Lietuvių ir kitų indoeuropiečių kalbų kauzatyvų raidos polinkiai

LITHUANIAN KALBOTYROS QUESTIONS XXXIII (1995) GRAMMATICS IR LEXICOLOGY Gertrude SAVIČIŪTĖ-NAKTINIENĖ LITHUANIAN IR OTHER INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES CAUSAL RELATIONS RAIDOS 1.Introductory remarks The diachronic aspect of the study, so usual for phonetic morphology ir works, is taking its way into the field of syntax į semantics. ir It would be particularly useful for modern typological linguistics not to limit itself to the synchronous determination of existing similarities, but to take ir į into account language kinship, ir į general laws of language development (plg. Kaumos 1975 : 28). The works of many authors in our studied ir material show that causation is a universal (panchronic) category of Indo-European languages, expressed by means that have usually formed in individual languages. ma Therefore, ir the developmental trends of causative semantics and ir expression methods are best discussed from the point of view of typology. The object of the study, as in previous works (1980*, 1980*), are the related and typologically close Lithuanian, Latin and Russian languages, belonging to three different groups of the Indo-European family. Most of the material is collected from the dictionaries, grammar books, and other works of these languages, and other sources are used if necessary. language data. The causatives of the studied languages can be divided into morphological and syntactic or periphrastic s from the point of view of grammar, synthetic and analytic s from the point of view of typology, closed and open s from the point of view of syntactic semantics. The latter are distinguished by the correspondence of the superficial structure with the deep, or internal structure, which is described by the periphrase "make so that + direct verb". Ši periphrasis is formed on the basis of the descriptive sentence of the effect. Ji chosen because it is the effect, the purpose, the cause o ne compound ar connective sentences have most commonality with sentences, whose su predicate goes causative verbs causative analytical constructions ar (for more on causing periphrase see. Savičiūtė 1986! : 164—165; 19862 : 206—209). | Causatives of the aforementioned periphrase, which do not correspond in their surface structure and express causation in a concise form, are called closed causatives. ir — a t v i : a iYes. “The former are characterized by — morphological, the latter by syntactic or periphrastic forms of expression. 110 2. Closed causative The old tendency of the Indo-European flexional languages to express complex meanings in a synthetic way is demonstrated by the morphological causatives — causative (causative) and curative (care-giving) verbs, which express two (1) or three (2) different actions in one sentence. The root of the causative verb, which coincides with the root of the base verb, indicates the causative action, i.e., the action or state that the causative subject seeks or causes, e.g.: (1) grow — grow, fall — fall, eat — eat, (2) weave — weave, send — send, fix — fix. The suffix and/or the change of vowels indicate the abstract meaning of causation, i.e. the causative action "to do so that...". It is not the case that the phrase is incorrect, but rather that it is incorrect in context. 2.1. Closed causatives representing simple causation 2.1.1. By noting each component of the causal sentence’s deep-level component with symbols (S — subject, P — predicate, O — object, — causal relationship), the deep-level component of causal sentences can be represented by the formula (S + P) —(O + P). In the causation sentence there are 4 components, representing 2 situations: (1) the causing situation (the subject causing and his causing action) and (2) the causable situation (the object and the change of its state or action caused by the subject). For example, the sentence The master heard the horse is divided as follows: "(1) The master +(2) does so that +(3) the horse + (4) drinks", or Sun faded the shirt: "(1) Sun + (2) did so that + (3) the shirt + (4) faded". 