a n d a n d a n the bell rings Kp; Father and his kin tossed the money onto the plate clink-clink Val; G u r k š t g u r k š t we ate our fill Val.

Other particles (usually modifying particles) are also repeated to intensify their meaning: more and more, already now, just just, barely barely, for example:

J u s t j u s t she climbs onto the bed and does not sleep for a long time Bil; After all, she barely, barely touched them Simon.

Sometimes the repeated words differ in individual sounds for the same purpose—to express the imitated sounds and images more clearly, for example:

D ž i u n d z a p! — the bullet whizzed Vien; The motor just clanked and sputtered and broke down Mlt; D ž i n g t b r i n k t and we had our dealings with the gentleman LzP.

Quite often other particles also accompany words of this kind: and, that and so on—to emphasize the suddenness and intensity of an action, for example:

The frogs plunged splash after splash into the water Skr; T a r r r thunder that crashed down Ds; People, hunched up from the cold, scurry along shiver-shiver-shiver Kair.

Descriptive and imitative words sometimes have the same or a similar acoustic form to the verbs they modify and emphasize. In such cases, they almost replace those verbs. For example:

The children k u r n y k u r n y and scurried off Užp; B r a z d u b r a z-d u someone scraped noisily along behind the wall Rm; C h i u ž ž that chirps Grž; K u k u k u the hedgehog grunts Ds.

When describing and imitating the actions expressed by verbs, words of this kind often substitute for the verbs themselves and function as their equivalents. In such cases, the verb is understood from context, while words of the type under discussion occupy the predicate position (cf. the corresponding function of descriptive particles in §3.4). For example:

50

Only babapt (went thump) two apples at once fell to the ground Grž; With his elbow he dukst (jabbed) in the side Gs; The old man drak (whacked) the old woman over the head with a stick Prng; Someone behind the hut brazdu brazdu (is rasping) Srv.

Sometimes ideophones, like interjections or certain particles, are used in noun positions as substitutes for nouns. In such cases these words have an additional stylistic nuance, e.g.:

He seems like a real kešt Skr; Now you’ll be left with a shabast of pastures Kal; He worked and worked and got nowhere—šnipšt An; There too was a girl, šakarma-kar KlvrŽ. Cf. interjections: He’s a person—just ajajai: hard to find another like him LK’; For a clever girl, a morsel here is oioi oioi... Žem; particle: Those shoes—but (are poor) colloq.

3.7. As the material examined shows, in terms of their differential function in the sentence—directing their lexical force toward coloring the action expressed by the verb—ideophones do not essentially differ from other particles and should be considered a subgroup of them rather than a separate, specific word class in Lithuanian. Semantically, these words have features of both modifying and expressive particles: in their own way they modify and at the same time, p. delineate the nature of the action expressed by certain verbs—by imitating and depicting the image and sound produced by the corresponding action. Thus, it would be best for grammars to discuss these words under particles as a separate subgroup.

4. Similarly to ideophones, so-called manner forms with the formant -e could also be classified as particles. These are fossilized verb forms and are used only with verbs of the same root: bėgte bėgo, meste metė, klykte klykė, cf. depictive and imitative particles: bumt bumt bumsejo (see §3.6). Like depictive and imitative particles, these words likewise do not function as a separate constituent of the sentence; they generally indicate not a circumstance of the action, but only intensify and color in their own way the nature of the action expressed by the verb, indicating its intensity.

The old woman was overjoyed that her son had already forgotten his pranks Krėv; The king’s estate is positively begging to be noticed more than the others Simon; The men seemed to have promised the priest, but they had no intention whatsoever of going to fetch the doctor Krėv.

Certain contexts sometimes seem to imply a circumstantial meaning for these words, e.g.:

I won’t patch the holes; I’ll mend them by burning Kp; Well, how much did he bring back on his shoulders Žem.

Thus, in terms of their differential function in the sentence, these words also belong to the class of particles (they could be classified among emphatic expressive particles; see §3.5a). They are not highly productive and, because they are consistently used with verbs of the same root, tend to become fossilized.

