Netiesioginės nuosakos (modus relativus) paplitimas ir kilmės problema

LITHUANIAN AREALINES LINGUISTICS QUESTIONS LITHUANIA TSR SCIENCE ACADEMY V. AMBRAZAS INDIRECT SECTIONS (MODUS RELATIVUS) EXPANSION IR ORIGIN PROBLEM 1. CONSTRUCTION SU ACTIVE SUBSTANCES PARTICIPANTS 1.1. Indirect consequence (modus relativus, hereinafter — NN) is usually called the Lithuanian form of the active participle noun, which has a verbumfinitum position in the sentence, contrasting with the direct consequence on the basis of the meaning of the action recounted in another way ir indirectly experienced, cf.: jis gyvenęs kaime ar (net. nuos.) ir he lives in the countryside (true. nuos. ). Term of implied reference entered into use 1937 m. ,,In the mother tongue” has become established in Lithuanian linguistics in recent decades?. Although sometimes ir debated*, it is still a more convenient and accurate term than the previously used ir “participatory language”, which už was used to denote a wide variety of participants’ uses. Like other ir Lithuanian dialects, it has a specific NN modal semantics defined paradigm ir of forms. 1.1.1. In the contemporary Lithuanian literary language, the paradigm of indirect pronoun consists of the following forms: 1. Singles: 1. 1. vn. metąs, -anti, dg. the year, -of; be. k. 1. vn. metęs, -usi, dg. year, -usios; be. d. 1. vn. mesdavęs, -usi, dg. mesdavę, -usios; will be. 1. vn. mesiąs, -ianti, dg. mesią, -iančios. 2. Aggregate action. race. beginner: be. k. 1. vn. formerly be-thrown, formerly be-throwing, dg. formerly unemployed, formerly unemployed; will be. 1. vn. būsiąs bemetąs, būsianti bemetanti, dg. becoming, becomings, becomings, becomings; I'm sick. Type 1 completed: es. I. vn. esąs mėtęs, esąti mėtęsi, dg. esą metę, esančios metusios, būti. k. l. vn. had thrown, had thrown, dg. been thrown, been thrown: 1 Zr. J. Lazausko str. »»Fifth provision« GK 1937, No. 2, p. 24—6 su approved editorial note. *. Plg. J. Balkevičius, Sint. 94 tt. ; P. Gailiūnas, LKG II 58—9; N. Sližienė, LKG II 167 tt. ; A. Paulauskienė, Aksim. 158 ir kt ; on the modus relativus term lie. k. plg. E. Fraenkel- ,IF XLVI 44; P. Trost, LKK III 220; W. K. Matthews, SEER XXXIII 370, E. Hofmann, Indo-Germanic language 29; I. Marvan, SIPr IV 254, B. Cuprayrac, I'naroabhoe CKa3yeMOe B COBp. JIHTOBCKOM JIHT. si3blke, ABT. KaHg. aucc., Bunsutoc, 1968, p. 5; la. J. Endzelins, DI. I 144; LaGr. 902; M. Rudzite, Dial. 138, 241, 374; A. Bergmane, MLLVG I 624 ir kt The corresponding paradigms of meaning forms in other languages are also usually treated as separate sentences ir called modus obligatus (A. Sauvageot, BSL L. 2 208; W. K. Matthews, SEER XXXIII 370), eommentativus (W. Fiedler, WZL XV 3 565), imperceptivus (V. Koseska, SFPS XIII 166), narrativus (B. Tank, OSS III 70 ir Bulgarian k. grammar), auditivus (J. Endzelins, LaGr. 902; B. 3. I'm a couple, B3aanmdoorhometns s35iKa H MbInIJIeHHs, MockBa, by 1971); B. Panzerio OSS III proposed 70 universal table of modal ir modes modus — narrativus (auditivus). Then lie. ir la. applied modus relative term is traditional, For lie. ir la. NN for the theoretical grounds and reasons for separation, see I. Ma rvan, SIPr IV 253 —4, * A. "Girdenis, V. Zulys, Baltistica IX (2) 210. qt. d. 1. vn. buvęs mėtęs, buvusi mėtęsi, dg. been thrown, been thrown; will be. 1. vn. būsiąs metęs, būsianti metusi, dg. the future year, the future years; ne. type es. su 1. ne. with participants: es. 1. vn. esąs metamas, esanti metama, dg. claimed to be methane, which is methane; be. k. 1. vn. formerly thrown, formerly thrown, dg. were thrown, were thrown; be. d. 1. vn. being thrown, being thrown, dg. have been thrown, have been thrown; will be. 1. vn. being thrown, being thrown, dg. being thrown, to be thrown; ne. type of su being. I. ne. with participants: es. l. vn. esąs mėtas, esanti mesta, dg. esq throw, being thrown; be. k. 1. vn. formerly thrown, formerly thrown, dg. were thrown, were thrown; be. d. |. vn. being thrown, being thrown, dg. were cast, were cast, will. 1. vn. becoming cast, becoming cast, dg. to be thrown, to be thrown. NN the paradigm of forms is symmetrical to the paradigm of direct sequence. The forms of both the continuous and the compound NN tenses form the opposite of the corresponding forms of the direct present tense, e.g.: is, : was, was, was, was, was, was, was, was, was, was, was, was, was. It is the same with the truth. is, was, was, was, will, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be, will be is, was, was, will be thrown: esąs, buvęs, buvęs, būsiantis mėtas. 1.1.2. It differs from other Lithuanian k. verb conjugations NN in that its forms do not change by persons. In this respect, it can ji only conditionally be considered part of the system of personified verb forms. It has a distinct place among other sequences. NN forms used in literary language, which are correlated on the basis of the meaning of the indirectly experienced action ir su what. desirable (or the person of the 3 imperative), e.g. fenesa tenešąs, : -anti; tenesq, -ancios; tegu(l) neša: tegu(l) nešąs, -anti, tegu(l) nešą, -ancios. In this case, the intersection of the indirect and desired (mandatory) verbs is explained by the fact that the so-called desired verb forms tėneša, tegu(l) nėša, as well as tenėš, tegu(l) nėš actually have direct verb endings that can be considered iš as being true. ir sequence forms particles su fe-, let (e.g.: bėneša, benėš)*. Eastern Highland dialects (approx. Subordinate pronouns have NN a prepositional ir form, such as: I'm going, you're going, su you're going. I would have gone being éjes®. : : This is because it denotes the modality of action in a NN slightly different aspect than the predicate, namely, according to the nature of the information available to the speaker ir jo the į certainty of action”. However, the aforementioned dialectal forms are narrowly distributed and do not constitute a formal obstacle 4 This applies to the ir corresponding Latvian forms, e.g. k. to carry; lai vedot, cf. I, Marvan, SIPr IV 255; for other formal beisemantic motives, see P.