2.1.2. Closed causative ide. in languages—are verbs with a certain degree of conjugation and/or causative suffix. Not all of the categories can be formally derived from ide. prokalbės. A. Meillet distinguishes two old ideas. causative suffixes (1) *-eje/o-and (2) -ijo-/-i-(Mette 1951: 190). The first prefix corresponds to the Indo-Iranian, Ancient Greek, and partly Latin languages. For example, the old-Greek pefouat "I am afraid" — poffėčw "I am frightened". In Sanskrit this suffix corresponds to -dya (Burrow 1959 : 301—302, 330; Enusapenkosa 1982 : 367—370), e.g. vart-dya-ti "suka" wvdrta-ti — "turns" o in Latin — *-eič/6, e.g. : mone6 "remember" —memini "remember", doceo "learned" —disco "learned" (Tponcku- #t 1960: 215; Safarewicz 1969 : 212). Other minor ir Latin causative verbs are mentioned, e.g.: augeo "increase, increase", suūde6 "advice, persuade, convince", terres "fear", torreo "dry" (Ernout 1927 : 231—232). Rare Latin forms testify to the second ide. causative suffix *ijo-/li-, e.g. sopio "almonds" (Ernout 1927 : 235). with riesaga -ya root ir vowel change is typical of ancient Germanic causatives, e.g. got. bi-leiban, sen. ang. belifan, sen. fr. b(i)liva, sen. vok. high.. bi-liban "stay" got. — bi-laibja-n, sen. isl. Leifa, son. ang. Lefan, you. fr. lava, lava-a "leave" (CTT 51 IV 142, 169). In modern German there are relics of causality expressed by root vowel change, e.g.: 111 liegen "lying — down" legen "to lay down", sitzen "sit — down" setzen "sodinti", drinking "gerti" — drink "to ir hear" etc. _Analytical structures in contemporary English are also found in morphological residues of causative expression. Veiksmazodis wake (woke, waked; waked, woken, woke) "to wake up; zadėti” has a causative, ir non-causative ir meaning. Iš The second is more often chosen to ko indicate the causality of the past laiforms ir woke waked. The verb rise (rose, risen) "rise, station" differs in the degree of vowel change from raise "to raise, build, set up", although R. Lakoff (1972 : 187) claims that most English speakers do not feel that raise is made by raise. iš In Russian, causality can be expressed irregularly by prepositions, prepositional adverbs and vowel changes, e.g. : ir BHcCeTBb "Cabots." — BemaTs "cabinti", racuyTs racuTb — "gestures" "off", ru6HyTb "die" — ry6uts "kill", Mep3HyTb "Shall we go? — MOpO3UTH "frozen", cnaTs "sleep" — YcCBbInJIATb "sleep", coxHyTs "dry" — cymuTb "dried". The class of morphological causatives in Lithuanian is particularly abundant. These are causative verbs, whose causative meaning is formalized by vowel change and/or suffix of Baltic origin -(d)inti, -(d)yti (Carcases 1941 : 529—548; Jablonskis 1957 I : 288—290; Jakaitienė 1968 : 227; Sxastrene 1968 : 11; LKG 1971 : 25, 264; LKM 1976 : 110 ir kt ). Adverbs -yti equivalents sometimes ir found in Slavic languages (Carcases 1941 : 535). 2.1.3. Complex is the origin of causative verbs pro lem ba. A. Desnickaja, citing N. Marr asserted that nouns are the earlier verbs, proving the noun-like origin of causative verbs (1941: 138-165). už However, linguistic data and the works of many researchers suggest that causative verbs can be derived both from nouns and from verbs. Causatives can be associated with: (1) verbs, (2) both nouns and primary verbs, (3) nouns, e.g.: (1) skr. saddya-ti "planting" —sidati "sitting", (2) skr. radhdya-ti "permits" —raūdhoti "performs" —radhah "gift", (3) old german. height. wermen "warm" —warm "warm" (cf. d. Menuep 1966: 73—79). The undoubted connection between the formation of causative and ordinary verbs, which is clearly perceived in contemporary Lithuanian, is reflected in references in the "Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian Language" (1972) (hereinafter — DZ) and in the "Dictionary of Lithuanian Language" (hereinafter — LKZ), e.g.: laužti caus. broken LKŽ, rotten prž. blow DZ. The connection of the meaning of morphological causatives with nouns is confirmed by the fact that many adverbial verbs in Lithuanian can be described by periphrase "to do something", e.g.: curl "make a curve” — curve, spread "make platy” — wide (Sikattrene 1968 : 11). That's right. LKŽ ir DZ explains the verbs of this type, accompanied by the abbreviation caus. ar pri. unwritten, although most have a iš jų corresponding verb from the same root, meaning "to do something", ti e.g.: weaken "make weak, weaker" — weak to — weaken, weaken; urinate "make wet" — wet wet. — The choice of this way of presentation in dictionaries shows the concept of noun origin. jų But sometimes it is really iš unclear what this type of causative su verbs should be related to (plg. “When it 1941 : 541—544) ir comes to dictionaries, the authors opt for a compromise, for example, they add the abbreviation caus to seninti. ir refers į to the 112 verb seni, and the meanings are explained by the periphrase "daryti kokį" and linked to the adjective