Pirminių būdvardžių semantikos derivacinis aspektas

LIETUVIŲ KALBOS SANDAROS TYRINĖJIMAI LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVI (1987) RITA ŠEPETYTĖ THE DERIVATIONAL ASPECT OF THE SEMANTICS OF BASIC ADJECTIVES 1. The use of the adjectives aukštas, gilus, žemas with the meanings “large, strong; good” and “small, slight; poor,” respectively, is considered a semantic error in the Lithuanian language1. Prof. J. Balčikonis used to correct it2 rigorously. In Volume I of the *Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language*, which he edited, the entry for the adjective aukštas does not include the meanings “good, excellent (of quality)” and “large, considerable in quantity, force, and so on” (cf. the second edition4). J. Balčikonis knew Lithuanian well—or, more precisely, understood it deeply—and sensed what was foreign to it. One of the main arguments he used in language corrections was whether a word or expression was authentic in relation to the people’s spoken language5. In the second edition of Volume I of the *Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language*, the adjective aukštas is presented, in our opinion, with excessive regard for the meanings of the Russian adjective высокий. Through subtle corrections, Prof. J. Balčikonis did not impede the development of the Lithuanian language, as some may perhaps have thought, but nurtured its distinctiveness. After all, every language models its own vision of the world. Revealing this is, of course, possible only through in-depth semantic research. Prof. J. Balčikonis wrote no major theoretical works, but his corrections and translations show him to have been a great expert in the semantics of the Lithuanian language. 2. In order to describe the semantics of basic Lithuanian adjectives as systematically as possible, we applied, among other methods, the method of analyzing derivational relations. Basic adjectives provide a favorable domain for this; they are characterized by an abundance of derivational relations. Moreover, deadjectival derivation types6 are characterized by a fairly high degree of regularity and productivity7. Analysis of derivational relations is usually applied in order to break down the semantic structure of a polysemous word into sememes (meanings)8, or, more precisely, derivatives 1In *Advice on Language Usage*, these words are marked “better not to use in this sense,” see: *Advice on Language Usage*. – V., 1976, pp. 40, 81, 312. In the second edition of the advice, this prohibition is softened; see: *Advice on Language Usage*. – V., 1985, pp. 41, 82. 2 Balčikonis J. Rinktiniai raštai/Sud. A. Pukpis. – V., 1978, t. 1, p. 155, 228, 291, 307, 332. 3 Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. – V., 1941, t. 1, p. 396–397. 4 Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. – V., 1968, t. 1, p. 488. 5 Keinys S. J. Balčikonio kalbos mokslo darbai. – Kalbos kultūra, 1985, sąs. 48, p. 7–8; Vitkauskas V. Juozas Balčikonis. – Kaunas, 1985, p. 66, 106. Žr. taip pat: Balčikonis J. Rinktiniai raštai, t. 1, p. 194. 6 Dėl termino darybos tipas žr.: Urbutis V. Žodžių darybos teorija. – V., 1978, p. 249. 7For these terms, see: Urbutis V. Min. veik., pp. 262–268. 8 Медникова Э. М. Значение слова и методы его описания. – М.,1974, с. 60–61; Kalendienė D. Būdvardžio senas leksinė-semantinė charakteristika. – Kalbotyra, 1981, t. 32 (1), p. 38–51. Šios analizės taikymo pamatas – teiginys, kad dariniai paprastai remiasi viena (apibrėžta) pamatinio žodžio reikšme, žr.: Urbutis V. Min. veik., p. 152–156; Тихонов А. Н. О семантической соотносительности производящих и производных основ. – ВЯ, 1967, № 1, с. 114. 