[1asy xun, Tak Ha3biBaeMoe,,TmoBeJiMTEJIbHOS KaK/IOHeHHe- “,,,Studia Rossica Posnaniensia“, VI, Poznan, 1975, p. 94. 5 E.g.: kad norėtu.s, tai jimtu.s ir padari.tu.s Sb; I'm not gonna be able to get out of this place. A. Kučinskaitė, K. Morkūnas, MAD 1(16)215tt. ; A. Vidugiris, LKK VII 190—1. 6 Jakobson considers the description of an act based on testimony, i.e. on the notification of that act, to be a distinct category of evidential evidence. P. O. Si kxo6con, Illugrephi, rAarojibubie KaTeropHH H pyccKHH rJjiaroj, —IlpHHuHnbI THIIOJIOTHUeCKOro aHajiH3a SI3bIKOB pA3/HYHOr0 CTDpOS, Mocxsa, 1972, p. 101. The forms paradigms on this basis, in their meaning close to lie, and la. NN, are distinguished in many languages belonging to different families, e.g. Bulgarian, Macedonian, Albanian (see 3.6.1—2), Estonian, Livonian (see 3.5), Turkish, Turkmen (see 3.6.3), Arabic (B. M. T pau ne, BBejnenue B CpaBHATE/ILHOE H3YUeHHe CEMHTCKHX SI3bIKOB, Mockea, 1972, p. 397), Georgian, Svan (J. Lohmann, KZ LXIII 45 et al.; V. d.CaatTxyuumsujn, Sintagmatika 146 et al.), American Indian (P. O. 51 x 06CoH, ibid. with lit.), Nganasan (H. M. Tepemenxo, IH CCCP III 431) and others. 8 consider the nouns of the participants denoting the narrated action as one of the iš Lithuanian k. verb conjugations. 1.1.3. The most important NN structural features of the forms, distinguishing them from the nouns of other participants, are the position of the personified verb in the sentence the absence of the personified form ir of the auxiliary verb. — Participants in the verb NN position are different from the corresponding attributive and semi-predikative participants (plg. hurt hand healed his hurt hand). ir Be That's me. 1. I'm sick. of participants g. vn. ir dg. the denominator, by forming NN, usually has a short (historically — consonant stem) form, e.g.: gyvenąs, gyveną, whereas the attributive participants are characterized by the longer, newer forms (gyvenantis, gyvenantys)". by the absence of the direct form of the auxiliary verb distinguished from the predicative NN participants, si į (periphrastic) time system, cf. yesterday he wrote a letter he ir is (was, will) write a letter. Frequently used ir in the past tense. participants su are not used as an auxiliary verb, so in this respect they are the most prominent representatives. NN Current time operation. Participants su of the auxiliary verb to be present tense form in the present literary language are also almost not used, past tense forms of past tense, past frequent future are o su jo connected only when they have an affix besudaro vad. ir ir the beginning times. So, going in verbum finitum position of the conjunctibe on, es. 1. I'm sick. participants are always understood NN as forms. Time to act. participants enter the į subsystem of cumulative accomplished times and, used to be personified, can be considered be the current accomplished time of a zero connection, e.g., he is tired. su This was the time of the Carthaginians. nominatives of participants (especially the prepositional forms of the event verb) are homonyms: the meaning jų of the present perfect or past perfect of the direct NN pronoun depends on the context. This is true of the collapsible ir inactive forms of the past participle past thrown past thrown, where a zero connection is also possible. ir Only in these three cases is the opposition of the direct indirect ir pronoun formally implied (neutralized). In cases of neutralization, the meaning can be emphasized by adding the auxiliary verb be to the past NN participle of the past tense, t. y. instead of solid form he is tired of using enriched he is (was) tired. Instead of the solid, the compound forms emphasize NN the modal shade of the action." A similar function has iš NN outrigged ir insertion word becomes the participle form of the participle esą (uncommon) LKŽ I 1209 ar even in the future. ), indicating the speaker's uncertainty or doubt about the reality of the action". 7 Only in some dialects (mainly in Panemunë) the long es. 1. I'm sick. number of participants ward. forms used for acceleration in short su forms, e.g.: sakė, jis žinantis žinonąs visą miestą | 1g, Grl, Kdn, or even prevail ( Zp, Plut, Jsv, Krkn, Ss). This is not typical of literary language. Except for the last period J. Balčikonis' writings, where he tries to avoid short forms in general, are almost always composed of es in literary language. NN I. I'm sick. the short form of the nominative of the participants. The tendency to formally differentiate ir attributive predicative participants ir is observed in other, especially Slavic, languages (see jų section 4. 