LIETUVIŲ KALBOS SANDAROS TYRINĖJIMAI

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVI (1987)

REGINA DILIENĖ

MORE CHARACTERISTIC STRUCTURAL MODELS OF THE SIMPLE SENTENCE IN J. BALČIKONIS’S TRANSLATIONS OF H. C. ANDERSEN’S “FAIRY TALES”

In J. Balčikonis’s translations of fairy tales, a treasure trove of beautiful, living folk language, the researcher finds much of interest not only in the lexicon but also in the syntax. In this article, we attempt to survey the syntax of J. Balčikonis’s translations of H. C. Andersen’s “Fairy Tales”¹ from one perspective: which extended structural models of simple sentences are most characteristic.

We shall consider a structural model of a simple sentence to be an abstract syntactic pattern according to which an individual minimal, relatively complete sentence can be constructed². However, the question arises as to how to determine that necessary minimum. According to the Academic Grammar of the Russian Language, the formal minimal structure of a sentence includes one or two constituents (which usually form the predicative center of the sentence)³, whereas the semantic minimal structure also includes the object of strong government and the subject of a state / object of an action under strong government⁴. It has not yet been clarified whether this criterion is sufficient for constructing minimal sentence-structure schemas. An examination of concrete linguistic facts might shed some light on which structural models actually operate in language, and this would also help establish the principles for distinguishing them.

The examples of actual language used in this study were collected from J. Balčikonis’s translations of H. C. Andersen’s “Fairy Tales”.

Already the first investigations of the translation make it clear that a substantial “shortening” of the sentence’s structural formula does not always make it possible to discern even significant differences between linguistic phenomena. It would therefore be expedient to distinguish structural formulas at least at two levels: minimal (the highest level of abstraction) and extended structures. The scope of an extended sentence model is greater than that of minimal-structure models, since its composition includes not only obligatory but also facultative actants⁵; in some models, these will include, for example, adverbial-case forms and prepositional-case forms, the infinitive of verbs expressing purpose, and so on. Extended-structure models represent predicate structure more clearly, and this often has considerable significance for sentence semantics. It is also important that, by summarizing the essential differences between extended structures, minimal structural sentence types can be distinguished. For example, this is how predicates of motion and localization are distinguished, since sentences whose composition includes

¹ Andersenas H. K. Pasakos. — V., 1966.

² Русская грамматика. — М., 1980, с. 92.

³ Ten pat, p. 97.

⁴ Ten pat, p. 25.

⁵ Степанова М. Д., Гельбиг Г. Части речи и проблема валентности в современном немецком языке. — М., 1978, с. 172—177.

44

include directional motion predicates, in an expanded structure, have a specified point of reference (in the broad sense) /see example a)/, while sentences with predicates of localization have a specified location of the state or event /see example b)/. E.g.: a) Thus they flew into the land of the Turks 95; b) Once, beside a large mirror on a little table stood a shepherdess and a chimney sweep 23.

Expanded structural sentence patterns also help to some extent to characterize a writer’s style. In J. Balčikonis’s translations of the tales, one often encounters a construction long characteristic of Lithuanian: a finite verb form with a participle or a half-participle. E.g.: Just before sunset, Elzytė saw eleven wild swans flying, with golden crowns on their heads 152.

In terms of sentence structure, this construction presents considerable difficulties: it is unclear whether all the construction’s constituents are equally necessary for the sentence minimum, since, in general, Lithuanian linguistics has not yet reached a consensus on how such a construction should be classified⁶.

In H. K. Andersen’s “Tales” as translated by J. Balčikonis, the aforementioned constructions are mostly formed with predicates of perception and sensation (hear, see, feel); sometimes with predicates of action or state (listen, fear). E.g.: Then the dogs could also be heard barking 157; Now Kay no longer feared the Snow Queen on her way home 264.

In the translation of H. K. Andersen’s “Tales,” there are synonymous substitutes for the aforementioned construction. These are:

1. Verb + nominal case form (without a participle / half-participle). E.g.: The princess went for a walk with all the ladies of the court and heard the melody of little bells 15.

2. Verb + subordinate clause. This synonymous substitute is much more frequent than the first, i.e. verb + nominal case form. E.g.: Didn’t you hear that they are ringing about it throughout the land? 19. But even more terrible was to see how they fought and shoved one another, bit, scratched, and devoured each other²⁸.

Another possible synonymous case is the replacement of a half-participle beside a transitive verb by a participle. In this case, the participle functions as an agreeing attribute and is not dependent on the predicative word. E.g.: Elzytė saw the flying swans. Cf.: Elzytė saw swans flying.

However, no such example could be found in J. Balčikonis’s translation of the “Tales.” Thus, in this case the linguist gives preference to the verb and half-participle construction. It is quite difficult to determine precisely the relationship among all the aforementioned synonymous cases in the translation of the “Tales,” because:

1. The same verb, although essentially not polysemous, can in a particular context express meanings distinguished by certain stylistic nuances, which in turn determine different formal sentence structures. E.g.: a) He heard a drum being beaten <...> 166. b) I heard that the vase had once been engaged to a body 24.

In the second sentence, the verb I heard denotes not so much the act of auditory perception as a certain modality; that is, it could be synonymous with the verb I knew, with an undertone of doubt, uncertainty, or lack of assurance.

⁶ Plg.: Balkevičius J. Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos sintaksė. — V., 1963, p. 193; Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. — V., 1976, t. 3, p. 476.

