LIETUVIŲ KALBOS SANDAROS TYRINĖJIMAI

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVI (1987)

SAULIUS AMBRAZAS

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF WORD-FORMATION TYPES OF VERBAL ABSTRACTS

The word-formation category consists of a paradigm of word-formation types¹. One or several productive types occupy the most important place in it; their word-formation meaning coincides with that of the category as a whole. They form the semantic center of the category, while other word-formation types, with narrower or more specialized meanings, constitute its periphery². The aim of this article is to review changes in the semantic center of the category of Lithuanian verbal abstracts (nomina actionis; hereafter NA).

In contemporary Lithuanian, the center of the NA category consists only of derivatives with the suffixes -imas/-ymas. They can be formed from every verb and generally retain the categorical meaning of an action or state³. Ending-based derivatives are now peripheral. In contemporary language they are often used with specialized meanings and frequently serve as terms in various fields⁴.

An examination of verbal abstracts in 16th–17th-century texts shows that the state of this category was different at that time. Ending-based derivatives, which now have more concrete or specialized meanings, were still used in early texts simply as names of actions. This is evident from the examples given below.

The NA mūšis in M. Daukša’s Postil still has only the meaning “beating”: mušbi pjaßtaku ir kůmſciu … kąkino Wießpati DP 167₁₉–₂₀ (also 160₁₁, 161₂₂,₂₆; orig. bicie, karanie, policzki, razy⁵). It was used with the same meaning in many other 16th–17th-century Lithuanian monuments (VlnE 42₂₂, 51₄; BB Pat 17,10; 18,8; 20,30; 28, 6; Lex 75, 84a; SD³ 13; SIG II 81₁; Ch¹ Luk 12,18; ApD 16,18; 2 PvK 6,5; 11,23; 11,24; 1 Ptr 2,24). The meaning “battle, combat,” characteristic of contemporary language, for the derivative mūšis has been noted in only a few places in early texts: Bitwā. Pugna. Kawa / mußis ^SD³

¹ Wellmann H. Deutsche Wortbildung: Typen und Tendenzen in der Gegenwartssprache. 2. Haupt. Das Substantiv. — Düsseldorf, 1975, S. 19—20; Morokhovskaya E. Ya. Main aspects of the general theory of linguistic models. — Kyiv, 1975, p. 82; Tsyganenko G. P. On the word-formation paradigm—one of the components of word-formation theory. — In: Study of grammatical structure and the teaching of grammar at university and school (Proceedings of the All-Union Conference). Chisinau, 1976, pp. 72—73; Muryasov R. Z. On word-formation paradigms. — In: Word formation and phrase formation: Abstracts of papers for the scientific conference. Moscow, 1979, pp. 57—59.

² Plg. Furdík J. Zo slovotvorného vývoj slovenčiny. — Bratislava, 1971, s. 16.

³ Urbutis V. Žodžių darybos teorija. — V., 1978, p. 161, 215, 268—269.

⁴ Keinys S. Suffixal word formation of terms. — In: Problems of Social Linguistics (Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics). V., 1979, vol. 19, pp. 167—169.

⁵ Kudzinowski Cz. Indeks-słownik do „Daukšos Postilė“ (toliau — KI). — Poznań, 1977, t. 1, s. 647.

88

17 (also SD³ 21, 136); Feldschlacht abazo mušis Lex 35; mušis (bitwa) PK 53₈, cf. also the similar meaning “murder (zabojstwo)”: Karalißtes šiames ießko … waydays ir mušieys SP II 155₁₅.

NA žinia in old writings denotes not only “information” but also “knowledge.” This latter meaning is particularly frequent for this derivative in K. Sirvydas’s Punktai. Of 26 occurrences, in 23 NA žinia means “knowledge,” for example: gitumą žinios / ape wifą kas deßis I 14₁₅. The words umiejętność, wiadomość, used to translate K. Sirvydas’s žinia, also meant “knowledge, cognition” in Old Polish⁶. This meaning is recorded in other sixteenth- and seventeenth-century writings as well, for example: Dok mums ßine ir drukibe Mž 53₅; parodęs lobius … mókßto arba žinios ßawós DP 436₆, cf. also Szinnę (Verstand) BB Pat 5,12; acc. sg. szinnę (Klugheit) Ps 7,4; Ape apßtepta žinia Roždńciaws SIG II 71₄; turi žinę wißu paprociu Ch¹ ApD 26,3. In present-day dialects this meaning has survived only in frozen expressions: mano trumpa žinia “I know little” Grd; daug žinios yr galvoj “I know a lot” Psv (LKŽK).