158 to confirm the difference between sememes (meanings) on the basis of differences. We analyze the derivational relations of adjectives from another perspective. Primary Lithuanian adjectives are characterized by regular derivatives: nouns are formed from them with the formatives -umas, -uma, adverbs with the formative -ai, verbs with the formatives -ėti, -inti, as well as many other derivatives belonging to various parts of speech and exhibiting greater or lesser degrees of regularity. We have observed that adjective derivatives “produced” formally according to the same derivational pattern often have different derivational meanings, and sometimes diverge from the meaning expected (characteristic of the “adjective + formative” derivational pattern), i.e., they have become lexicalized9. Our hypotheses are: 1) the semantic proximity of primary adjectives is mirrored by the semantic proximity of their corresponding derivatives; 2) if regular10 derivatives diverge in meaning from that expected from the derivational pattern, then the semantic structures of the primary adjectives differ in important semantic components. In this article, we selected for analysis four semantic groups of primary adjectives, i.e., adjectives whose semantic structure includes semes11 (of varying rank) “space,” “quantity,” “color,” and “time.” We compiled the inventory of semes based on Ž. Sokolovskaja’s model12. The presence of semes is determined from the definitions of meanings given in dictionaries. The article is based on illustrative material and explanations of meanings from the “Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language”13 and the “Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian”14. We emphasize that our assumptions and conclusions are hypothetical, owing to 1) the recording of derivatives in dictionaries (regular derivatives are not always recorded); 2) the limited number of illustrative examples; and 3) most importantly, the possible heterogeneity and heterochrony of derivatives15 (e.g., the derivational base is not entirely clear—senas–seninti or senti–seninti, etc.). Furthermore, our analysis does not cover figurative meanings (of either derivatives or base words). 3. We selected the following regular derivatives for analysis: a) with the formative -uma. In “The Grammar of the Lithuanian Language”16, they are described under two derivational categories—“abstract nouns” and “place.” It is also stated that abstract nouns denote “an abstract property or a period, a state of time”17, while derivatives expressing place may also denote “... a part of an object” and time18; 9 On lexicalization, see: Urbutis V. Op. cit., pp. 146–148; Кубрякова Е. С. Типы языковых значений. Семантика производного слова. – М., 1981, с. 57. 10 We consider two derivatives belonging to the same derivational pattern to constitute minimal regularity. 11 In this article, “seme” and “semantic component” are used synonymously. 12 Соколовская Ж. П. Опыт системного описания семантических отношений в лексике (на материале русских имен прилагательных): Автореф. дис.... д-ра. филол. наук. – Киев, 1981. – 28 с. 13 Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. – V., 1956–1984, t. 1–13 (toliau vartojamas sutrumpinimas LKŽ). 14 Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian. – V., 1972 (abbreviated DŽ). 15 Plg.: Кубрякова Е. С. Теория номинации и словообразование. – В кн.: Языковая номинация (Виды наименований). М., 1977, с. 270. 16 Grammar of the Lithuanian Language. – V., 1965, vol. 1, pp. 311, 399. 17 Ibid., p. 311. 18 Ibid., pp. 399–400. 159 b) with the formant -ėti. These derivatives denote “the gradual emergence or intensification of a property expressed by the base word (=the stem word – R.Š.)”19. Slightly formalized, the derivational meaning can be rendered as follows: “to become X-am/X-esniam”20; c) with the formant -inti. The basic derivational meaning is “to make such as is expressed by the base adjective”21 (“to make X-ą /X-esnį”); d) in addition, regular derivatives of adjectives with the “color” seme formed with the formant -uoti were analyzed, as were derivatives of adjectives with the “time” seme formed with the formant -yvas. The analysis focused on: 1) whether the meaning of a particular derivative corresponds to its derivational meaning (i.e., determining the degree of lexicalization); 2) what meaning the derivative acquires (has acquired) in relation to the seme of the base adjective. 