Derinamojo pažyminio vieta senojoje lietuvių kalboje

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XXXIII (1995) GRAMATIKA IR LEKSIKOLOGIJA VIRGINIJA VASILIAUSKIENĖ THE POSITION OF THE AGREEING ATTRIBUTE IN OLD LITHUANIAN 1. In present-day Lithuanian, the attribute usually precedes the noun it modifies. This position is neutral and unmarked. It is used postpositively when it is intended to be emphasized (Schwentner 1922: 29–30; Durys 1927: 81–82; Meškauskas 1929: 45; Girdenienė 1981: 156, 168; Ambrazas 1986: 96; Грамматика литовского языка 1985: 685–686). It has been observed that in 16th–17th-century texts the postposition of the agreeing attribute is more frequent, but its position relative to the modified word in these texts has not been studied in greater detail; it is only assumed that the attribute is more often shifted after the modified word under the influence of Slavic languages—many religious books were translated from Polish (Palionis 1967: 208; Ambrazas 1982: 107); for Slavic languages, see Мельничук 1958: 37 ff.; Сиротинина 1965: 12 ff.) Typological studies of various languages show that the position of the determiner relative to the determined element is related to the order of the components of the sentence nucleus (Greenberg 1963: 73 ff., Hawkins 1979: 619–620; 629 ff.). Languages in which the attribute is used prepositively are more typically characterized by the SOV word-order pattern. The preposition of adjectival (AdjN), numeral (NumN), and pronominal (PronN) attributes is typologically consistent with this word-order pattern (Greenberg 1963: 73 ff.; Ambrazas 1982: 107). Works on syntactic typology point out that a very strong implication links the attribute with prepositional constructions: if a language has prepositional constructions, its attribute is used postpositively: PraepN → NGen → NAdj (Ambrazas 1986: 99). The SVO word-order pattern characteristic of present-day Lithuanian, as well as the predominance of prepositional constructions, are typologically inconsistent with preposed attributes; it is therefore thought that this pattern may be more recent, having become established in the literary language only relatively recently. It has been observed that the SOV and OV patterns are more frequent in folklore and dialects than in the present-day standard language (Ambrazas 1982: 102 ff.), but more comprehensive data are still needed to substantiate this view. As already mentioned, postposed agreeing attributes are more frequent in 16th–17th-century texts. This led to the hypothesis that in Old Lithuanian, agreeing attributes may have been used more regularly after the noun they modified, and to the linking of this postposition with the SVO and VO word-order patterns. Having studied agreeing attributes in the Samogitian dialect, D. Girdenienė observed that in forms of address and dysphemisms they more often follow the noun they modify. She believes that such constructions may have 124 išlikusi archaiška žodžių tvarka (Girdenienė 1981: 165 tt.). 2. Data from old texts could help determine the direction of change in word order. However, research is complicated by the fact that almost all old texts are translations and have been considerably influenced by other languages. The source selected should be an original, or at least a partly original, work. This article examines the position of the agreeing attribute in K. Sirvydas’s ”Punktai sakymų” and J. Bretkūnas’s ”Postilė”. ”Punktai sakymų” is not a translation but an original work, written first in Lithuanian and only afterward translated into Polish (Zinkevičius 1988: 256). The accompanying translation makes it possible to compare word order in the Lithuanian and Polish parts of the text. J. Bretkūnas’s ”Postilė” is also not a translation but a compilatory work; in preparing it, the author drew on his own sermons and the works of other Protestant theologians (Zinkevičius 1988: 66—67). Neither of these sources is entirely stylistically neutral or unmarked. They are rhetorical texts—collections of sermons. This will be taken into account when using statistical data and attempting to determine the predominant word order in a neutral text (Reklaitis 1982: 371 ff.). 3. To determine the position of the agreeing attribute relative to the modified word, all sentences containing attributes were extracted from the first part of K. Sirvydas’s ”Punktai sakymų” and from 100 pages of J. Bretkūnas’s ”Postilė”. Word order was examined in 3,447 phrases (2,263 from ”Punktai sakymų”, 1,184 from ”Postilė”). Statistical data from both sources show (see Table 1) that preposed agreeing attributes predominate: in ”Punktai sakymų”, 74.3% of all agreeing attributes are used prepositively, while in ”Postilė” the figure is as high as 89.4%1. Table 1 Source | Total number | Preposed attributes, no.% | Postposed attributes, no.% | ”Punktai sakymų” | 2263 | 1682 | 74,3 | 581 | 25,7 | ”Postilė” | 1184 | 1059 | 89,4 | 125 | 10,6 Whether an agreeing attribute occurs before or after the modified word depends directly on which part of speech functions as the attribute (Table 2). In both ”Punktai sakymų” and ”Postilė”, numeral and pronominal attributes are most often used prepositively (in ”Punktai sakymų”, NumN=95,2%, PronN=92,4%; in ”Postilė”, NumN=100%, PronN=93%). The position of adjectival and participial attributes varies more: in ”Punktai sakymų”, 58% of adjectival and 30.2% of participial attributes are used prepositively, while in ”Postilė” the corresponding figures are 86% and 67.8%. As we can see, adjectives and participles in ”Postilė” 1Statistical data will henceforth be presented in the following order: first from ”Punktai sakymų”, and then from ”Postilė”. 