senas (LKŽ XII 380). There is a known hypothesis that causative verbs are derived from iterative verbs. B. Delbrūckas (1897: 119) stated that the causative verb vardhdyati "to grow" arose from a different meaning of the verb vardhdyatė "to grow strongly", which arose from vardhatė "to grow". The origin of causative prepositions from frequent prepositions was also considered possible by B. Serebrennikov, based on the frequently occurring closeness of these prepositions and their meanings (Cepe6penxuuros 1974: 175—176). The proximity of causative and iterative meanings is confirmed by the Lithuanian suffix -(d)inti, -(d)yti, which can have both meanings, e.g.: spausti, dirdyti, šaudyti ir gydyti, guldyti, žudyti, etc. The derivatives of this suffix are sometimes even called iteratives-causatives (Kayrene 1991: 21). The intensity of the causative action expressed by causative verbs and effect sentences has been noted (Saviciuté 1986: 159). It also shows iteratyvy (at least those that have a shade of intensity) and causatyvy relationship. However, none of the facts mentioned here prove the origin of causative from iterative. The basis of their proximity is apparently the very activity of the causative and the iterative action (in cases where the iterative has a shade of intensity). Therefore, in the absence of a clear and specific historical prototype from which to derive various ideas. The origin of causation has been linked to the development of semantic oppositions. He's coming. J. Kurylowiczius (1964: 86—88) considered the semantic opposition of state/caused action (state > intransitive action > causation) as the starting point of the development of causation in languages. Authors who study transitivity—intransitivity on the basis of oppositions speak of causality as one of the cases of transitivity—intransitivity. S. Krinickaitė showed that there is an opposition of external and internal diathesis between transitive verbs with vowel change and intransitive verbs, e.g., versti — virsti. This opposition, constituting the oldest layer of the category of transitivity—intransitivity, originally meant semanting opposition of the state of a thing or other inanimate subject/the action of a human or living subject. The later opposition n equauzitive verb / causative verb (Kpuunukraitre 1979: 46—49) has become even more pronounced. A. Paulauskienė (1979: 21, 26) as the main category of transitiveness- —intransitivity, not causality. She distinguishes three types of transitivity: (1) change — change, (2) grow — grow, (3) change — change, and speaks about the overlap of the indicators and functions of transitivity and causality. J. Stepanovas ide. Morphologically, it is a reconstruction of the original skeleton. According to him, the following types of sentences existed in the period of the active construction: active subject active verb, inactive subject inactive verb, active subject + active verb + inactive object. However, at that time there was no grammatically formalized type active subject active verb + active object, e.g. : A soldier kills an enemy. In the opinion of J. Stepanov, such causatives as lie. (1) + (2) + (3) (4) + "Kill Me" (: (feat. (: 113 MopuT5 "pickling, destroying" (: -MepeTb, -MHpaTB (ymupaTs)) "die", skr. mardyati "forces, allows to die, kills" mdrati, mdrate, (: mriyate miršta are related to the ) formation of the aforementioned type of su sentence. (4) “With the change of the very nature of sentence structure, type sentences to have become common. The fact that many Lithuanian causative objects can be humans, for example, klaidinti klysti, is also considered to be proof of this są hypothesis. The appearance of morphological causative derivation is considered one of the ways that helped avoid certain difficulties in iš ide. language structure changing iš active į accusative. 