M. Daukša’s Postil also uses NA pažinia: iżg pažinios ne įbitikeiimo ßawo pažino 404₃₅ (orig. wiadomość) with the same meaning. In present-day dialects this derivative is used with the more specific meaning “acquaintance” (“recognition, knowledge” in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was also denoted by the corresponding -tis suffix derivative pažintis^⁷).

The opposite meaning, “ignorance,” was expressed in old writings by NA nežinia, for example: kas waikßčioia tamfumßia (ne žinios ir nūdžių) DP 510₃ (also 234₃₆, 299₁₈, 528₃₈, 610₂₇ – orig. niewiadomość); Nießwiadomość / Imprudentia. Nepritirimas nežinia SD³ 218 (also SP I 104₂₃, 117₉, 248₁₀, 294₁₀; II 8₂₂, 31₂₈, 112₄). Today NA nežinia most often means “the unknown” or “uncertainty.”

NA maldą, besides its predominant meaning “an appeal to God; the text of such an appeal,” is occasionally used in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century writings in the sense “request” (in M. Daukša’s Postil in 2 cases out of 200): [Kristus] mus maldomis teßia ßawęs DP 380₁₃ (also 545₅₂ – orig. prośba); klaußik balsą maldos (corrected to aßuftoghimo) mana BB Ps 28,2 (also Ps 31,23 – orig. Flehen); maldą (Bitte) Job 6,8; Lex 18: Vorbitt malda Lex 101a; Proßba / Petitio, precatio. Malda SD³ 346 (also in some later writings; see LKŽ VI 790). The meaning “request” accords with the archaic meaning “to speak, to ask” of the verb *mel-/*mol-⁸, which is still preserved in the verb melsti “to ask.” NA prašymas underwent semantic concretization in a similar direction. In the sixteenth century it is attested with the meaning “prayer”: daboießi praßchimo mana BB Ps 66,19 (orig. Gebet; also Mž 362₅, 365₅, 392₅, 393₇).

NA nūlaida, which today has various specialized and concrete meanings (LKŽ VIII 934), was still a process noun in M. Daukša’s Postil: nūg ußtekeimo ßaules net’ ik’ nūlaidai garbūs yr wardas io 487₂₁. In its categorical meaning, this derivative

^⁶ Reczek S. Podręczny słownik dawnej polszczyzny. – Wrocław etc., 1968, s. 548.

^⁷ Ambrazas S. Priesaginės darybos veiksmažodžių abstraktai M. Daukšos Postilėje. – Kalbotyra, 1983, t. 34(1), p. 80.

^⁸ Szemerényi O. Principles of Etymological Research in Indo-European Languages. – In: Etymologie / Hrsg. von R. Schmitt. Darmstadt, 1977, S. 338–345 su lit.; Иванов Вяч. Вс. Славянский, балтийский и раннебалканский глагол: Индоевропейские истоки. – М., 1981, с. 171.

89

is sometimes also used in later writings, e.g.: nuolaidos (i.e. descent) virvė LC 1884, 5 (LKŽ VIII 934).

NA pasaka had the meaning “narrative” in the 16th–17th centuries: Nepaniekin... pašakos wirefiniųjų DP 66₃₀ (also 166₄₆, 272₄₁, 371₂₃, 475₅₁ – orig. powieść, przypowieść⁹); Ant tos pašakos akis atkelkite SIG II 20₁₈ (similarly II 21₁, 26₁); nieku kitu neboWijos, tykt pašakomis naujenu Ch¹ ApD 17,21 (also PvTit 1,14; PK 48₁₆); Wadiname ją Hiftoria, delto jog užrakina... tykrą pašaką ape tey, kas nufidawę Ch Job (preface) (also 2 Moz (preface); Ch¹ 2 PvTm 4,4).