4.1. The “color” seme. Adjectives: baltas “the color of snow or milk,” juodas “the color of coal,” geltonas “the color of a buttercup flower, sulfur, or gold,” mėlynas “one of the primary colors of the spectrum – midway between violet and green,” raudonas “being the warm color of the rainbow” (“the color of blood,” DŽ), rudas “dark yellow,” žalias “the color of grass,” DŽ. a) Meaning: “a place (surface) of X color.” For example: baltuma “a white place,” juoduma “a black place, a black patch,” geltonuma “a yellow place,” mėlynuma “a blue place,” raudonuma “a reddened place” (could also mean “a red place”), ruduma “a brown place, a brown spot,” žaluma (in dialects žaliuma) “a green place, a green surface,” DŽ. b) A more potential than actual derivational type. Recorded in dictionaries, but with hardly any illustrative examples. Meaning: “to become X/X-esniam.” For example: baltėti “to turn white, to grow pale” (no illustration); juodėti “to become black …; to darken” (5 illustrative examples with various meanings); *geltonėti22, mėlynėti “to become blue, bluer” (2 examples), raudonėti “to become red” (1 example; second-degree derivatives įraudonėti, išraudonėti, etc., duplicate the meanings of verbs with the formant -yti or are dialectal variants of them), similarly rudėti “to become brown,” žalėti “to become green, greener” (DŽ; no illustration). c) Meaning23: “to dye (coat) with an X color.” For example: baltinti “to paint with something white” (“to paint white,” DŽ), juodinti “to make black, to smear,” geltoninti “to make yellow” (“to make yellow, to paint yellow,” DŽ; LKŽ illustration – Gardakuliȧis geltonina gijas Šts), mėlyninti “to make bluish, to turn blue” (Egliniai pelenai ne baltina, bet mėlenina žlugį Šts), raudoninti “to paint red,” rudinti “to paint brown,” žalinti “to make green; to paint green,” DŽ. d) Meanings: 1) “to be, to appear X-colored”24, for example: baltuoti “to be white, to look white,” juoduoti “to be, to appear black; of a black object, to move, glide,” gelto- 19 Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. – V., 1971, t. 2, p. 258. 20 The symbol X here and throughout denotes the base adjective. 21 Jakaitienė E. Veiksmažodžių daryba. (Priesagų vediniai.) – V., 1973, p. 21. 22 An asterisk marks derivatives or their meanings that are not recorded in dictionaries (potential derivatives). 23 Cf. Jakaitienė E. Min. op., p. 21; here, however, the author refers to nominal derivatives (auksinti and the like). 24 See Jakaitienė E. Min. op., p. 43. A probably more precise explanation is given here: “to appear, to be visible from a distance as such as is expressed by the base word.” 160 nuoti “to be yellow, to look yellow,” mėlynuoti “to be or look blue,” raudonuoti “to appear, shine red” (“to look red, to be red” DŽ), ruduoti “to appear, be visible as brown,” žaliuoti “to be, appear green” DŽ (this verb is more often used in the lexicalized sense “of meadows, fields, plants (in spring and summer)”); 2) “to gradually acquire the color X; to become covered (coated) with the color X,” e.g.: *baltuoti, juoduoti “to become black, grow darker” (“to blacken, darken” DŽ), *geltonuoti (this meaning is recorded in the second-degree derivative apgeltonuoti “to turn yellow on the surface”), mėlynuoti “to become blue,” raudonuoti “to be, become red,” ruduoti “to become brown,” žaliuoti “to become covered with green rust, mold” DŽ; 3) “to apply (smear) color X,” e.g.: *baltuoti (the meaning is not recorded, although it is possible, e.g., in the second-degree derivative Kur išsibal­tavai nugarą?), *juoduoti analogously, geltonuoti “to make yellow, to yellow,” *mėlynuoti analogously, *raudonuoti (but įraudonuoti “to smear with red,” nuraudonuoti “to dye red,” etc.), *ruduoti (but suruduoti “to soil brown”); žaliuoti “to make green, to soil with greenery” DŽ. The first meaning is also manifested in second-degree derivatives with the prefixes at-, iš-, nu-, pa-, par-, su-; the second meaning—with the prefixes ap-, į-, iš-, nu-, pa-, su-, už-; the third meaning—with the prefixes iš-, nu-, su-. 