4). 2.2.5.2). Latin speakers, having a meaning close to verbs, also usually retain the consonant root, conjugated tend to pass o į i stone, plg. J. Safarewicz, The development of participles in Latin, —Linguistic studies, Hague —Paris, 1974, . 245. P 8 Plg. the appropriate (only more pronounced) compounds (resp. emphatic) even. the function of conjunctive forms in Latvian (see section 4.4). 1.3.1) ir Bulgarian (see section 4.4). 3.6.1) languages. ? Plg. ta in the same meaning used modal particles words that ar turn into them in other languages: rus. moa (from morsum E. Fraenkel, Baltosl. 40), skr. iri (W.D. Whitney, SkrG. 89, 405) ir Mr. 9 1.2.1. NN the semantics of forms consists of specific modal meanings. These forms of narration denote: a recounted action 1) experienced ar indirectly in another way or the language and thoughts of another person, e.g.: I heard that ans well drunk aš PIn'; others say that he ir stumbled Tt; here, they say, forests used to be Infringement; Our grandmother when she described the lazs, how they used to go, how they used to work Musk; asks only, ar aš having fifty litas medicines Shil; will do už this, will do that, as it should, there's nothing Plvn; mistaken that there would be no 25; storms BalčHP shepherd knew that the bočius pungų poor Ms; 2) doubtful, untruly known ar action considered unreal, e.g.: we disappeared, bitties raging JV 912; probably from his wife he separated himself Smln; buried stones burning Vrn; that they may have gone to the race Mžš; parents were fearless, Peter, appearing in the ar people, not to be involved in any disaster Myk-PutS seem, the grave light suvéjes 514; iš Vrnv; 3) suddenly, unexpectedly experienced ir surprising action", e.g.: I go outside, ogi white-blue warm bed į Krp (LKZ VII 589); Whenever it was evening, look, he's coming — i Jnuš (I'm going 214); to see what's up, I'm looking for a hedgehog — Sk (LKT 153); aš courageous pasvietu — katinas lindęs klėtį į įkliuvęs ir Rt (LKT 89); 4) iš the implied action of the results, e.g. : Oh, look, that guy already ir understands Lithuanian... SimonR IV 74; those cats their nė bleed unbroken besq Vvr; father examined the anus, saw that he was approachsu ing dum horse Grg; already, apparently, those children rupliukai in the side were: the largest brides left Tt (LKT 108); tautis buvęs pasileidęs“ spikus pri bulbių išvertęs, išrauliojęs Krtn (LKT 76). Therefore, NN semantics is not homogeneous: į ją does it include meanings that in other languages can be marked by separate clauses, e.g., the narrative of retelling, the unreal of non-conformity to reality, the dubitative — of doubting, the admirative of suddenness, of surprise, — etc.*? In Lithuanian, all — these meanings are linked by the same paradigm. — ir NN However, they are unequally distributed and equally ir ne characteristic of all forms of participants. The most common is the meaning of the recounted, indirectly experienced, with which mo the shade of su doubt is closely associated ir (the recounted things may already seem doubtful to the speaker). These values are shared by all time participants. The significance of the suddenly experienced action is more characteristic of es only. 1. I'm sick. for participants (especialsu ly with the ir prefix be-) be. k. I. I'm sick. for participants (infrequent). These forms may have ir iš the value of the implied action of the results, which is the rarest. The latter two meanings are also close to each other. Therefore, NN semantics consists of two groups of interrelated meanings, having the same morphological expression, further denoted by the general term of the meaning of ir the indirectly experienced action. It should be noted that the indirectly experienced action can be expressed by direct forms of narration, especially when the narration doubt in the sentence is marked by ir lexical means. ar The constructions said, he will come said, he ir will come in the present literary language are contiguous. This is because NN su directly constitutes privatyving opposition. This opposition The last member is NN, the o distinctive semantic character — of the meaning of the indirectly experienced action. ** Examples of dialects in the article are phonetically transposed into į literary language, preserving morphological and syntactic features, marked ir LKŽ abbreviations. Examples in current spelling ir iš XIX - XX a. published dialect texts. "" Plg. : ,,We use the participatory language for often ir unexpected, sometimes as if delayed observations, experiences, as if for attestations“ ir ablonskis, J. J RR I 527. "* Plg. B. Tank, OSS III, etc., forms 63 used: in the 70. 