NA priep(u)olis (prýpuolis) meant “misfortune; fall; unexpected event” in the 16th–17th centuries: iźg fwetimų priepůlů / mókikites DP 65₂₇ (11x – orig. przypadek, przypadłość, przygoda¹⁰); wiſoki priepuoley (wſelakie przypadki) SP I 109₂₆ (also II 14₂₅); I. sg. wiſokiame pripůly SIG II 2₁₅ (w żadnej przygodzie; also II 16₁₀, 40₂₆¹¹); Przypadek / przygoda. Cafus repentinus, euentum Priepuolis SD³ 364 (also SD¹ 147, 148, 171; SD³ 242, 319, 364, 414, 446); Zufall pripůlis, prigadas Lex 110a (similarly PK 73₁₉, 112₁₂, 251₇ … 9x; AK 85₁₅; BK 54₁₅; Ch¹ 1 PvK 7,15); iź priepůlo tokio iźbliūtas (w swym upadku... podźwigniony)¹². The now widespread meaning “exacerbation of an illness” is entirely new; it is attested only in 20th-century sources¹³.

That ending-derived forms in the 16th–17th centuries retained the categorical meaning of NÁ better than they do in the modern language is also shown by the fact that the same terminologized meaning was often expressed not only by an ending-derived form, but also by a concurrently used derivative with the suffix -imas/-ymas or another suffixal NÁ. For example, alongside the ending-derived form nuodžia (187x), M. Daukša used the suffix -mė derivative nuodėmė with the specialized meaning “religious sin” (K. Sirvydas and S. M. Slavočinskis used only the latter), while the old writings of Lithuania Minor also attest nusidėjimas. The rare suffix -tis derivative prasirastis (grzech) has the same meaning: AK 23₂₄, 36₂₈, 39₁₈,₂₁; BK 6₉, 16₁₃.

The -ė ending-derived form gailė is used in K. Sirvydas’s writings not only with the categorical meaning “regret” (e.g.: Żal / żałowanie / żałość. Poenitentia, dolor. Gailyſta / gaile SD³ 520), but also meaning “repentance” (e.g.: Sakramento gailes – Sakramenta pokuty SP II 130₆), alongside another ending-derived form gailius (pokuta) SP I 159₁₄ and the suffixal derivatives gailysta, gailystė, gailystavimas, e.g.: Pokutá / Poenitentia, poena, multa, satisfactio pro defectibus suſcepta. Gailyſta / gayle SD³ 319; daritu gayliſti aźu ſawo nuſideimus (źá grzech ſwoy pokutowal) SP II 116₅; acc. sg. gayliſtawimu (pokuta) SP I 57₅¹⁴. Other 16th–17th-century authors used suffixal NÁ forms for this purpose: gailėjimas (is) DP 143x; SE 12₃; AK 10₂–₃, 24₇; BK 23₆; gailesys (gailesis)

⁹ Kudz inowski Cz. Kl, t. 2, s. 50.

¹⁰ Kudz inowski Cz. Kl, t. 2, s. 153.

¹¹ Lebedys J. Žodynėlis. – Kn.: Slavočinskis S. M. Giesmės tikėjimui katalickam priderančios. V., 1958, p. 502.

¹² Lebedys J. Ten pat.

¹³ Plg. dar Būga K. Rinktiniai raštai / Sud. Z. Zinkevičius. – V., 1959, t. 2, p. 39.

¹⁴ Plg. dar Zinkevičius Z. Kelios pastabos lietuvių XVI–XVII a. leksikos istorijai. – Kn.: Socialinės lingvistikos problemos (Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai). V., 1979, t. 19, p. 121–122.

90

Mž 335₃; Vln 69₁₆; BP II 229₃; MT 2₁₀, 54₄, 61₁₁, 67₁₉,...; DP 6x; gailystė SE 57₂₆, 257₃; gailysta BK 43₁₃; prisivertimas BP 6x; liovimas(is) Vln, VlnE 4x; BP 2x.