4.1.1. The “Color” adjective group is characterized by semantic proximity (perhaps this is why it is a popular choice for analysis). This is also evident from the overview of derivational relations. The adjective žalias stands apart from the group. Its semantic structure is more complex compared with other color adjectives (e.g., the coexistence of the meanings “the color of grass,” “unripe, immature,” and “uncooked (unprocessed)”). Moreover, in our view, analysis of derivational relations confirms that the seme “surface” is also relevant to color adjectives (see also the explanations of the meanings of derivatives). 4.2. The “Space” seme. Adjectives: aukštas “having great height, a large extent from bottom to top,” gilus “extending far below the surface,” žemas “having a small extent from bottom to top” DŽ, artus “near (in terms of location)” (artimas “located nearby”), tolus “far in terms of space” DŽ (tolimas “located far away (in terms of space)”). a) Meaning “X place.” E.g.: aukštuma “a high place, elevated area, mountain, hill,” giluma “a deep place, depth,” žemuma “a low place, plain, only slightly elevated above sea level” DŽ, artuma “a nearby place,” toluma “a distant place, distance” DŽ. b) Meanings vary, e.g.: aukštėti “to become high” (without an illustration; in our view, the base meaning of this derivative is aukštas 2. “far above the ground” and 1 || “rising above the usual level (of terrain, water)”), gilėti “to go deeper” (since this adjective has no corresponding primary verb, gilėti may also mean “to become deeper, deep” (the second-degree derivative pagilėti)), žemėti analogously to aukštėti, artėti “to move closer, approach (in terms of distance)” (a higher degree of lexicalization; second-degree derivatives with the prefixes pri-, su-), tolėti “to become more distant, far” DŽ. c) A highly lexicalized meaning “to make X/X-er”; make denotes an actual action, e.g.: aukštinti “to make higher” (Gdusim tvorą aukštinti Grg), gilinti “to make 161 “to make deeper, to turn red,” to lower “to make low; to let down” DŽ, to bring closer “to make approach” (“to pull nearer”), to move farther away “to make more distant in space” DŽ (this may be a derivative of tolti) (“to push farther away,” cf. the illustration Senis čia artino, čia tolino tabokinę rš). Second-degree derivatives with the prefixes nu-, pa- have the semantic component “too much,” e.g.: nuaukštinti “to make too high,” paaukštinti “to make too high,” nugilinti “to deepen too much,” pagilinti “to make too deep,” nužeminti “to make too low,” paartinti “to bring too close.” 4.2.1. The “space” adjectives (under analysis) could be divided into two subgroups: 1) high, low, deep; 2) near, far. Derivatives of adjectives in this subgroup display greater lexicalization of meaning. The adjectives long, short, wide, narrow also have the “space” seme. However, for these, the “quantity” seme is more important; whereas for the adjectives high, low, deep, the “quantity” seme is not important. Moreover, one can observe that the meanings of derivatives of “space” adjectives may be interpreted by the corresponding adverb (high, deeply, low; near, far). 4.3. The “quantity” seme. Adjectives: long “extending lengthwise; lasting” (a composite definition based on DŽ and LKŽ), short “of little length” DŽ, thin “of narrow diameter,” thick “having a large distance between the two plane surfaces,” wide “large across,” narrow “small in diameter, width,” large “notable in its size,” small “of small stature, height, or dimensions,” hard “resistant to pressure from another body, incompressible, not easily crushed,” soft “easily squeezed, not firm” DŽ. a) Meaning “the X-th part.” E.g.: ilguma “the very long part” (DŽ – “the long place,” without an illustration), plonuma “the thin place” (however, the illustrations suggest that the meaning is probably “the thin part,” e.g.: Lašinių plonuma DŽ, Eikit [šieno] plonumą grėbstyt Ds, etc.), storuma “the thick part, place, thick portion” (stormena “the thick part, thickness”), platuma “the wide, broad place” (could also be “part”), siauruma similarly, diduma²⁵ “the larger part, the majority,” mažuma “the smaller part,” kietuma “a hard place” (could also be “part,” e.g.: Minkštumą