Words with the suffix -tinai, used with verbs of different roots and functioning circumstantially, should be considered adverbs, e.g.: He bought the board in installments colloq. However, words formed in this way, when used with verbs of the same root, have not a circumstantial (adverbial) but an emphatic (particle) function, e.g.:

At that time he begged his parents earnestly to go along Simon; He lies there, and lies there for good (does not get up) Pc.

51

5. If interjections and corresponding adverbials were classified as particles, the class of particles would be somewhat expanded, but this would not alter the main criterion for distinguishing particles—their differential function in the sentence. On the contrary, the particle would be more clearly defined among the other classes of invariable words (conjunction, preposition, interjection), distinguished according to differential functions at the same level (the syntagmatic plane). Lithuanian grammars would no longer contain “specific” word classes that are not distinguished in the grammars of other Indo-European languages.

Literatūra

1. Flämig W. Zur grammatischen Klassifizierung des Wortbestandes im Deutschen. — In: Linguistische Studien/ Herausgeg. von G.Helbig. Leipzig, 1977, S. 39-52.

2. Fries Ch.C. The Structure of English. London, 1951.

3. Harris Z.S. Co-occurrence and Transformation in Linguistic Structure. — In: The Structure of Language/ Ed. J.A.Fodor, J.J.Katz. New Jersey, 1964, p. 155-210.

4. Helbig G. Zu einigen Problemen der Wortartklassifizierung im Deutschen. — In: Linguistische Studien. Leipzig, 1977, S. 90-118.

5. [Jablonskis J.] P.Kriaušaitis ir Rygiškių Jonas. Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. V., 1918.

6. [Jablonskis J.] Rygiškių Jono Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. 2 leid. K.-V., 1922.

7. Jablonskis J. Rinktiniai raštai / Sudarė J.Palionis. T. 1. V., 1957.

8. Jakaitienė E., Laigonaitė A., Paulauskienė A. Lietuvių kalbos morfologija. V., 1976.

9. Jašinskaitė I. Lietuvių kalbos ištiktukai. V., 1975.

10. Labutis V. Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos dalelytės (kand. dis.). V., 1965.

11. Lyons J. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge, 1968.

12. LKG — Lietuvių kalbos gramatika / Vyr. red. K.Ulvydas. T. 2. V., 1971.

13. Miežinis M. Lietuviszka gramatika. Tilžė, 1886.

14. Schleicher A. Littauische Grammatik. Prag, 1856.

15. Valeckienė A. Lietuvių kalbos gramatinė sistema. Giminės kategorija. V., 1984.

16. Žiugžda J. Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Kaunas, 1961.

17. Гля — Грамматика литовского языка/ Гл. ред.В.Амбразас. В., 1985.

18. Кубрякова Е.С. Части речи в ономасиологическом освещении. Москва, 1978.

19. Кузнецов П.С. О принципах изучения грамматики. Москва, 1961.

20. Мухин А.М. Части речи и синтаксические единицы. — В кн.: Вопросы теории частей речи. Ленинград, 1968.

21. Панков М.В. О частях речи в русском языке. — Науч. докл. высш. шк. Филол. науки. №4. 1960, с. 3-14.

22. Пешковский А.М. Русский синтаксис в научном освещении. Москва, 1956.

23. Савченко А.Н. Части речи как грамматические и лексико- грамматические классы слов в индоевропейских языках. — В кн.: Вопросы теории частей речи. Ленинград, 1968, с. 185- 190.

24. Стеблин-Каменский М.И. К вопросу о частях речи. — Вестн. Ленинградск. ун-та. Сер. обществ. наук. №6. 1954, с. 147- 157.

25. Щерба Л.В. Языковая система и речевая деятельность. Ленинград, 1974.

52

THE STATUS OF THE ONOMATOPOEIC INTERJECTIONS IN THE SYSTEM OF THE WORD-CLASSES

Summary

In the most latest grammars of the Lithuanian language onomatopoeic interjections (strýkt, pókšt) are considered to be a separate word-class. The author analyses the functions of the onomatopoeic interjections and concludes that these words have no status of the separate word-class. They form one of the semantic groups in the word-class of the particles.

The so-called ”būdiniai” (bėgtė bėgo) with the formant -te can be enclosed into the word-class of the particles too. They express no adverbial modifiers, but emphasize the action, expressed by the verb.

53