In most cases, while retaining their categorical meaning, ending-derived verbal abstracts (VAs) of the 16th–17th centuries differed little semantically from the corresponding derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas. In old writings, there is a tendency to avoid derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas when synonymous ending-derived forms from the same verb are available. In Lithuanian texts of the 16th–17th centuries, ending-derived VAs without corresponding derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas generally account for 48 to 90%; among those that do have such parallel derivatives, ending-derived forms are used more often than the corresponding VAs with the suffix -imas/-ymas. This ratio between the aforementioned groups of VAs varies among individual texts. Two factors influenced it: 1) the total number of ending-derived VAs; 2) the authors’ tendency to use synonyms. Where ending-derived VAs are relatively few, corresponding forms with the suffix -imas/-ymas are also less frequent. This is the case in the writings of Lithuania Minor (Mž, Vln, BP, BB, etc.). For example, in B. Vilentas’s writings, only 9% of ending-derived VAs have corresponding derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas. In the writings of Lithuania Major, where ending-derived VAs are considerably more numerous, corresponding derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas are also used more often. Most such co-occurrences are found in M. Daukša’s Postil¹⁵, which is generally notable for its abundance and variety of synonyms¹⁶. By contrast, in M. Daukša’s Catechism, where there are fewer synonyms, about 17% of ending-derived VAs have corresponding derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas.

In the 16th–17th centuries, many types of ending-derived VAs (especially derivatives with the endings -a, -is/-ys, -ia) were more productive than they are today. In most writings of that period, there are more ending-derived VAs than suffixal ones (except for derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas). Ending-derived VAs are especially widespread in the writings of M. Daukša, K. Sirvydas, and S. M. Slavočinskis. Many ending-derived forms used in 16th–17th-century writings are now either entirely obsolete or very rare. For example, 46% of the VAs in this group recorded in K. Sirvydas’s Punktai are not characteristic of present-day language; the figures are 28% in M. Daukša’s Postil, 26% in K. Petkevičius’s Catechism, and 22% in S. M. Slavočinskis’s hymnal.

The data presented here suggest that in the 16th–17th centuries the semantic center of the VA derivational category consisted not only of derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas (as it does today), but also of ending-derived forms.

Derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas spread in Lithuanian only during the period of its independent development¹⁷. In still earlier times, for which we have no written sources, the semantic center of the VA category consisted solely of ending-derived forms, which also occupy an important place in the derivational paradigms of other related languages. In the Slavic languages, ending-derived

¹⁵ Ambrazas S. Galūnių darybos veiksmažodžių abstraktai M. Daukšos Postilėje. – Baltistica, 1980, t. 16(1), p. 68.

¹⁶ Cf. Tangl E. Der Accusativus und Nominativus cum Participio im Alt litauischen. – Weimar, 1928, pp. 8–11; Skardžius P. Daukša, the first creator of the standard language in Greater Lithuania. – Archivum Philologicum, 1933, vol. 4, pp. 12, 15; Lebedys J. Mikalojus Daukša. – V., 1963, pp. 308–318.

¹⁷ Ambrazas S. Dėl veiksmažodžių abstraktų su priesaga -imas/-ymas darybos raidos. – Baltistica, 1983, t. 19(1), p. 66–69.

91

NA became established before the appearance of the earliest written monuments, perhaps during the period of Slavic linguistic unity¹⁸. Many derivatives of this type have been found in the Indo-Iranian languages since the earliest times¹⁹. In Classical Greek, NA ending in *-ā- became very widespread²⁰. In the Germanic language group, ending-derived NA (especially those with the ending *-o-) are most characteristic of Gothic and Old High German²¹. Many scholars associate the spread of ending-derived forms, which took place at different times in the individual Indo-European languages, with the differentiation of masculine and feminine gender and the related increase in the productivity of o- and ā-stems²².

Before ending-derived forms became widespread, derivatives with the formatives *-tei-/-ti- and *-teu-/-tou-/-tu- occupied a privileged position in the derivational paradigm of Indo-European NA, and had different meanings²³.

From NA with the formative *-tu-, the supine developed in the Baltic languages, while in Prussian the infinitive with the formative -tvei also developed. In the East Baltic languages, however, this derivational type lost its productivity early. From the old NA with the formative *-tu-, in Lithuanian and Latvian

¹⁸ Mečė A. Общеславянский язык. — М., 1951, с. 273; Бернштейн С. Б. Очерк сравнительной грамматики славянских языков: Череповская. Именные основы. — М., 1974, с. 276—277, 302—333; Vondrák W. Vergleichende slavische Grammatik. — Göttingen, 1924, Bd. 1, S. 494 ff.; Sławski F. Zarys słowotwórstwa prasłowiańskiego. — In: Słownik prasłowiański. Wrocław etc., 1974, t. 1, s. 58—61; Wojtyła-Świerzowska M. Prasłowiańskie nomen agentis. — Wrocław etc., 1974, s. 12—16.