suvalgė, o kietumą man paliko and so on), minkštuma “the soft part, pulp.” b) Meaning “to become X-er.” E.g.: ilgėti “to become longer,” trumpėti “to become short (shorter)” DŽ, platėti “to become wide (wider)” DŽ (the meaning given in LKŽ, “to widen, expand to the sides,” is partly lexicalized, since it is associated with the “space” seme in the structure of the adjective wide), siaurėti similarly, plonėti “to thin, become thin (thinner),” storėti “to thicken, become thicker,” didėti* “to become larger” (LKŽ “to increase, grow (widen, thicken)”), mažėti* “to become smaller” (“to decrease” – LKŽ), kietėti “to become hard” (“to become hard (harder)” DŽ; a partly lexicalized meaning “to harden, congeal, become firm” is also given, associated with other semes of the adjective hard not discussed here), minkštėti “to become soft, softer.” The same meaning is also manifested in second-degree derivatives with the prefix pa-. c) Meaning “to make X-er.” E.g.: ilginti “to make long,” trumpinti “to make short” DŽ, platinti “to make wide (wider),” siaurinti “to make narrow,” 25 On the mismatch between semantic and formal bases of derivation, see: Urbutis V. Min. veik., p. 84. 162 narrower, ploninti “to make thin,” storinti “to make thick, thicker,” didinti “to make larger” (LKŽ – caus. didėti: Pavasarį reikės sodą didinti Gs), mažinti “to make smaller in size,” kietinti “to make hard, harder,” minkštinti “to make soft, softer.” These verbs (except kietinti and minkštinti), as well as aukštinti, žeminti, gilinti, artinti, tolinti, have a meaning not recorded in dictionaries (although sometimes illustrated): “to make something appear X,” e.g.: A short skirt makes the legs look longer, Vertical lines look better—they make the figure look taller and slimmer trš, Wide clothes make a person look fatter DŽ, Binoculars bring things closer through one end and make them seem farther away through the other DŽ, Magnifying glass DŽ, The orange color makes the space seem narrower, smaller trš, etc. The verbs kietinti and minkštinti, more precisely their second-degree derivatives with the prefix pa-, have the meaning “to try by touch whether X,” e.g.: pakeitinti “to test hardness,” paminkštinti “to press lightly to see whether it is soft” (cf. palengvinti and pasunkinti “to lift repeatedly to determine the weight”). Second-degree derivatives with the prefix nu- acquire the meaning “to make something too X,” e.g.: nuilginti “to make too long,” nutrumpinti “to make too short” DŽ, nudidinti “to make too large,” nuplatinti “to make, to saw too wide,” etc. Such a meaning is also recorded for the verb nukietinti: “to make too hard.” 4.3.1. As already mentioned, the adjectives long, short, wide, narrow also have the “space” seme (and the meanings of some of their derivatives correspond to the meanings of derivatives of the adjectives high, deep, low). However, the “quantity” seme is more important in their structure. A psycholinguistic explanation may confirm this. For in order to qualify an object as, for example, high, its position in space (verticality, base, top, etc.) matters to us. But an long or wide object may have these qualities regardless of its position in space; what matters here above all is the quantitative relationships among the object’s parts. 4.4. The “time” seme. Adjectives: long “lasting for a long time,” short “lasting for a short time” DŽ, old “of advanced age, having reached old age, not young (of people, animals); growing for a long time (of plants),” young “not many years old, not old,” new “recently created, made, acquired,” early “of the beginning of some period of time,” late “far advanced, approaching its end (of time)” DŽ. a) Ilguma “the very long period of time” (Ilgumo dienos aš ir tai tiek nesuverpiu Sdk), trumpuma similarly (e.g., from the LKŽ card file Trumpumoj nakties), senuma “oldness; an old thing,” jaunuma “youth” (jaunystė “young years, young age”), naujuma “something new,” ankstuma “earliness, an early time,” vėluma “a late time” DŽ. b) From adjectives with a dominant “time” seme, forms such as ilgėti and trumpėti are not derived, for