125 occurs considerably more often before the modified word. It is useful to discuss separately the position of a modifier expressed by a numeral, pronoun, adjective, or participle. 3.1. As already mentioned, the numeral most often precedes the modified word — PS 95.2%, BrP 100%. Thus we read about King Saul, of whom Scripture says that he reigned over Israel for two years PS 13612–15. On the first day we learn that he was truly born of the Virgin Mary in Bethlehem BrP 9312–14. After the modified word in the “Punktai sayings,” only 4.8% of numeral modifiers occur (4 examples). Two of them are found not in the Punktai themselves, but in Gospel passages, which were apparently translated not by K. Sirvydas himself (Zinkevičius 1988: 256). And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the marketplace... PS 3177–8. And there were six stone water jars set there according to the Jewish purification custom... PS 21410–11. In one case, the numeral is used prepositionally when another modifier occurs before the modified noun (for a fuller discussion of such cases, see 3.3.). Those three stones are the ones... PS 37924–25. The position of the numeral modifier relative to the noun differs in the Lithuanian and Polish texts of the “Punktų sakymai”: in three of the four instances, a postpositive modifier in the Lithuanian text corresponds to a prepositive one in the Polish text. Examples: nine perfect PS 8622–23 — dziewiąći doskonałości; the third hour PS 3177–8 — trzećiey godzinie; six jars PS 21410 — sześć stągiew. 3.2. Pronominal modifiers are used almost always prepositively—PS 92.4%, BrP 93% (Table 2). In both sources examined, they make up more than half of all prepositive modifiers (PS 59.9%, BrP 50.1%; see Table 3). The adjective most often occurs as a postpositive modifier, but it is interesting to note that pronominal modifiers account for as much as 32% of all postpositive modifiers used in “Postilė” (PS 14.3%; see Table 4). Incidentally, the demonstrative pronouns tas, ta, šis, ši, šitas, šita, anas, ana are in some cases used in a way similar to the articles of present-day Western European languages. In such cases, A. Rosinas has proposed calling them “artroids” (Rosinas 1972: 84; 88—89; 1980: 96 ff.; 1988: 59 ff.). However, it is difficult to define more precisely how closely these pronouns resemble articles, so they are not distinguished below from other pronominal modifiers, since the main concern will be to define their position in relation to the noun. The aforementioned demonstrative pronouns make up a substantial proportion of all pronominal modifiers—approximately half (43.7% and 52.5%). The frequency of use of certain modifiers apparently depends on the dialectal features of the text (see Tables 5 and 6). K. Sirvydas uses the pronoun kitas more often than J. Bretkūnas, but the pronoun šis less often. The pronoun tūlas is characteristic only of K. Sirvydas. In J. Bretkūnas’s sermons, kożnas is used instead of kiekvienas; kiekvienas occurs only once. But every man [with] eyes standing after him BrP 8113–14. Only a few pronominal modifiers in both sources are more frequently used postpositively. First of all, these are the pronouns anas, ana (PS 15.9%, BrP 15.4%). 126 Position of the numeral, pronominal, adjectival, and participial modifier Table 2 Source | Numeral modifier: Pre Post% | Pronominal modifier: Pre Post% | Adjectival modifier: Pre Post% | Participial modifier: Pre Post% | “Punktai sakymų” | 80 | 95.2 | 4 | 4.8 | 1008 | 92.4 | 83 | 7.6 | 556 | 58 | 403 | 42 | 39 | 30.2 | 90 | 69.8 | “Postilė” | 82 | 100 | – | – | 530 | 93 | 40 | 7 | 407 | 86 | 66 | 14 | 40 | 67.8 | 19 | 32.2 127 Distribution of prenominal modifiers by part of speech Table 3 Source Total number Number of numeral modifiers% Number of pronominal modifiers% Number of adjectival modifiers% Number of participial modifiers% “Punktai sakymų” 1682 79 4,7 1008 59,9 556 33,1 39 2,3 “Postilė” 1059 82 7,7 530 50,1 407 38,4 40 3,8 Distribution of postpositive modifiers by part of speech Table 4 Source Total number Number of numeral modifiers,% Number of pronominal modifiers,% Number of adjectival modifiers,% Number of participial modifiers,% “Punktai sakymų” 581 5 0,9 82 14,3 403 69,4 90 15,5 “Postilė” 125 — — 40 32 66 52,8 19 15,2 128 and pats, pati (10.8% and 12.2%). They tend to be used postpositively, apparently to emphasize the noun more strongly. Table 5 The ratio of preposition and postposition of the pronominal modifiers used more frequently in K. Sirvydas’s ”Punktai sakymų” Pronominal modifier | Used prepositionally | Used postpositionally | Pre% | Post% | Tas 384 97 12 3 | Visas 192 97 6 3 | Kitas 123 99.2 1 0.8 | Tūlas 72 75.8 23 24.2 | Visoks 65 95.6 3 4.4 | Anas 37 84.1 7 15.9 | Toks 28 90.3 3 9.7 | Pats 33 89.2 4 10.8 | Kiekvienas 21 91.3 2 8.7 | Šis 17 100 — — | Koks 2 11.1 16 88.9 ...thus we shall see k a r a l i s t e y a n o y God the Father/ the Holy Spirit and the Son. Diewo PS 337₁₆–₁₉. Lutheru ir Kalwinu eldideles ne turi stimmiko C h r i s t a u s p a t i e s/ ney kitu nuo jo įstatu PS 275₃₁ – 276₁–₃. Er pawirsta d ů n a n n a, peršėknota ing kuna BrP 66₅–₆. It can also be observed that in ”Punktai sakymų” the postposition of these pronouns is more frequent before a pause. This is related to the fact that in Lithuanian the penultimate position is more strongly emphasized (Girdenienė 1971: 41; 1981: 162–163). Thus the soul does so/ and with that