¹⁹ Wackernagel J., Debrunner A. Altindische Grammatik. — Göttingen, 1954, Bd. 2, T. 2, S. 219—235, 238—251; Burrow T. The Sanskrit Language. — London, 1959, p. 123 ff.; Герценберг Л. Г. Морфологическая структура слова древних индо-иранских языков. — Л., 1972, с. 240, 245; Елизаренкова Т. Я. Грамматика ведийского языка. — М., 1982, с. 136 сл.

²⁰ Debrunner A. Griechische Wortbildungslehre. — Heidelberg, 1917, S. 141—142; Chantraine P. La formation des noms en grec ancien. — Paris, 1933, p. 19—23; Arend E. Verbalabstrakta bei Herodot und ihre Vorgeschichte. Teildruck: Die Verbalabstrakta auf -οσ und -η. — Berlin, 1936, S. 13—41.

²¹ Bahder K. Die Verbalabstrakta in den germanischen Sprachen. — Halle (Saale), 1880, S. 40 ff.; Meid W. Germanische Sprachwissenschaft. Bd. 3. Wortbildung. — Berlin, 1967, S. 59—60; Hinderling R. Studien zu den starken Verbalabstrakta des Germanischen. — Berlin, 1967, S. 42 ff.; Сравнительная грамматика германских языков. — М., 1963, т. 3, с. 76—77.

²² Cf. Burrow T. Op. cit., p. 121 ff.; Gagnepain J. Les noms grecs en -οσ et en -ā: Contribution à l'étude du genre en indo-européen. — Paris, 1959; Kurylowicz J. The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. — Heidelberg, 1964, p. 216—217; Birnbaum H. Indo-European Nominal Formation Submerged in Slavic. — In: The Slavic Word: Proceedings of International Slavistic Colloquium at UCLA/Ed. by D.S. Worth. The Hague, 1972, p. 162—163; Mažiulis V. The Relations between Baltic and Other Indo-European Languages (Declension). — V., 1970, p. 306—308; Georgiev V. I. Die luv̯ische Abstrakta auf -aḫi, die hethitischen Nomina actionis auf-(a)ai und die ā Stämme. — KZ, 1974, Bd. 88, H. 1, S. 121; Watkins C. Die Vertretung der Laringale in gewissen morphologischen Kategorien in den indogermanischen Sprachen Anatoliens. — In: Flexion und Wortbildung: Akten der V. Fachtagung der indogermanischen Gesellschaft. Regensburg, 9—14. Sept. 1973/Hrsg. von H. Rix. Wiesbaden, 1975, S. 363 ff.; Бернштейн С. Б. Указ. соч., с. 134—135; Brosman P. W. The Development of the PIE Feminine. — The J. of Indo-European Studies, 1982, vol. 10, N 3—4, p. 253—272.

²³ Benveniste E. Noms d’agent et noms d’action en indo-européen. — Paris, 1948, p. 112.

92

only a few remained: Lith. lietùs (lytùs), Latv. lietus: Lith. lýti, Latv. lit; Lith. piẽtūs, cf. pỹti “to drink moisture, become sodden, turn to slush; to let milk”; < Indo-European *pī-[poi- “to drink”²⁴; Latv. viltus “deception”: vilt “to deceive”; mītus (miētus) “exchange”: mīties “to alternate, exchange”; dẽstų (1st sg.) likt “(Samen) in die Keime legen”²⁵. Many NA with various variants of the format *-teu-/-tou-/-tu- acquired instrumental meanings in the Baltic languages. For example, Lithuanian instrument names with the suffixes -tuvas and -tuvė were formed in this way.

In the East Baltic languages, the semantic core of the NA category was initially, it seems, made up of derivatives with the formative *-ti-. Only after this derivational type lost its productivity, and many derivatives with the formative *-ti- became fossilized and turned into infinitive forms, did ending-derived forms take their place in the NA derivational paradigm. This must have happened while Lithuanian and Latvian were still a single language, since both Lithuanian and Latvian have few NA with the formative *-ti-, whereas ending-derived forms are numerous and many of them have counterparts in both languages²⁶.