example; they manifest the “quantity” seme, not “time.” Senėti “to become old (older)” and jaunėti “to become younger, to grow younger” (apparently by analogy with senėti; it has a feature of relativity) are associated with the “state” seme. c) Meanings are lexicalized, e.g.: ilginti “to delay, prolong,” ankstinti “to do something too early, hasten,” vėlinti “to do something later than necessary” DŽ, naujinti “to remove signs of use, wear, aging,” jauninti “to make young; restore the vigor of youth,” seninti “see sendinti” (sendinti caus. senti “to make old”) (the meanings of the latter are the least lexicalized, it is thought, because the base adjectives have the “state” seme). 163 d) Adjectives grouped by the seme “time phase” form adjectives with the formant -yvas; their meanings, however, are not uniform: ankstyvas “occurring early…”, vėlyvas * “occurring late”, jaunyvas “rather young, recent” DŽ (a more precise definition), senyvas “elderly, rather old”. As can be seen, the meanings of the first two derivatives are considerably lexicalized, whereas those of the latter two are modificational. 5.1. In this article, we have presented essentially only an example of applying the analysis of derivational relations. However, we can also draw certain conclusions that confirm our hypothesis: 1) if base adjectives share a seme, their corresponding derivatives acquire: a) identical derivational meanings (or reproduce the same repertoire of meanings (e.g., derivatives with the formant -uma)), especially when that seme is dominant (e.g., “color” adjectives); b) meanings with the same degree of lexicalization (e.g., derivatives with the formant -ėti). 2) A discrepancy in derivational meaning indicates a difference between the base adjectives with respect to other semes (e.g., senyvas and ankstyvas or baltuoti and žaliuoti). 5.2. The principle of economy of expressive means operates in language. Word formation by semantic analogy is one instance of this principle at work. We believe that further investigation of derivational relations among adjectives may identify maximally similar semantic structures (semantemes). THE DERIVATIONAL ASPECT OF THE SEMANTICS OF UNDERIVED ADJECTIVES Abstract The article describes the application of an analysis of the word-formation relations of adjectives in order to confirm their semantic proximity with respect to a particular shared seme that constitutes their semantic structure. The rationale for this analysis rests on the hypothesis that the semantic proximity of derivatives formed according to a particular word-formation model should indicate semantic proximity among their bases; the possibility of such analysis is grounded in the regularity of deadjectival derivation in Lithuanian. The inventory of semes is compiled with reference to J. P. Sokolovskaya’s model. The presence of semes is established by generalizing dictionary definitions. The article describes certain word-formation relations in four groups of adjectives, each grouped according to a shared seme (of different orders): “color,” “space,” “quantity,” and “time.” A review of the meanings of the derivatives showed that, for some of the deadjectival derivation models examined, the categorical (lexico-grammatical) commonality of the bases (qualitative adjectives) is not sufficient grounds for forming derivatives with the expected (according to the model) word-formation meaning. Lexicalization of meanings (to varying degrees) is observed. It is established that bases grouped by a shared seme (especially if that seme is dominant) correspond to derivatives (within a single model) that have identical word-formation meanings or meanings with the same degree of lexicalization; variation in these meanings signals the presence of other relevant semes in the semantic structure of the bases. It is hypothesized that further study of word-formation relations may help identify semantemes of maximal similarity. It is emphasized that the propositions and conclusions are hypothetical in nature, primarily owing to the possible heterogeneity and heterochrony of the derivatives. 164