10 1.2.2. NN secondary elements of 1) connective explanatory sentences, when the main elements are commentable (t. y. phrase control)*® verbs, most often denoting sensations, perception, thinking and information transmission, e.g.: kalbėjo, kad ryžių nesą viskai Slm:; I heard ka when I was at home Skd; in the 2) second part of sentences without conjunctions, usually verbs po of the same meaning, e.g. : She dreaming, everywhere going, everywhere talking Jrb; said, horror burned the cottage Ktk; in 3) independent sentences, e.g. aitvarai pas vieną nešdavę, katras juos turėdavęs BsMt I 129; pots crying horse that pouring finally su through pots, even all combs picked up BM 52. In the first (prepositional) elements of non-conjunctive sentences, the NN participants go relatively rarely, e.g.: to on zastrelil volka, govori KzR all ; kinds of songniy sung, says Vvr. In the conjunctive ir sentences, synonymous with them, the modal character of the participant is emphasized by the verb of the other démens!? ; in independent sentences, it becomes clear contextual situations. iš ir 1.3.1. In literary Latvian, the indirect pronoun is usually formed by the present tense of the future tense. ir participsu ants suffix -ot < *before (to raise, raise ir etc.). The function of auxiliary verb of the conjugated tenses performs in the inflexible than in the genitive unchanged forms of participants esot, tiekot (tapot):; būšot, tikšot (APPLAUSE) The Future of the Future. the participants NN only have a ir meaning, so in the current language viewpoint to the participants no longer iš belongsamil®. Time to act. Participants in NN paradigmatic forms are now only used when they go in participle conjunction, e.g., esot su rundjis, only verbs are used to indicate past action. t. y. present tense forms. Therefore, the modal function of the participle k. is even more pronounced in Latvian than in Lithuanian. In this way, the paradigms of literary language avoid the direct NN consequence su of homonymy in the compound present tense. However, in iš the dialects of the real Latvian iš language, in ir some fictional literature, the past tense is active. participants are still used NN with the ir be meaning of a connection being present, e.g., kadam tēvam bijuši trīs tāpēci**, t. y. exactly the same as in Lithuanian. Aukštaičių (upland) in some ir other dialects veik. NN The participle can also be combined with the noun of the noun pronoun by su gender and ar number, e.g.: vini uskritūoši, vina navaruete oizmigt"“". NN of the forms recorded ir in Latvian k. old se writings, cf. Adolphus Grammar. sing. max. guarded, fem. guard; name. pl. max. cautiously, fem. guard ir pan.8 was NN made by present ir su tense participants in the unnamed form of the genus esu lie. ~ is, still known to dialects, e.g., I'm afraid es (R. Grisle ib. 252). The Latvian indirect k. noun therefore consists of the historically same participle forms as the ir Lithuanian one, but has changed more recently. Be According to the paradigm of direct pronoun" in the Latvian language, indirect pronouns were formed '5 For terms see aut., LKK XV 210 with lit. '* Sometimes it inserts a į sentence ar substantive su NN becomes ir an insertion word, e.g.: v nemocnici, hovorí, bývala Sd. '* J. Endzelins, LaGr. 1009; A. Bergmane, MLLVG I 624, 661 tt. ; J. Handbag, La, 155, 166. '6 J. Endzelins, ib. 977; see. but A. Bergmane, ibid. 625. 17 J. Endzelins, ibid. 977; M. Rudzite, Dial. 374. 18 P. Smiths, R.C.R. XIV 29, 38; J. Endzelins, ib. 977—8; R. Grisle, LVLIR VII 251—2. '* J. Endzelins, DI I 144. Since the Latvian debt k. intersects with the ir su supposed to determine a separate category of the verb. 11 the forms of the imperative, e.g.: esot jūmet, būšor jūmer; It's been a month, it's been a year. These later changes made Latvian NN more morphologically defined*??. The semantics of Latvian NN corresponds to the main, i.e. 1—2, group of Lithuanian NN meanings. It is usually used to indicate a recounted, unknowable or doubtful action. 1.3.2. In Old Prussian monuments, the participants with a clear indirect meaning are not recorded. However, Old Prussian participants can go in verbum finitum position and correspond to NN forms according to syntactic function. NN's syntactic assumptions are to be. 1. veik. participants used after the relative pronoun kawids in the subordinate elements of connective sentences, e.g. fans... prei issprestun dast | en kawijdsei debijkun nautin bhe wargan stai gurijnai malnijkiku embaddusisi 7la-s —Er... zuuerstehen gibt | in was grosser Not vnd Gefahr die armen Kindlein stecken; Kai ious... sen seilin pomirit quoitéti en kawidsu debijkan powargsennien | bhe nautien | schis malnijkiks... embaddusisi Tlsy-39 —das jhr... mit fleip bedencken willt | in was grossem Jammer vad Noth diff Kindlein... steckt**. The autochthony of such usage is confirmed by the fact that the participle is translated as the original personified form of the verb (see corresponding Lithuanian participle constructions with conjunctive Words 1.9.3). 1.4.In both Lithuanian and Latvian languages, the indirect pronoun, as a kind of verb category, is relatively new, formed from noun forms. Although the constituent participants (otherwise verb adjectives) with suffixes nt and us are inherited from ide. but in most related languages such use is not attested. It is not reflected in the oldest ide. in language monuments (e.g., Hittite texts, Vedas, Homeric epics). This suggests that the NN was formed during the period of the independent development of the Baltic languages, and its foundation is to be sought in the usage of the participants of these languages. There are various opinions about the origin of the name. 1.4.1. B. Delbriickas VS II 491 considered the construction of the accusative with participle (accusativus cum participio) as the basis of the indirect pronoun and thought that from such statements as said father coming (coming), next to which synonymous statements with the direct pronoun were used said, (that) father will come, the construct that could be deciphered said father coming, and then said that father will come. This opinion was supported by J. Endzelynas LaGr. 976—977, 979, adding that the contamination of the final with the participle and of synonymous statements with verbs of direct denotation could also be facilitated by the construction of the nominative with the participle (nominativus cum participio, hereinafter—VD), for example, he says he knows a lot. According to E. Hofmann, the Baltic NN iSriedéjusi from indirect language, denoted by accusativus cum gerundium type constructions**. From the accusative construction, as the primary source (,,letzten Endes“), derives Latvian. NN and G. Bense, LKK VI 192. 