During the independent development of Lithuanian, as NA with the suffix -imas/-ymas spread, the derivational capacity of ending-derived forms gradually began to diminish. This process is already reflected in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Lithuanian written monuments. In the writings of Lithuania Minor, ending-derived NA were used much less frequently at that time than in Lithuania Major. For example, ending-derived NA occur half as often in J. Bretkūnas’s Postil as in K. Sirvydas’s Punktai, which is smaller in size. The ratio between the numbers of ending-derived NA is similar in the manuscript Lexicon Lithuanicum and K. Sirvydas’s dictionary. Apparently, the productivity of ending-derived NA declined earlier in the West Aukštaitian dialect of Lithuania Minor.

Ending-derived forms are unevenly distributed in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century writings of Lithuania Major. There are relatively few in the anonymous 1605 catechism and the so-called Belarmino catechisms, although they were written on the basis of the East Aukštaitian dialect, like the writings of K. Sirvydas, which are notable for their abundance of ending-derived forms. The fluctuations in the number of ending-derived forms may have been influenced by the fact that not all old writings reflect the living vernacular equally well. It is worth noting that we find the greatest number of ending-derived forms in the writings of M. Daukša, K. Sirvydas, and S. M. Slavočinskis, which best represent the spoken-language lexicon of the people of Lithuania Major. On the other hand, the standardization of derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas, particularly evident in the writings of B. Vilentas and in Eastern catechisms, met the requirements of book style. It has been observed that in Old Church Slavonic, too, the use of ending-derived NA and derivatives with the suffix -nije/-tije also depends on the style of the texts²⁷.

The old Lithuanian written monuments document the end of the stage in the development of NA when ending-derived forms were still at the category’s core. The regrouping of the NA derivational paradigm, which began before the advent of writing, came to an end over the past few centuries:

²⁴ Fraenkel E. Die baltischen Sprachen. – Heidelberg, 1950, S. 37; Litauisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. – Heidelberg, Göttingen, 1962, S. 588; Pokorny J. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. – Bern, 1959, Bd. 1, S. 839–840.

²⁵ Endzelīns J. Latviešu valodas gramatika. – Rīga, 1951, 1pp. 380.

²⁶ Endzelīns J. Op. cit., 1pp. 380.

²⁷ Вайан A. Руководство по старославянскому языку. – М., 1952, с. 228.

93

At the center of this category remained only derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas. The sphere of use of ending-derived forms narrowed considerably. At present, they are no longer synonyms of derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas, but have more specialized meanings; cf. mūšis ‘battle’ and mušimas ‘beating’, pašaka ‘branch’ and pašakojimas ‘telling’, žinia ‘news’ and žinojimas ‘knowing’, and so on.

In Latvian, too, there is a tendency to specialize ending-derived forms²⁸, while derivatives with the suffix -šana, which roughly correspond in their place in the NA derivational paradigm to Lithuanian -imas/-ymas derivatives, are generalized and standardized to express the process of an action.

A similar process took place in the Slavic languages as well. In Old Church Slavonic, ending-derived forms were still used as synonyms of -nije/-tije derivatives²⁹. It has been established that in Old Russian, ending-derived forms constituted about 80% of all deverbal nouns³⁰. During the period of independent development of the individual Slavic languages, the sphere of use of ending-derived NA narrowed, their meanings became specialized, while derivatives with the suffix -nije/-tije spread widely and became the core of the NA category. Such a regrouping of derivational types has been observed in Russian³¹, Bulgarian³², Czech³³, Slovak³⁴, and Polish³⁵.

Thus, we see a clear parallelism in the development of ending-derived NA in the Baltic and Slavic languages. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that in both language groups, suffixal derivational types that spread only during the period of independent development of the individual languages took the place of ending-derived forms in the NA derivational paradigm.

²⁸ Mūsdienu latviešu literārās valodas gramatika. — Rīga, 1959, s. 1, lpp. 100, 106—108; Скуня В. Образование терминов технических наук в латышском языке: Автореф. дис.... канд. филол. наук. — Рига, 1969, с. 12.

²⁹ Вайан А. Указ. соч., с. 228—229.