2.2. Closed causative, meaning more complex causation (curative) of 2.2.1. Iš the flexional ide discussed here. language only in Lithuanian language formed curative, or vo serving verbs, class (curative verb or passive causative). Ji is distinguished from causative or causative verbs (verba causativa activa). Causative curative verbs have the same suffix ir tą - teeth (with causative suffixes -especialir ly -yti curative are rarely used) ir usually the tą very structure of the sentence, so they are often mixed (for more jų information on the significance and awarding criteria, see (Jakulienė 1975 : 78 — 81; Savičiūtė 1984 : 73 — 78, 1985 : 236 — 251). Since both classes have many similarities, the causative o class is much more abundant, more diverse in its forms and meanings, which suggests that curative verbs have originated from causative verbs. The formant -dof the causative suffix, which once was only a means of removing a hiatus, later became a characteristic indicator of the significance of curacy (Stang 1966: 374), and the causative suffix began to be attached to the already formed morphological causative, e.g., lakinti —lakindinti or to the factual verb, which can be called a lexical causative, e.g., stūti —siudinti. Similar secondary causative derivation has been observed in other languages (cf. 1969 Hemsinkos : 27). The differences between causal and curative sentences are particularly obvious in the case of trinar oppositions, e.g.: amusing — amusing — laughing, talking — talking — speaking, breaking — breaking — breaking, loding — loding — loding. Compare sentences with trinar opposition verbs: maple branches pléseles su Iš p lė šdinsiu (cur.), o iš I'll cut the waistcoat tables LTR (Lkv) — "Pleurotus ostreatus (caus.) ir pinam ryžus Švnč — The horns are already cracking (intr.) J (LKZ X 166, 179, 248). By writing the aforementioned causation ir curation sentences in the general causation periphrase, or by depicting the deep jy causation in the formula, the most important differences are obviously jų visible: Causation: Curatio: (1) "I do so that ...” + (1) "I will do so that..." + (2) "Carnations are cracking" (2) "[Someone] will do so that" + (S + P)—(0 + P) (3) "Slices will tear" (S1 + P1)—-(S2 + P2)—(0 + P3) Syntactic semantic components were found in causation sentences, 4 114 determining 2 situations. Curation sentences have 6 components that define situations: (1) the curating 3 situation (subject curator—initiator Sy and his curating action P1), (2) the intermediate curated situation (subject intermediary or performer Ss and his immediately performed action Py, which was curated by the subject initiator), (3) the final curated situation (object O and its state change or action caused by the subject intermediary and curated by the subject initiator). Thus, the formula of the deep level of curative sentences can be clarified: — (S, + P1) TT ((83 + Pa) 5 (0+P5)) The object of the curative sentence is influenced in a double way—directly by the mediator of the subject and indirectly by the initiator of the subject. Therefore, curacy is conditionally called "double causation- ". From a semantic point of view, it seems possible to say that curative meaning arose on the basis of verbal (or, in D.A. Cruse’s terms, “relative”) causation, when an indirect, non-physical effect of a living subject on another living subject was expressed. Such an indirect (in the term of V. Nedialkov — non-act) causation, close to the meaning of curatives in Lithuanian, is also found in other languages, e.g.: German. lassen + inf. (Mucciopa 1952: 10; Hensjrros 1971: 19 tt.), fr. faire + inf. (A6pocumsosa 1954: 7—10). In Lithuanian language, the superficial conjugation of curative sentences was formed even on the basis of sentences of non-physical (verbal) causation, in which S; —person, P; —"to order, to tell, to beg...", e.g. : U 21 a ndy k (cavs.) children to the shoulder Sts (LKZ VII 119). The semantics of the components narrowed as the curation formed: S; —only (1) a person with authority, e.g.: king, lord, etc., (2) a person who is unable, unable to perform a certain work, the principal, P1 — (1) 'command, order','reque- (2) st'. The intermediate curation situation only in rare and atypical cases "penetrates" into the superficial layer. For example: : The three batches of wheat were quickly brought into the lighthouse by K. Donel (LKŽ VIII 702); The thief for the third robbery with dogs was smashed by S. Dauk (LKZ II 644). Most often it is perceived in the context of the grammatical meaning of curative verbs. iš ar Ši intermediate situation of curacy, usually only in the deep level, close to direct physical causation, when the person, object in the causation S1 — sentence is a force ar of nature, P1 — various physical, rarely ir non-physical actions: Child (wind, apples) branch lau ži a. i In curatives Sg — only a person (1) who performs an order, e.g.: servant, executioner, person who can, knows how to (2) perform a certain work, e.g.: seamstress, barber, Pa —(1) various verbs denoting servitude and punishment, e.g.: bring in, cut off, verbs denoting various professional actions requiring a certain payment, skill, e.g.: weave, build (2) (pasta). For example: : | 115 (1) Herod had cut off the holy John BP II 366 (LKŽ II 854). (2) Build a cottage in the back J (LKZ XIII 674). In this way, the sentences of indirect non-physical (verbal) causation were adapted to express a more complex situation of reality. The curative verbs were formed by narrowing, specializing the meaning of the ir components, making the deep structure more complicated by the appearance (1) of another subject in the deep, in atypical cases, in the superficial level. ir (2) — o ir ir jo action. 