1.4.2. A. Potebnia (3ar. I—II 230—1) associated indirect determination with VD (nominativus cum participio) and similar constructions. He claimed that the indirect 20 Plg, I. Marvan ib. 253.2 See J. Zubaty, 1F VI 302; E. Fraenkel, Baltosl. 46, kitaip J. Endzelin AprGr 2 E, Hofmann, On the Use of the Participies in the Skeireins, Indogermanica, Festschrift fir W. Krause, Heidelberg, 1960, p. 29. 12 the shade of ar language doubt that may have iš originated from the verb used in these constructions (e.g.: rūkoti, dėtis) of lexical meaning, which was then reinforced by the conjunctions but, nei, etc., e.g.: bijojos, ar dumodami, buk dwase koke regi; placed had, ney esq right (the construction iš itself was initially indifferent to modality). Such constructions quite correspond to Slavic: monjaacho (eyes) spirit viděšte. But the Baltic languages went further: they began to use participants when the subject of the kaijų action did not ir coincide with the subject of the verb action. su tu (e. g. : I aš don't ar know, he's 225, coming, he told me to go, ka there's a house ne 227). Considering constructions common only in ir Lithuanian and Latvian languages with different subjects of action su of the participant as newer? *, Potebnia at the same time pointed out circumstances A. contradicting this opinion: heterosubjective ir constructions closer to noun, less unified, the development of language is just going in the direction of sentence unification. o 1.4.3. E. Tanglis Acc, the 50—51 indirect condition derives simply iš VD (nom. c. participio) constructions su with non-recursive verbs, which are jo thought to have ir XVI — The 17th a. century was not yet over. The indirect pronoun E. Tangle was a new phenomenon, apparently only established during the period of written tradition. Similarly explained NN the internal causes of the occurrence ir I. Marwan** adding that VD su non-recursive verbs were secondary sentence variants in the example could ir jų get conjunctions separate action subject. ir Sometimes-- gi VD these authors derived from the accusative iš construction, postulated about the following evolutionary chain: says he NN came->says he came says — (that) atėYes bag — (that) the father — has come the father has come. 1.4.4. Explained the formation NN quite differently J. Kazlauskas LKK IV 86-87, Is. Article 10 402—403. He thought it might be a remnant of the periphrastic optative (*bi negelbės, *bi nekėlęs), which in the Lithuanian language proved Ch. S. Stangas NTS XVIII 348—356, VGr. 429, based on the participants of the conditional su constructions, e.g.: jeib negelbės, jeib nekėlės, etc. ir Other ideas. In other languages, indirect language is often expressed as optional, so this could have been the case in Lithuanian. When the ir participant of the auxiliary verb that has become a particle is transferred to an optional iš charge, the particle may have disappeared. bi į ta NN In order to make i it clearer, it is useful to examine the usage at the beginning of the writing, its NN prevalence in relation to other constructions of similar meaning. ir su 1.5. Ką we know about the usage at NN the beginning of Lithuanian writing? E. Tanglis Acc. 50—51 in the ancient NN writings found no examples. J. Bretkūno, M. Daugos other ir studied scripts jo independent constructions of the language, in NN their form different from VD, really iš uncharacteristic. Individual cases where participants are close to an indirect link (e. g. : DP 5123, BrB I Moz 48, 18; Joz can be 10,1) interpreted as the forms ir of addition times with null conjunctionsu s? *. However, after experiencing others XVIIn the 17th a. century, there was no doubt that the writing was fully formed at the beginning. NN Particularly significant in this regard are: S. Vaughan- 's Letters. Jo ‘Žemčiūgos’ ir In the translations of,,On the Papal Mass“ we find quite 35 independent (with separate ** Recently, similarly V. Sirtautas, Linguistics XXV (I) 95. *t H. Mapsan, Kalbotyra IV 36—37; Baltistica V(1) 18. ** E.g.: wel’ Ką after a lot of to other holy minions | | ir who have committed DP 512; (What also then many other saints... vezynilo action of the W 876). 13 subject) NN pavyzdzius®®. Since they have not been discussed anywhere so far, we will describe them in more detail. 