³⁰ Варбот Ж. Ж. Древнерусское именное словообразование. — М., 1969, с. 18.

³¹ Auerbach I. Nomina abstracta im Russischen des 16. Jahrhunderts: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Abstraktsuffixe im Slavischen. — München, 1973, S. 118—139 with earlier literature; Menge-Verbeeck R. Nullsuffix und Nullsuffixierung im Russischen: Zur Theorie der Wortbildung. — München, 1973; Dulewiczowa I. Nomina actionis we współczesnym języku rosyjskim. — Wrocław etc., 1976, s. 17—22; Волков В. С. Наблюдения над производными бессуффиксных существительных в актах XVII в. (лексические новообразования). — В кн.: Вопросы теории и истории языка: Сборник в честь профессора В. А. Ларина. Л., 1963, с. 53 сл; Дубогаева М. Бессуффиксальные отглагольные существительные в русском языке XI—XVII вв.: Автореф. дис.... канд. филол. наук. — Минск, 1970, с. 20; Ахметова Г. Я. Имена действия в русском языке XV—XVI вв. (словообразовательные типы и лексико-грамматические свойства): Автореф. дис.... канд. филол. наук. — Л., 1975, с. 15, 17; Русская грамматика. — М., 1980, т. I, с. 220—221.

³² Szymański T. Słowotwórstwo rzeczownika w bułgarskich tekstach XVII—XVIII wieku. — Wrocław, 1968, s. 94.

³³ Tvoření slov v češtině. — Praha, 1967, s. 592—607, 610—617; Ангел В. П. Словообразование абстрактных существительных в чешском языке: Автореф. дис.... канд. филол. наук. — Минск, 1979, с. 7—8.

³⁴ Furdík J. Op. cit., s. 54 tt.

³⁵ Klemensiewicz Z., Lehr-Spławiński T., Urbańczyk S. Gramatyka historyczna języka polskiego. — Warszawa, 1955, s. 207; Fokker A.A. Derivation of Nouns from Verbs in Contemporary Literary Polish. — Lingua, 1964—1965, vol 13, p. 395 ff.; Puzynina J. Names of Actions in Contemporary Polish. — Warszawa, 1969, s. 34—40; Rospond S. Gramatyka historyczna języka polskiego. — Warszawa, 1979, s. 181.

94

ABBREVIATIONS

BK – A Brief Collection of Christian Learning / Written by Cardinal Roberto Bellármino. – Vilnae, 1677.

LKŽ – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. – V., 1957–1984, t. 1–13.

LKŽK – Lietuvių kalbos žodyno kartoteka.

KZ – Journal of Comparative Linguistic Research in the Field of Indo-European Languages, founded by A. Kuhn. – Berlin etc.

The other abbreviations are the same as in the large Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language.

HISTORICAL CHANGE IN THE WORD-FORMATION TYPES OF ACTION NOUNS

Summary

Old Lithuanian writings attest the end of the period when inflectional derivatives, together with derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas, formed the semantic center of the category of action nouns (nomina actionis; hereafter – AN). In the 16th–17th centuries, inflectional ANs still largely retained their categorical meaning and were used as names for actions and states, e.g.: mūšis “battle,” now “combat”; priepuolis “trouble, misfortune; decline,” now “seizure”; žinia “knowledge, cognition, understanding,” now “message, information.” Over the following centuries, inflectional derivatives gradually narrowed in use, acquired more specialized meanings, and moved to the periphery of the AN category. Only derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas remained at the category’s center. A similar process of specialization of inflectional ANs is observed during the independent development of Latvian and many Slavic languages, where word-formation types of suffixal derivatives also took the place of inflectional derivatives in the AN word-formation paradigm: in Latvian, ANs in -šana; in Slavic languages, ANs in -nije/-tije.

A comparative analysis of the Baltic languages reveals the following sequence of changes in the word-formation types at the semantic center of the Lithuanian AN category: 1) ANs with the formant *-ti- and *-tu- (in Common Baltic); 2) ANs with the formant *-ti- (in Early East Baltic); 3) inflectional ANs (in Late East Baltic); 4) inflectional ANs together with derivatives with the suffix -imas/-ymas (in Old Lithuanian); 5) ANs with the suffix -imas/-ymas (in Modern Lithuanian).