sleep sleeps/ which speaks thus about itself PS 284₂₇–₂₉. First, the sign is the z i m e a n a/ which shows what is PS 190₁₆–₁₇....everyone knows how to row into the kingdom of heaven... but sails straight into p r a g a r u p a t i PS 276₅–₆. The postpositively used pronoun pats, pati does not always form an attributive phrase: it can also be related to a noun in an appositive relation (Valackienė 1984: 117–118; 123). This and some other postpositively used pronouns (visas, visa, tas, ta) refer once again to the entity denoted by the noun: 129 Table 6 Ratio of preposed to postposed pronominal modifiers used more frequently in J. Bretkūnas’s “Postilė” Pronominal modifier Used prepositively Used postpositively Pr % Po % That 121 98,4 2 1,6 This 111 96,5 4 3,5 All 105 96,3 4 3,7 Itself 36 87,8 5 12,2 This 35 100 — — Other 30 96.8 1 3.2 Each 17 94.4 1 5.6 That 11 84.6 2 15,4 Koks 8 32 17 68 And Christ himself speaks thus BrP 72₁. Therefore a difficult day of judgment will come even for God himself BrP 99₁₉–₂₀. For all people are true servants of God PS 322₆–₈. Death and the earth will consume all the dead people BrP₁₉–₂₀. For into the souls of those who had first lived in the body, he was brought back by God's power PS 88₂–₆. More frequently than the pronouns mentioned earlier, the pronoun tūlas is used postpositively; recently it has been proposed that it be regarded as an adjective (Rosinas 1986: 30 ff.). Tūlas’s postpositive use, in terms of frequency (23%), resembles that of some adjectives (cf. baisus — 23.5%, geras — 24.6%), but, as with the pronouns mentioned, its postposition emphasizes the modified word—the noun: Thus [there are] paths along which stars shine brightly and many diseases PS 355₁–₂. In the soul there are many powers: memory, human free will; and again, there are many kinds of learning there PS 292₃–₆. Tūlas postposition has another characteristic: this pronoun occurs before a pause after the word it modifies even more often than anas (see also the preceding examples): There are wars, famine, plague, and many diseases PS 260₂₉–₃₀. The position of the prepositively used pronoun tūlas in the sentence is not defined in this way: They would hold feasts or banquets, preparing many dishes and drinks PS 227₅–₈. This shows that God... makes many things in heaven and on earth PS 96₁₀–₁₅. 130 Among the other pronouns, the pronoun koks has a strikingly different position. It occurs after the modified word even more often than before it (PS 88.9%, BrP 68%). The son takes the wealth of his father not for any works whatsoever, but because he is a son PS 323₃₀ – 324₁–₃. ...and thus of the other truths about him we grasp little by little, and as if through a small opening we extract some gold for ourselves PS 209₂–₆. When a person of some sort lays or sets a table, invites some guests, or wishes to eat with his family BrP 64₂₆–65₁–₂. Then Christ gives us his body and blood as a sign of some grace BrP67₂₀–₂₁. First, the indefinite meaning of this pronoun may have influenced this usage, since it corresponds to the currently predominant pronoun some. Second, koks is used only postpositionally in combinations such as I wonder what kind, any kind, hardly any kind, and so on, where it has an appositional function similar to that of the already-mentioned self. This suggests that the postposition of the indefinite pronoun koks is a relic, and that constructions in which this pronoun occurs enclitically after a more prominent noun have preserved an older state of affairs. This pronoun is most often used prepositionally when the modified noun has other modifiers as well: ...for your ears, those who have some thoughts about God PS 173₃–₆. I am neither Christ nor Elijah, nor some other prophet BrP 40₂₃–₂₄. From the New Testament... we heard that Christ was truly... born in Bethlehem, and like any ordinary child was wrapped in swaddling clothes BrP 70₁–₆. The position of pronouns may differ between the Lithuanian text of the “Punktai sayings” and the Polish translation: this collection of sermons contains 9.6% of combinations in which a pronoun that follows the modified word in the Lithuanian text (NPron) precedes it in the Polish text (PronN), e.g.: every creation PS 79₂₃–₂₄ — każdego stworzenia; inner parts themselves PS 87–8 — samych wnętrzności; these days PS 370₂₂–₂₃ — te dni; such happiness PS 38₂₇ — takie szczęście; all the seas PS 209₁₀–₁₁ — wszystkiego morza. There are very few combinations in which the Lithuanian text has PronN and the Polish text NPron (0.8% of all prepositionally used pronouns), e.g.: that holy thing PS 108₂₆ — swiata tego; that word PS 341₂₈ — słowo to; all the people PS 358₂₀ — lud wszytek. Therefore, the pronoun’s postposition cannot be explained by the influence of Polish. Emphasizing particular textual units was important to the authors because the texts themselves (collections of sermons) were intended for oral delivery. We sometimes also see variation in position within the same sentence. For both all people and all angels would wish to know when or at what time the Lord Jesus must come a second time from heaven to judge all people BrP 21₉–₁₂. This way was not devised by any ordinary person, nor by any great doctor, nor by the Pope, nor by any emperor, nor by an Angel of God BrP 63₂₂–₂₅. Even the same pronoun with the same noun is often used in both orders, e.g.: for each thing PS 99₂₆–₂₇ — thing for each PS 99₃₁–100₁; on these days PS 365₁₅ — days these PS 370₂₂–₂₃; of every kind 131 with wealth PS 378₂₄ — with every kind of wealth PS 376₆–₇; a prophet of some kind BrP 42₂₅ — a prophet of that kind BrP 40₂₄; Christ himself BrP 41₁–₂ — Christ himself BrP9₁₄; all people BrP 10₂₁ — people all BrP 19₂₀, etc. Thus, pronoun postposition is apparently a phenomenon characteristic of Lithuanian. The pronominal modifier is used postpositively to emphasize the noun; its postposition may also have been conditioned by sentence intonation. In addition, a pronoun follows a noun when it is linked to it in an appositional relation. 