1.5.1. With the exception of one case of optional meaning (see 3.3.2), all NN forms in Vaišnoras' translations go with the modal particle būk, emphasizing the shade of uncertainty, doubt?". With this particle, NN is still widely used in Žemaitija (e.g. about Tėlšiai, Salantus, Lenkimūs, Papilė, Tytuvėnai, Ūžventis, Kaltanėnai, Šiauliai, Raséiniai, Laūkuvas), as well as in north-eastern Lithuania (about Joniškis, Pasvalis, Liūnkuvas, Daūgailiai, Dūsetas, Miežiškiai), sometimes even in southern dialects, where NN participants are very rare. S: Vaishnor usually uses these participants in the subordinate elements of connective sentences with the conjunctions that, as well as relative pronouns which, kursai. When NN is in the subject of a compound sentence that does not have a conjunction, the latter's role is played by the same particle bitik. Subordinate elements of compound sentences with NN forms are often very distant from the main elements, separated by whole complexes of other elements and therefore quite independent. In indirect speech, the verbs say, talk, speak are used in the main accent or in the previous context; to reinforce, to write, e.g. : Tapieiig saka ghie... iog spawiedniie buk priwalingas essąs ischskaitimas wissu grieku 148,,; skaisczei nor perkalbeti | as buk macis tokia io walgimo | and other tos regetoiems on good atenti PM 32,5; netikumus statczei uschstoie turiami... iog ipaczia wiera ing Christu | book nesanti dallis Acts 148,; ; raschiti | and foolishly strengthen dressa... Buk Chrikschtas... ne essas apmasgoimu 1322%,,. In conveying thoughts and beliefs that the author considers unreal and incorrect, the participants of the NN follow the verbs smokoti, laikytis, mokyti, pramanyti, pramanymus ginti: (Stoics) dumoie | buk Diewas ir ischkadingu paiudinojmu (177) žmones biauribiump werczęs 177—1772*. Popes... in their wandering keep | iog buk dina ingi kuna Christ's butischkai persimainanti PM 302,,; mokin teipaieig. Iog rebirth and redemption we will not be in Christ's presence 133%,,. Nessa imogischkasis protas pramana | Diewa santi sudcze swietischku | kursai sawo dingscze buk danguie ischkadingus pastatimus raschqs 164,; pramanimus ginna: First of all, God... no creations... on amZzinoses prapulties buk paskires 178255. 1.5.2. Indirect consequence in S. VaiSnora- 's writings usually consists of es. I. veik. participants (25 examples), less often —maybe. I. veik. participants (5 examples). The participle of the verb to be (12 e.g.), going through a conjunction, is associated with nouns (ne essas apmasgoimu 132%,,, uschmokejmu... essqs 264%;, kitu nosrais essa 32,;), adjectives (priwalingas essqs 148.5, nei naudingas nei ischkadingas... essas 132%.) and their *6 In two of these examples, due to spelling, it is not quite clear whether we have participants or personified forms of direct pronoun: ischrinktieghi buk palaika (-ą or -0?) malone 179,,, Apaschtolai buk... laike (-ę or -ė?) PM 37,5. Other cases do not give rise to any doubt. 6 constructions are used in the book,,Apie popiežiškąją masę” (PM), 29—in the very “Žemčiūga”. ?7 This particle is used several times with the same meaning with the direct subjunctive (11%, 13351, 1785—5, 178 —178a, PM 23,,, 272,, _;3), and in one place —with the participle of the participant: ghie i regima affiera... (25) be iokia ischstowincza grunta | kaip buk priwalomo sancze | be reikos stata PM 25-259; for the corresponding cases in the present language see. LKZ, I 1136 plg. dar E. Fraenkel KZ XIV (Erg. H.), 36, 98 tt. Come on. be in the ancient scriptures is also used as the accent of the conjunction be... alba, be... be,,or... or“, e.g.: buk tatai House alba City be BrB III Mos 25, 34 (see also 17, 10; 22, 18; 22, 28; IV Mos 15, 2; V Mos 12, 3; 13, 6 and others). 14 in adjective forms (priwalu essa PM 332) ir prepositional construction (no czech) Holy Apostles PM 39,4). Su es. 1. ne. Participants of the verb to be a participant forms conjugated NN forms of the passive kind: Adoma butibe... nuodemais buk santi attolinama tie kad isch schos giwatas ischeiti... 692,.; | nig biaurjbiu greku buk essq nuczistijemi pramana ipaczus 263*—264; pagavimus kureis buk žmones | ir be to ulcer Baszniczes esq priwerczemi neatmetiemus 113%; kuri... | buk never essa ne reborn 133944. How NN S. In Vaišnors translations, the participle-at-being compounds su used in the adjective's genitive form with a preposition and a predicative adverb are rather impersonal ir participles, having the forremark of the respective participants' genitive form only when necessary. mų (plg. reikią, tereikią): I would like to tu persuade | them not to need to walgjti but | to stay while they can PM 32*,; Lastly, I'm teaching | you about the decisive election. ir God needs to be put | down so that I can get to work. 179;,,; I am enthusiastic... says... buk need to wait for catching gwoltinguiu 69254 (Antonims) nig Euangelias start | ir tq be Zokana was administered through Euangelia buk teireikent sakiti ir teaching 758,,. Such statements po of implicitly ar indicative (75%,,) verbs are very close to the final participle, e.g. su teaches to salt properly, says to wait properly. It was just the non-human į structures of the rear su participant that the participant first began to penetrate, pushing the participant's beam. g. form, see Baltistica IV (2) 197 tt. Apparently, the participle form was tended to be ir generalized in other cases of impersonal usage; it shows such ir F. Kuršaitis's statements, as I think, aš (that) today in the rain K Gr. 424, 426 next to the lion K I 284. 