45

2. It is difficult to determine whether the object of the action is understood as performing an action or in a static sense. This determines whether, semantically, the finite verb form and the participle / half-participle construction can be used, or not. For example, in the sentence I have never heard anything of such beauty! 17, we could hardly replace the phrase heard anything of such beauty with any synonymous construction consisting of a finite verb form and a participle / half-participle.

Another case is the sentence She felt the pea through twenty mattresses and twenty featherbeds, piled one on top of another 48.

Here, semantically, one can say not felt the pea, but felt the pea pressing against her.

3. A verb and participle / half-participle construction cannot always have synonymous expressions. For example, the verb to say of oneself generally requires a participle, both semantically and syntactically. For example: He declared himself to be a Turkish god and to have come to him from heaven 36; But she said that she was a real princess 48.

The fact that J. Balčikonis does not content himself with just one means of expression demonstrates his subtle understanding of the differences between these means of expression and his ability to use them persuasively. These differences could be reflected in expanded structural formulas—which means that all the construction’s

Savितai J. Balčikonis also uses another construction: a finite verb functioning as the predicate together with an infinitive. For example: They gave the artificial nightingale a chance to sing alone 77; Similar things cannot be kept silent 30.

According to G. Zolotova, such constructions (finite verb form + infinitive) occur when two features of an action are expressed in the syntagmatic sequence—either the process’s phase (beginning, ending, continuation) or the intersyntactic modal relation between subject and action (ability, desire, obligation, etc.)⁷.

In this case, the main verb takes the infinitive form, while the finite form of the auxiliary verb seems to take its place. For example: The little fir tree began to tell again about herself and her life in the forest 92; Soon even the marshes stopped visiting her 93.

Thus, the action is expressed by the infinitive, while the finite verb form semantically expands its content. In this way, the two verb forms constitute a single predicate. Constructions with a modal or phase verb are semantically more specific and precise, and occur frequently in J. Balčikonis’s translations. In the tale “The New Clothes of the Emperor,” they constitute about 25% of all verb forms; in “The Little Match Girl,” 13%; and in “The Ugly Duckling,” 20% of all verb forms.

However, phase and modal verbs do not affect the content of the infinitive in the same way. Phase verbs indicate only the phase of the action—its beginning, ending, or continuation. For example: Now he is finishing wearing my old golden shoe! 54; Afterwards they began shooting even more 224.

Modal verbs are semantically almost more important than the infinitive, since it is precisely they that determine the semantics of the expanded sentence structure. Cf.: 1) We old folk can now sit in her shade 112; 2) We old folk now sit in her shade.

⁷ Золотова Г. А. О синтаксической природе современного русского языка. – Филологические науки, 1979, вып. 5(113), с. 45.

46

In the first sentence, we have only the possibility of an action, a certain condition for its taking place, whereas in the second we have the concrete action itself. In J. Balčikonis’s translation of H. C. Andersen’s “Fairy Tales,” we find a wide variety of modal verbs. They can express:

1) Ability, skills: For the grandmother knew how to work magic 248.

2. Inability: Thumbelina could not fall asleep 127.

3. A decision, permission: He was given a year and a day to change his mind 180; He was given a tiny little room to live in, beside the pigsty 15; They decided to banish the real nightingale from that land altogether 78.

4. Necessity: We have to move out of here 125; For on the first morning after her wedding, she was to die and turn into sea foam! 281.

With regard to sentence structural models, the problem here is again a single one—whether to include the auxiliary verb in the minimal structural schema or not. Let us examine possible synonymous variants:

1) Seeing a cockchafer, they decided to play with it 38 and When they saw the cockchafer, they played with it. 2) And on that paper he really did begin to write 118. — And on that paper he really wrote. 3) He was given a tiny little room to live in, beside the pigsty 15. — He lived in a very small room beside the pigsty.

Such synonymous substitutions are possible, but they considerably, sometimes even fundamentally, change the semantics of the sentence. We would therefore argue that these constructions should be included in the minimal and (necessarily) the extended sentence model. All the more so because these auxiliary verbs can often govern the accusative case of a verbal noun. Cf.: And Elzytė began to pray with all her heart 154 And Elzytė began a prayer with all her heart.

A separate group consists of predicates expressing will; they are always expressed by a finite verb form together with an infinitive. For example: Bid the snow warmly cover the young shoots 205; She lets no one look straight into her face 195.

Since in this case the two verb forms denoting actions belong to separate agents, that is, to separate subjects carrying out the actions, both the finite verb form and the infinitive are included in the minimal as well as the extended structural model. For this reason, predicates expressing will form a separate predicate type.

This paper has discussed only some fragments of the extended structure of simple sentences. More detailed research might help resolve some of the disputed questions concerning sentence structure that remain unsettled to this day.

SOME COMMON MODELS OF THE SIMPLE SENTENCE IN J. BALČIKONIS’S TRANSLATION OF H. C. ANDERSEN’S “FAIRY TALES”

Резюме

This paper examines the need to distinguish sentence structural models at least at two levels—the minimal and the expanded structure—because substantial “shortening” of the structural formula often makes it impossible to discern even significant semantic differences. This claim is based on the material of J. Balčikonis’s translation of H. C. Andersen’s “Fairy Tales.” The paper discusses two constructions frequently encountered in the translation—V₁ [Part / N] / gerund and the construction of an auxiliary V₁ with Vinf—and considers their place in the structural model of the sentence.

47