3.3 Adjectives are used postpositively more often than numerals and pronouns (PS 42%, BrP 14%). The frequency of numeral and pronoun postposition is the same in both sources, whereas that of adjectives differs considerably (difference: 28%). Adjectival modifiers are not very diverse, and a large proportion of them recur constantly. This makes it possible to identify differing usage tendencies among various lexemes (see Tables 7 and 8). Table 7 The ratio of preposed to postposed use of the most frequent adjectival modifiers in K. Sirvydas’s ”Punktuose sakymų” Adjectival modifier Preposed uses Postposed uses Pre% Post% Great 104 67,5 50 32,5 Good 49 75,4 16 24,6 Eternal 41 62,1 25 37,9 Small 26 81,3 6 18,7 True 26 65 14 35 Angry 24 68,6 11 31,4 Heavy 24 66,7 12 33,3 Holy 20 16,7 100 83,3 Tall 14 61 9 39 Terrible 13 76,5 4 23,5 Old 11 68,8 5 31,2 Dear 9 39 14 61 In K. Sirvydas’s ”Punktuose sakymų”, only two adjectives occur postpositively more often than prepositively — dear (Post 61%) and holy (Post 83,3%). In eight of the fourteen occurrences, the adjective dear modifies the same noun — stone dear: 132 Those things... are called gold/ silver/ pearls/ p r e c i o u s s t o n e s/ wealth/ treasure PS 366₁₁–₁₈. I loved your commandments more than gold and topaz, p r e c i o u s s t o n e PS 354₂₂. The adjective holy usually follows the head noun in various terminologized combinations: holy scripture, Holy Spirit, John the Baptist, Holy Church and so on. The postposition of this adjective was apparently influenced by other languages (Latin, Polish), from which, or through which, these sacralized ecclesiastical phrases came, with the corresponding order of constituents (cf. Latin spiritus sanctus, Polish duch święty and so on). Thus, when John the Baptist himself cried out, he responded to the voice no less than those to whom he called PS 139₂₄–₂₇. To him alone was the Spirit given, that is, the gifts of the H o l y S p i r i t without measure PS 178₁₉–₂₃. The writers will be the true heart of man himself... they will be h o l y a n g e l s/ they will be devils/ and there will be other creatures PS 5₁₇–₂₅. The prepositional frequency of all other more commonly occurring adjectival modifiers fluctuates between approximately 60% and 75%. In the “Postilė,” the adjective dear is used postpositionally somewhat more often (Po 25%), especially when it occurs together with an invariable pronominal modifier: Table 8 The ratio of preposed and postposed position of the more frequently used adjectival modifiers in J. Bretkūnas’s “Postilė” Adjectival modifier | Preposed occurrences | Postposed occurrences | Pr% | Po% | Holy 87 88.8 11 11.2 | Great 60 89.6 7 10.4 | Just 32 100 — — | Eternal 31 86.1 5 13.9 | Poor 28 90.3 3 9.7 | True 20 83.3 4 16.7 | Dear 16 88.9 2 11.1 | Good 15 88.2 2 11.6 | Merry 10 91 1 9 | Dear 9 75 3 25 And may many people, having considered themselves dear to God, be saved forever BrP 13₂₀–₂₂. Now, protect us, God the Father, through Jesus Christ, your d e a r S o n BrP 6₉₈–₉. 133 The frequency range of all the other adjectival modifiers more often used prepositively in the “Postilė” varies between 83% and 91%. Neither source contains an adjectival modifier used more frequently that is exclusively prepositive or exclusively postpositive. The position of the adjective relative to the noun generally coincides in the Lithuanian and Polish parts of the text of “Punktų sakymai”. There are very few discrepancies. Constructions in which the Lithuanian part has AdjN and the Polish part NAdj account for 2.7%; for example: durmo wiro PS 321₃ — męża głupiego; umżinu iżganimu PS 144₂₄ — zbawienie wieczne; biauriu palaydu PS 345₂₉–₃₀ — brźydkich rozpust; paganiszko dziewayčio PS 42₂₉–₃₀ — bożka poganskiego; wienatiji Sunu PS 66₂₇ — Syna iednorodzonego and so on. Constructions in which the Lithuanian part has NAdj and the Polish part AdjN account for 4%: gieydulu piktu 232₂ — złych żądź; luosibes piktos PS 71₉–₁₀ — złey wolności; szwyntibes retos PS 75₇–₈ rzatkey swątobliwosći; warnu uodu PS 85₂₈ — czarna wrona; pagundimu sunkiu PS 24₂₅–₂₆ — ciężkich pokus and so on. These discrepancies show that the prepositive adjective in the Lithuanian part of the text is very rarely repositioned in translation into Polish (2.7%); by contrast, NAdj is translated as AdjN somewhat more often (4%). Thus, postposition of the adjective cannot be explained by the influence of Polish. In the first Lithuanian grammar, D. Kleinas wrote: “Lithuanian adjectives, like Latin and Greek ones, agree in gender, number, and case. They differ from German in that Lithuanian adjectives stand both before and after their nouns. Thus, one could correctly say: piemū geras ir geras piemū” (Pirmoji lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1957: 512). The fact that using an adjective before or after the modified noun could be motivated is suggested by variation in its position (similarly to a pronominal modifier). An adjective is often used in both positions with the same noun; for example: aukszto kalno PS 377₁₀ — kalno aukszto PS 310₃₁; brungiu prekiu PS 