3. Open causative verbs 3.0. In the case of a larger number of cells in a larger area, the area that is closest to the center of ir the cell is called the epithelium. The open causative sentences are connective sentences of the analytic causative construction. ir 3.1. Open causative verbs, in individual words, denoting the ir causing causative action 3.1. The common flexive ide. the tendency of language development to move to iš the į synthetic analytic type indicates the formation of ir perifrastiniy causatives (plg. Lakoff 1972 : 172 —198; Reklaitis 1974: 197—214; Ambrazas 1977: 149 et al.). Causative constructions with auxiliary verbs representing causative suffixes and/or vowel changes are a late ide. a derivative of languages. These constructions clearly distinguish the causing and the caused actions by describing them with separate words, e.g. : Jmdn singen machen —to make something sing K II 40, Jmdn weinen machen —to make something weep K II 40, binden lassen —to bind K. Periphrastic causatives arise in the absence of a class of morphological causatives. Of the three languages discussed here, only one has had causatives of this type. In the prevailing synthetic structure of Latin, the analytic causative construction facere + inf., atypical in the archaic and classical periods, was used by Plautus and was widely used in the postclassical period. In late Latin, another analytic causative construction lazare + inf. (A6pocuMosa 1954: 4—7) appeared. Often these auxiliary verbs have a lexical meaning of active actionmeg, as in lot. facere (plg. TouuaposBa 1974 : 136—155). In causative constructions, the primary jų meaning was apparently "forced to do." It is in this sense that the verbs leten, don, goren, mohen, later get, have were used in English to convey the meaning of causation. (Apuesa 1945 : 60). The clarity of the lexical meaning of auxiliary verbs often allows them to be adapted to the expression of one type of causation, to specialize them. In late Latin, the construction lazare inf. + began to mean passive causation, the causative action of which is "allow, do not ir disturb" etc. Such a meaning of this construction is apparently based on the meanings of the auxiliary verb lazare as "release, allow 116 (rest), ease, weaken, reduce, leave" etc. r There is a close connection between the causative construction lassen + inf. of the German language and the semantics of its auxiliary verb. Some causative constructions can be linked to the meaning of the verb lassen "to order, to urge, to incite", e.g.: schmieden oder hūmmern lassen —forging K, sich einen Anzug machen lassen —to order, to get a suit K II 40, tragen lassen —to wear K, etc. Compared to the Lithuanian translation equivalents and the causation periphrase, this German construction could often be called curative rather than causative. The verb lassen, meaning "to allow", may be associated with passive causation, e.g. tingėdinti caus. trügen sein lassen K, timsodinti caus. leave them in a sluggish state K. On the contrary, more active causation means constructions with machen, e.g.: schweigen machen —to silence K, Jmdn springen machen —what to tell K II 40. Periphrastic causatives correspond to the types of synthetic causative semantics, but are in the process of becoming syntactically open. However, German constructions corresponding to Lithuanian curatives (sich die Haare schneiden lassen K —cut the hair) are also implicit causation periphrases, because the subject mediator is not expressed in the verb, as in Lithuanian curatives. ir 3.2. Open causatives, expressing a causative situation explicitly 3.2.1. Causation is represented ir by compound connective sentences of effect, which have most deep-level components in the superficial level. Like other ir types of connective sentences, they have formed as they have ir rolled out separately. se languages, but have a number of structural ir similarities. The