1.5.3. As in the ir current speech, NN S. In the Vaishnava scriptures, it can su go along with the accelerata tion in the very same meaning, for example: anis toktai... scraped | ir unreasonably strengthen dressa: 1. For the first | Buk Chrikschtas wlosnai speaking | ne essas apmasgoimu rebirth but ... Figurischkai (132%)... buk tiektai issimano widutini atgimima bei atnaughinima Dwasses schwentoses kursai | ir be chrikschta / ischrinktusamp buk ends to indulge on eternal ischganima discussrty examples show 132% —133. 1.5.4. Iš that S. The constructions found in NN Vaishnava scripts correspond to the present language in both their iš structure and meaning. NN here functions as a grammatical means to express an overstated, questionable or unreal action. Ta the fact that iš XVIThe 17th a. most prominentNN ly attested sources S. In Vaišnor’s writings, the author’s origin in the Zemgaly region, iš where the indirect trace is currently the most ir common, is explained primarily by the polemic purpose of the books ir themselves. Teaching foreign views, the translator tried to emphasize the unreality of them by all means of jų language ir (this shows ir the already mentioned dll. be the use of indirect, in su some cases o direct forms of ir reference). On the other hand, the NN avoidance in most of the other to writings of the time can also be explained in part by the iš nature of the content: jų the religious ir truths and events they described were considered by the authors to be indisputablely true and unquestionable. Since Latvian also uses from ir NN There is no a. doubt that the Eastern Baltic dialects were formed in the prehistoric period. ji jų 1.6.1. NN The ratio of the prevalence of the current Lithuanian language in the ir area with other su near-meaning constructions s helps to determine the Lithuanian language atlas database, especially the answers of the atlas material collection program action, į 120, 145°, 151, 175, 176 cf. Tawa servant buwa beganns Awis sawa Tiewo, and comes Lewas 15 BrB I Sam 17, 34 (hutet die schafe LB). Occasionally present tense. Participles with the affix in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb in the past tense form of the auxiliary verb : Tu awinelio newirk, kolei ira beszindans (prieg Pieno Augiwes) BrB II Moz 34,26 (if still at his mother milk is LB; in lacte matris suae V); Sakie iems su dziauksmu didziu | Iog est begulis edziosu BrGD XLVII (p. 83), t. p. Ms 193. 1.8.2.3. So predicative es. 1. veik. Participles, which are used in the current literary language only as NN forms, may not have had a defined modal meaning in the past. In the verbum finitum position, they went alone or with the auxiliary verb be, with which they formed the same constructions as the past participle verb. participants. Current time operation. Participant forms with and without the affix beir had the same syntactic characteristics and differed only in the stronger or weaker meaning of duration. So the constructions with the present time act. with the participants were as close to NN, as at present are still close to it the forms of the past tense with the past participle. participants. We also find prerequisites for such a state in the system of the present language. These are, first of all, the incompleteness of the paradigm of the auxiliary tenses (lack of I. forms), the lack of common meaning (usually I. participants have the meaning of the relationship of the duration of the actions only with the present tense forms of the auxiliary verb, and this only in a certain context, cf.: N. Sližienė, LKK IV 67; LKG II 146), etc. 1. veik. the sense of admirative of participants with the affix and their correlation with those without this affix. k. 1. I'm sick. participants, plg. : Three days later the parents watch —a whole flock of coyotes crawling into their yard LTt III 296 and Look, what a big hazel tree has grown! Kp. 1.8.3. The similarity of their usage areas also shows the connection between the compound times and NN. As with the NN, the composed tenses are most widely used in the western part of the Žemaičių and Western Altai (which also includes the Lithuanian dialects of the former East Prussia). In the north-eastern corner of Lithuania, where NN is also alive, only the completed forms of the past participle and future tense are more common. In general, the area of NN distribution approximately coincides with the area of the most intensive consumption of participants. The facts mentioned here suggest that it did. The nouns of the participants, going in verbum finitum position, did not differ from the NN forms in their morphological and syntactic characteristics. What is now known as the indirect subjunctive was only a special case of the predicative use of the participant noun, distinguished from the others by a certain shade of modal meaning. 1.9. Participant predicative behaviour — a legacy of the distant past. As a noun form of nature, the participants are already in the oldest ide. at different stages of language development could form noun, or nominal, sentences**, such as father tired next to father good or father master. Initially, such sentences were apparently different in their usage from the corresponding sentences with verbs of the *es, *bhū roots, 3 Cf. : K. Brugmann, Synt.69—70; J. Zubaty, Studie a ¢lanky, II, Prague, 1954, 126 tt. ; A. Meillet, MSL XIV. 1 | tt. ; Introduction a I’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes, Paris,” 1934, p. 356—7; J. Bloch, MSL XIV. 1 56 tt. ; E. Benveniste, BSL XLVI 27tt. ; Ch. Guiraud, La phrase nominale en grec, Paris, 1962, p. 152 tt. ; W. P. Lehmann, PIE 115-6. 