365₂₀ — prekiu brungiu PS 366₈; didžiu rupeščiu PS 144₂₆–₂₇ — rupeščiu didžiu PS 134₂–₃; piktus Anielus PS 373₂₁–₂₂ — anielus piktus PS 259₂₃; tikru Diewu PS 30₂₂ — Diewu tikru PS 62₁₈; amsžinu karaliumi BrP 9₂₁–₂₂ — karalumi amsžinu BrP 12₅; czistos panos BrP 6₁₇ — Pannos czistos BrP 16₁₂; grieschnoio szmogaus BrP 8₉₈ — szmogaus grieschnoio BrP 7₆₂₀; prastas szmogus BrP 4₆₁₈ — szmogus prastas BrP 6₃₂₂, and so on. Even within the same sentence, the adjective’s position varies: Tays žodžeys žada Diewas iż g i m i n e s a u k s z t o s karalu/ kuriu wadina a u k s z t u C e d r u/ duot Christu aba Mesiaśiu/ kuris iż pradžios bus m a ž a s z a k i e l e/ iauna/ tayba/ a potam užaugs C e d r u tabay d i d ž i u PS 311₆–₁₅. Wisas s w i e t a s d i d i s ira stebuklingas/ bet ir m a s ž a s s w i e t a s/ tay ira žmogus/ kuriami surakino aba sukrowe Diewas d i d i s s w i e t u/ ir padare iż sumbariomis d i d ž i o s w i e t o/ tot stebuklingiesnis ira PS 176₁₅–₁₄. Maria ira m e r g a c z i s t a/ pirm usžigimimo/ patime usžigimimme ir passiliekt c z i s t a m e r g a/ po pagimdimo sawa BrP 57₁₉–₂₀. Thus, the data cited above show that both preposition and postposition of the adjective relative to the modified word are features of Old Lithuanian. It is therefore important to determine when an adjectival agreeing modifier occurs before the noun- 134 noun, and when it is used after it. Here it is useful to draw attention to several cases: 3.3.1. An adjectival attribute preceding the noun is usually unemphasized: He shows great mercy to those who, while enduring hardship, are tormented and beaten in the heights PS 562₆—₅₇₂. Just as no one should grieve on account of his own low birth, so likewise no one should exalt himself on account of his own noble birth BrP ₈₂₆–₇. 3.3.2. An adjectival preposed attribute is most emphatic when it is separated from its head noun by another word (this is the so-called distant preposition; see section 4). Such an attribute, according to D. Girdenienė (1981: 159), usually conveys essential information: ...and this often happens to those/ who do not so greatly guard their own heart PS 200₈–₁₁. ...so that the Lord God the Father may give to Christ, his Son, good blessing BrP ₄₁₈–₂₀. 3.3.3. The adjective is most often used after the word it modifies in order to expressively emphasize certain words or word groups in the text and to highlight the rhetorical intonation and rhythm of the sentence (Степанов 1989:228). In some cases, postposition may also have been conditioned by the grammatical structure of the sentence or by the influence of other languages. 3.3.3.1. An adjective following the word it modifies may itself be emphasized: He gives daily upon the table living bread PS 227₁₄–₁₆. On hard stonethe word that was spoken fell PS 343₉–₁₁. The wise judge judges his people PS 22₁₄–₁₆. D. Girdenienė has also observed that when an adjective is shifted after the word it modifies, it is highlighted and more strongly emphasized (Girdenienė 1981: 159). 3.3.3.2. An adjective may follow the noun it modifies when the latter also has a pronominal preposed attribute: If your son is a king... a great thing, how much greater it is to have the highest of the majesties as Father of those majesties PS 103₁₅–₂₃. For the sea is vast; one must search it for pearls and precious stones of every holy goodness PS 189₂₁–₂₅. That cat is a stubborn beast PS 278₁₀–₁₁. The whole world is great and wondrous PS 176₁₆–₁₇. Constructions of this type are characteristic of only one of the sources examined—”Punktams sakymų”. 3.3.3.3. The adjectival concordial attribute is also often used postpositively in constructions of more complex structure: head noun-possessive pronoun-adjectival attribute: Finally, the Lord Jesus Christ... showed his obedience, which he had spoken of, and his divine works BrP ₆₁₉–₂₀. On the third day, the Holy Angel himself announced to the God the Father through his own holy angel the birth of his son BrP ₁₈–₁₉. ...thus the Lord, while living on earth, had within himself his most holy and joyful soul 135 ...while gazing at the sweetness of God PS 309₁₅–₂₀....that bread is the most holy sacrament of the altar PS 227₁₈–₂₀. In “Punktuose sakymų,” the adjective šventas (holy) most often serves as the agreeing modifier in such compound constructions, e.g.: akinu szwenčiausiu PS 364₈; Bažnicia io szwenta PS 203₂₃–₂₄; koiose io szwenčiausiose PS 337₉. 3.3.3.4. Very often, the adjective is used postpositively at the end of a sentence or in the middle of a sentence before some pause, usually indicated by a punctuation mark. This postpositive position of the modifier is characteristic of both sources examined. And such wisdom is death and d e s t r u c t i o n to the follower of the world PS 382₇–₁₀. The Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, is for us a l i v i n g b o o k PS 18₁₃–₁₆. There are many h e a v y s i n s, which a person realizes only in their own heart PS 147₂₁–₂₄. Since he is our k i n g o f m e r c y, who justifies us before the eyes of his heavenly Father and saves us eternally BrP 12₄–₇. And because of this the C h u r c h o f t h e c h r i s t i a n s sings: The blessed Child was born for us BrP 71₂₃–₂₅. It was also noted that the adjectival modifier tends to follow the modified word when, among several coordinated sentence constituents, only one has that modifier: He tears his hands, because on those days he abandons g o o d d e e d s, churches, prayers, the hearing of holy mass PS 364₁₇–₂₁. Those righteous ones will be true to the person’s heart... they will be h o l y a n g e l s, they will be devils, and there will be other creatures as well PS 5₁₇–₂₅. Then he can take nothing else except bread and wine; that is, food and o r d i n a r y d r i n k BrP 65₂–₄. An adjective before a pause is usually not emphasized. Compared with the same position at the beginning of a phrase, the final position in the phrase is generally unmarked, while the topic center in spoken language is most often in the penultimate position (Girdenienė 1981: 161–162). Thus, when an adjective occurs before a pause, the modified noun is emphasized. 