time of formation of Russian conjunctive-effect sentences with the construction of the conjunction of the effect — is quite su accurately determined Tak uTo formed only XII-XVII a. The effect conjunction is not found in earlier written sources (HT PS1 322, 332). The connection between the ir main and secondary focus was weak because there were no response words in the main focus. The conjunctions used or the vo elements of the consequence sentences were connected by conjunctions be (HT PS1 323; ITomerin 1971 : 24—25). The grammatical structure of sentences with a consequential meaning is also not clearly defined in the ancient monuments of the Lithuanian language. They had the conjunctions teip jog, teip kad, jog, kad, teip idant, jeib, jeng (Drotvin 1967 : 65—67). Majority iš jy in the current Lithuanian language are no longer used or used very narrowly in the meaning of consequence. The late formation of this type of sentences is shown by ir the sentences in the ancient writings of Lithuanian and Russian languages, in which the meaning of ir the cause of the effect ir and the purpose of the effect are not clearly distinguished. | In the academic grammar of Lithuanian language, there is not even a distinction between the type of connective-effect sentences, they are considered descriptive sentences: "Descriptive sentences usually denote cause-effect relationships: the main focus highlights 117 a certain phenomenon, the secondary explains, describing the resulting consequences" o jį iš jo (LKG III aka 836). T ni ; 3.2.2. (1) The formation of connective sentences with the meaning of consequence was encouraged by the need to express explicitly subjective objective relationships. ir The semantic subject of the causative situation in the consequence sentence is the syntactic subject of the secondary sentence, in the analytic causative constructions of closed o causatives it has the position ir of the object, e.g. : It rained so much that a § I got soaked right away. — "The 552nd Airborne Division" (PDF). pat on Lan (2) In all three languages the effect in the sentences can be explicitly expressed by the causative action (ar "causative properties") i ntensyvum as. Most sentences of this type have conjunctives that emphasize intensity, strength, abundance, etc.: lie. ir so, such, lot. ita, sic; ejusmėdi, adeo, tantopėre, talis, tantus, tam, hic, (Co6onesckunt is 1948 : 236), Russian. Yes, cTOJIb, 0 Toro, NO TaKOR cCTerIeHH (TPA 11(2) 338). For example: : I was so afraid that I turned around and aš walked away BV III 24 (LKZ manuscript); T a nt us in curia clamor factus est, populus concurreret ut Cic. Worse. 2,47 (Co6onenckutt 1948 : 236) "There was such a shout in the curia that subégo Zmonés”; Obwuee soanenue do maxod cmenenu coobwuaocy Byaanuny, “mo dance on nosabwa wecvacmuom o I'm going u to take you to the beach. Kynpun (TPS 11(2) 339) "The general excitement so affected Bulanin that he even forgot the fateful Zibintg and the future inconveniences associated with it". Intensity can also be shown by the adverb that, which goes with even in the subjunctive sentence or with that in the principal sentence: that... that even, that that... even, that... that... even, e.g. : That I blinded it blinded tg begédj, even began to cry (Drotvinas 1967: 62). (3) In effect sentences, as in analytic causative constructions, the causing and the causing action or state are expressed by separate words. Causative verbs say one action, e.g. busti, to achieve one result busti. Here the causal action and its result are very close or coincide in time: the result must be achieved immediately (I extinguish the candle), or is already reached (I heard a horse). The expression ir of the causative causative action in verbs of different roots allows to say states of actions more distant from each other. ar Often the subject causator does not even foresee the result (i.e. consequence or causal situation) or does not aim, e.g. : jo No need to spin, they play so many fairy tales, that the hand forgets to pest the tail ir K. Donel ‘LKZ XV 671); But the rose ta smelled so delicious, you had to forget all the troubles of this earth ir J. Balé (Balkevičius 1963 : 357). The distance of ir the causing-caused situation is particularly pronounced in the latter example, because the dead subject here cannot aim to foresee any outcome. In order to express such situations, we first need the ar effect sentences. ir Determining both actions of causation with separate verbs allows 118