3.3.3.5. In J. Bretkūnas’s “Postilė,” an indefinite pronoun koks (some kind of) can separate a postpositive adjective from the modified word: ...not looking at precious water with a keen eye, but at a donkey, and at all kinds of errors and indulgences BrP 9₂–₃. Nor can they tolerate that it is called such a precious Child, not ⟨in⟩ any little place of great esteem BrP 10₂₁–₂₂. 3.3.3.6. In the writings of K. Sirvydas and J. Bretkūnas, the postposition of the agreeing modifier is more frequent when the text recounts the content of Holy Scripture or other ecclesiastical works: And I will take that high cedar from the heart and place it above the highest branches; I will break off its small twig and plant it on a high and sturdy mountain. On the high mountain of Israel I will plant it, and it will sprout and bear fruit; it will become a great cedar PS 310₂₅–311₃. Today the Savior is born for you.... Christ is incarnate through the Holy Spirit from Mary, the Chaste Virgin. And because of this the C h u r c h o f t h e c h r i s t i a n s sings: the B l e s s e d C h i l d 136 that/ is our entrance. Also. Our kindred, born to us/ from an untouched girl. And Christ himself speaks thus/ Thus God loved the world/ that he gave his only Son BrP 71₂₀–72₂. In this case, the position of the agreeing modifier may have been influenced by Latin or Polish ecclesiastical works and by rhetorical motives—the aim of highlighting and emphasizing certain concepts in sacred texts. 3.3.3.7. The adjective more often follows the head noun when it forms a terminologized phrase with it: szmogus grieschnas BrP 68₃; Basznicze krikschczonischka BrP 71₂₄; Dwasia szwunta PS 175₃–₄, and so on. In corresponding Latin and Polish phrases, the adjective follows the head word in similar cases, so the influence of those languages is also possible here. As already mentioned, in K. Sirvydas’s ”Punktai sakymų” the adjective follows the head word considerably more often than in J. Bretkūnas’s ”Postilė” (PS 42%, BrP 14%). This marked difference probably arose for several reasons. K. Sirvydas made extensive use of rhetorical forms of expression in his sermons. His sermons were written in an ornate, expressive style characteristic of the Baroque era, and therefore contain many instances of inversion. Many greatly help those good ways/ which walk through the sea PS 279₁–₃. The fire of wicked desires burns in everyone PS 232₁–₃. J. Bretkūnas’s sermons were written in a simpler, less elevated and emotional style, and employ fewer rhetorical devices. The postposition of the adjective in ”Punktai sakymų” may also have been encouraged by the influence of Polish. Since in German the adjectival modifier normally precedes the head word, German could not have directly influenced the postpositional use of the adjective in ”Postilė.” It may also be assumed that the difference in adjective position was conditioned by the authors’ dialects. 3.4. The participial agreeing modifier is used postpositionally even more often than the adjectival one—in ”Punktai sakymų” its postposition is predominant, at 69.8%, while in ”Postilė” it reaches 32.2%. The participial modifier follows the head word in cases similar to those involving adjectives: The treasure of our salvation is called a treasure hidden beneath/ with pearls/ with precious stones PS 186₂₀–₂₅. The fire of those burning ones scorches the wound PS 240₁–₃. Thus the sons of Heli, spoiled, became ugly PS 212₂₆–₂₈. Other mothers gave birth with unspeakable pains, but Lady Maria gave birth to her son with unspeakable joy PS 169₂₀–₂₄....look here, so that you too may hear the word of God and not forget it BrP 99₁₁–₁₃. But now, Lord God, save the weary people BrP 91₁₈–₁₉. He sent me... to heal the brokenhearted BrP 34₂₀–₂₂. On the day you eat from the forbidden tree, you shall die BrP 73₁–₂. Postpositional use is more common with polysyllabic participles (three or more syllables). In ”Punktai sakymų,” a considerable group of such postpositional modifiers consists of participles with the prefixes ne-, nu-: nemirsztuntis, nepermamomas, neviensituntis, neiszmanuntis, neiszsakomas, neissemtamas, nukriziavotas, numiletas, nurimstantis. 4. The agreeing modifier can also occupy a non-adjacent position, that is, it can be separated from the noun by other words. The distal preposition— 137 ingly 5.1% of the preposed modifiers used in “Punktuose sakymų” and 2% in “Postilėje” (see Table 9). Cases are not considered discontinuous if the agreeing modifier is separated from the modified noun by the genitive of a non-agreeing modifier or by some other agreeing modifier, that is, when all these modifiers belong to the same modified word. In cases of discontinuous position, the agreeing modifier and the modified word form a framing construction. Discontinuous preposition is most characteristic of adjectival modifiers (PS 8.8%, BrP 3.4%); numeral modifiers (PS 5.1%, BrP 2.4%) and pronominal modifiers (PS 3.2%, BrP 1%) occur discontinuously less often, while discontinuous preposition is not characteristic of participial modifiers—only one example was found (see Table 10). A preposed agreeing modifier may be separated from its modified word by a verb, a verb together with its dependents, an adverb, a non-agreeing modifier expressed by a prepositional phrase, or a locative. In both sources examined, constructions in which a verb—alone or with its dependents—falls within the frame account for almost two thirds. One must know the number and gravity of sins at confession in the Sacrament of the Priesthood, so that he may impose as great a penance as he can PS 146₂₁–₂₇. How, then, do you discern the far more dreadful torments of the damned, who have trampled upon the Son of God PS 156₁₈–₂₁. For between those two thefts there is no small difference... since the theft of a sacred thing carries wickedness within itself PS 147₁₀–₁₅. And many people prayed to God at that time, that the Lord God the Father might grant a good blessing to Christ, his own Son BrP 4₁₇–₂₀. Here we hear of Christ first not as proud, but as occupying a humble position BrP 605–6. An adverb can be framed in a similar way: After confession, one must give thanks to God for the very great and gracious forgiveness PS 249₈–₁₁. This abandonment by God, by which the Father and the Holy One abandon him, occurs for two particular reasons PS 199₃₀ – 200₃. Let us learn from this question, so that all may act thus... every man, then, a young man and a father or guardian BrP 32₂₀–₃₀. Other cases of discontinuous preposition are highly varied; most often, long word groups occur between the agreeing modifier and the noun, for example: Christ the Lord wishes to have every single one of us obedient PS 50₁₀–₁₃. No one can say how difficult those things are for the powerful to do, on account of their sins PS 161₂₇–₃₀. The Virgin Mary’s house, how holy, how good the Lord God had made it from the beginning for humankind BrP 99₂₃–₂₆. In “Punktuose sakymų,” some non-agreeing modifiers expressed by prepositional phrases and the locative occupy an unusual position: they intervene between the agreeing modifier and the modified word:...but great or broad, or on the rivers, and of good gifts PS 301₂₈–₃₁. Wisa kia rpetikib ybar- 138 Table 9 Contact and discontinuous prenominal position of the agreeing attribute Source | Contact prenominal position of the agreeing attribute: instances |% | Discontinuous prenominal position of the agreeing attribute: instances |% | “Punktai sakymų” | 1596 | 84.9 | 86 | 5.1 | “Postilė” | 1037 | 98 | 22 | 2 Table 10 Discontinuous prenominal position by part of speech Source | Pronominal discontinuous attributes: instances |% | Numeral discontinuous attributes: instances |% | Adjectival discontinuous attributes: instances |% | Participial discontinuous attributes: instances |% | “Punktai sakymų” | 32 | 3.2 | 4 | 5.1 | 49 | 8.8 | 1 | 2.6 | “Postilė” | 5 | 1 | 2 | 2.4 | 14 | 3.4 | – | – 139 n i u/ with doubt and through a difficult question or questiiu/ elucidation PS 306₅–₈. Another great work, a warm-heartedness or zeal/ desire for the flames to appear PS 330₂₈–₃₁. Their position before the noun is marked. 5. In Proto-Indo-European and the old Indo-European languages, various unstressed or weakly stressed little words attached themselves to stressed words with independent lexical meaning and occupied the second position in the sentence (Wackernagel 1953; Степанов 1989: 225). In “Punktai sakymų,” particles jau, tik, vėl (12 examples) can attach to the agreeing attribute or the modified noun; occasionally an adverb tada (3 examples), or a pronoun tai (1 example). The particles most often attach to a pronoun or adjective occurring at the beginning of the sentence: And these other creatures do not possess [it]/ the very same human being and the Angel have freedom PS 325₂–₅. By the same faith I will speak, I shall be saved PS 258₈–₉. Thus the power of God and confession is called Christus PS 341₁₈–₂₀. What is the end of the world is very short PS 242₃₀–₃₁. Evil little things are sins lighter in nature PS 314₂₇–₂₉. The adverb tada attaches to a noun occurring at the beginning of the sentence: Jonas then, having been taken prisoner, did not allow himself to be chosen as Messiah PS 73₈–₁₀. Then, most holily, the lady and Joseph, because they cared for him well, were astonished PS 190₄–₇. The pronoun tai is attached to an adjective: I cannot satisfy myself with something so small PS 270₃₂–271₂. When the aforementioned clitics intervene between the attribute and the modified word, the latter are more strongly emphasized. Here, changes in Lithuanian word order play a role similar to that found in many related languages during earlier periods of their development. CONCLUSIONS In ”Punktuose sakymų” and ”Postileje”, the prenominal position of the agreeing attribute predominates (PS 74.3%, BrP 89.4%). The use of an agreeing attribute before or after the modified word depends directly on which part of speech functions as the attribute. Numerals and pronouns are most often used prenominally (”Punktuose sakymų” NumN 95.2%, PronN 92.4%; ”Postileje” NumN 100%, PronN 93%). Adjectival and participial attributes are more often used postnominally: in ”Punktuose sakymų”, 42% of adjectival and 69.8% of participial attributes occur postnominally, while in ”Postileje” the corresponding figures are 14% and 32.2%. The postposition of pronominal and adjectival attributes cannot be explained solely by the influence of other languages. A pronominal attribute is used postnominally to emphasize the noun. Its postposition, like that of an adjective, may have been determined by sentence intonation. In some cases, a pronoun following the modified noun is linked to it appositionally. An adjective is used after the modified word to emphasize certain words or groups of words in the text more expressively. An adjectival attribute often follows the modified word at the end of a sentence or before a pause in the sentence. 140 The ordering of components in some sacralized ecclesiastical phrases may have been influenced by other languages (Latin, Polish). In addition, adjectival attributes are used postnominally more often when the text recounts the contents of other ecclesiastical works. An adjective may follow the modified noun when the latter also has some other prenominal or postnominal attribute. In „Punktuose sakymų“, adjectives follow the modified word considerably more often than in „Postilėje“, perhaps because K. Sirvydas made more extensive use of rhetorical devices characteristic of the Baroque era. An agreeing attribute may occur in a non-adjacent position. This is more characteristic of „Punktams sakymų“. In the case of a discontinuous position, the agreeing attribute and the modified word form a frame construction. A prenominal agreeing attribute is most often separated from its modified word by a verb. Enclitic particles jau tik vėl occupy the second position in the sentence; they attach to more strongly stressed words (the agreeing attribute or the modified word). LITERATŪRA 1. Am brazas V. Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodžių tvarkos modeliai. — Lietuvos mokslų akademijos darbai. A Ser. T. 3(96), 1986, p. 92—102. 2. Ambrazas V. Žodžių tvarka ir baltų kalbų sakinio tipo rekonstrukcija. — Baltistica. T. 18(2), 1982, p. 100—118. 3. Durys M. Lietuvių kalbos sintaksė. K., 1927. 4. Girdenienė D. Aktualioji skaida ir jos vaidmuo bei reiškimo būdai lietuvių kalboje. — Kalbotyra, T. 22(1), 1971, p. 35—47. 5. Girdenienė D. Derinamojo pažyminio vieta tarminėje ir bendrinėje lietuvių kalboje. — Baltistica. T. 17(2), 1981, p. 156—169. 6. Greenberg J. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. — Universals of language. Cambridge, 1963, p. 73—114. 7. Hawkins J.A. Implicational universals as predictors of word order change. — Linguistics. V. 55, N 3, 1979, p. 618—648. 8. Meškauskas P. Lietuvių kalbos sintaksė. K., 1929. 9. Palionis J. Lietuvių literatūrinė kalba XVI—XVII a. V., 1967. 10. Park F. Typology and word order change. — Linguistics. V. 18, 1980, p. 269—288. 11. Pirmoji lietuvių kalbos gramatika. V., 1957. 12. Reklaitis J.K. The PIE word order controversy and word order in Lithuanian. — Papers from the 3rd International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam, 1982, p. 369—385. 13. Rosinas A. Žymimasis artikelis lietuvių kalbos tarmėse ir senuosiuose raštuose. — Kalbotyra. T. 24(1), 1972, p. 83—90. 14. Rosinas A. Dar kelios mintys dėl baltų kalbų artikelio, arba artroido. — Kalbotyra. T. 31(1), 1980, p. 96—98. 15. Rosinas A. Dėl tūlas statuso ir kilmės. — Mūsų kalba, 1986, Nr. 2, p. 30—33. 16. Rosinas A. Baltų kalbų įvardžiai. V., 1988. 17. Schwentner E. Die Wortfolge im Litauischen. Heidelberg, 1922. 18. Wackernagel J. Kleine Schriften. Bd.1. Göttingen, 1953. 19. Valeckienė A. Lietuvių kalbos gramatinė sistema. Giminės kategorija, V., 1984. 20. Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių kalbos istorija. T. 3. V., 1988. 21. Грамматика литовского языка. В., 1985. 141 22. Мельничук А.С. Порядок слов и синтагматическое членение предложения в славянских языках. Киев, 1958. 23. Сиротинина О.Б. Порядок слов в русском языке. Саратов, 1965. 24. Степанов Ю.С. Индоевропейское предложение. М., 1989. THE POSITION OF ATTRIBUTES IN CONCORD IN OLD LITHUANIAN Summary Attributes of Modern Lithuanian precede the noun. They follow the noun only in the case of inverted word order. In Old Lithuanian the attribute followed the noun more often. Modern Lithuanian has the SVO order of the major sentence constituents. By implicational universals of Greenberg if any language has the SVO word order, the genetive and the adjective follow the noun. Modern Lithuanian is inconsistent with these implicational universals. The article deals with the position of the attribute in concord in K. Sirvydas ”Punktai sakymų” and J. Bretkūnas ”Postilė”. Statistical data show the dominance of prepositional attribute (PS 74,3%, BrP 89,4%). The pronoun and the numeral precede the noun more often than adjective (in ”Punktai sakymų” Adj N 58%; in ”Postilė” AdjN 86%). The postposition of attributes in Old Lithuanian writings can’t be explained only as a result of the influence of Slavonic languages. A pronoun follows the noun in such cases: when the noun is stressed; when the pronoun is connected with the noun by appositional relations; it can follow the noun as a result of the intonation and rhythm of the sentence. An adjective goes after the noun in such cases: when the adjective is stressed; when it is used in constructions with other attributes (pronoun or genetive); when it goes at the end of the sentence or before the pause. The position of the adjective in some frozen constructions of religious phraseology can be the result of Polish and Latin influence. The position of adjectives can be motivated by genre and style, e.g. postpositional adjectives in ”Punktai sakymų” are more often used for rhetorical reasons. The usage of enclitical words in the position between the attribute and the noun is being explained in connection with the law of Wackernagel. 142