22 :which could have a specific lexical meaning**. Eventually, the old nominal sentences were incorporated into the system of verbal sentences as its members with null conjunctions*". The nominal sentences of the su participants could not be isolated from this process, the brother-goiir ng-back type | statements also had to be attached to the brother is was was-going-back paradigm. | | | However, the system of compound tenses that began to form on its basis in Lithuanian language did not finally crystallize, many predicative "participants, which had a process ir (especially es. I. forms), remained apart from it, retaining to these days the features of the previous predicative usage. 1.9.1. Even those participants, which in the view of the present language are considered equivalents of the present perfect tense, often differ in their meaning from the conjugated forms by conjunction. su N. Sližienė LKK XI 20 noticed that the former cartistic time was working. participants of the be auxiliary verb to be es. 1. forms are used,,creating an artistic picture of the present“, e.g. : John iSsitieses kniupštas at the stove on the pumpkin; short of space, so his feet up to the knees up against the wall; head second- "we're at the end fucked longer bench ZemR I 86. However, the creation of an artistic painting only partially describes the specificity of the use of such participants. It would be more accurate to say that participants without an auxiliary verb are usually used when describing a static situation and the qualitative state of individual things. It is used as a. I. veik. participants (usually with be-), e.g., O ans already from the morning lying down and bedribsąs Rs. Meanwhile, participants with an auxiliary verb are more typical of narrative. This difference in the use of the auxiliary verb by the participants is important in that it partly reflects the difference between the old verbal and nominal sentences. In ancient Indian, Greek and Celtic languages, sentences with a noun pronoun without a conjunction are used to denote constant,,,timeless,, states, while the form conjunction usually denotes changing, time-related su processes®. 1.9.2. Relics of ir be jo predicative participle usage can be found in fixed constructions, where the iš auxiliary verb form is not allowed at all. Many of them have a pronounced modal-expressive shade. Instead of verbum finitum, the negative forms of the participles (especially bev. g.) are used to express the denial emphasized, with a certain emphasis, e.g. : o su su ir su There was no longer that aš su the more I joined Jnsk; There was no longer, that I až his eich Ds (LKZ I, 1215); No longer living (=no longer living) here —that only this time it ends well! Sdk. It's raining. “Nothing to do with you! Ds (LKŽ VII 589). Now, bra, unwashed, unwashed... VaižgRR I 421. Bought the meat, only the money Aries (APh I 98). That's tu ignorant, you should have answered ką him though Alk (LKŽ VII 833). Bev. g. form not seen used in greetings turned into phraseologisms, e.g. : Kotas jo nematę! Ds (LKŽ VII the 914); nine jo unseen — have already ended (deceased) Lkm (LKŽ I 459); Bala nemasen, no more buy that sugar Slm (LKŽ VII 914); ball not found jo Kp; I've never ją seen that little thing Kp. Such konstruk- «tions archaism shows ir ta the fact that the participant bev. g. form goes all su the birth- ** E.g. to be a specific meaning remains in dialects: we so are (live) atkliudziai Zibinifikai (LKT we 76); are now living) by the lake (= Mrc; started wherev- (= er everywh- (= ere) be living), work Wine (LKT peas 300); will start to grow upwards) (= Veūtė (LKT see. 144), but LKŽ I 1215. % I will. Be. HBanos, O6m. 268. 38 Zr. E. Welcome, BSL XLVI. 1. 31 tt. ; J. Humbert, Greek Syntax, Paris, 1960, p. 66; Ernout— Thomas, Syntaxe latine, Paris, 21953, p. 146—8; P. Chantraine, TCLC IX 25; Ch. Guiraud, ibid. 64 tt, 23 nouns. In its meaning, the participant here approaches the optional, which is often used to express a wish (cf.: Horror you do not see him! Ds), and the corresponding constructions with a direct consequence (the end did not see you Dks, the devil does not see him Grz LKZ VII 914) are clearly later. The forms of other participants also occasionally have an optional meaning, e.g., That you have gone to the sky, that you will be lost Grv (CCC XIII 122). In this respect, the participant- 's steady bev is particularly characteristic. "Attack on Titan: The Complete 3rd Season Episode Guide" (PDF) (PDF) (272 kB). "Attack on Titan: The Complete 3rd Season Episode Guide" (PDF) (272 kB). "Attack on Titan: The Complete 3rd Season Episode Guide". durelas Verksniénys LKT 299 ir Open it up. (door), you my children Lt III 86**; here the participant already has a clear imperative meaning. The participants who preserved the predicative function are found in rhetorical question form statemenir ts with where or inv. what funny, e.g.: where you've seen me get her! Vb (LKŽ VII 915), nu kur tu matęs: air pavažiuot žmogumi, nukris Joniškaičiai LKT 245; Well, where not prayed, such a beggar KatkR 259; Ką tu Waiting for old age? ib. 190; Where would he find better, ko he has not gone? ib. 219; I know, where not ib 186; knowing what was a rake! Clean your nose first! Rdn (LKT 75). Some of these sayings are iš completely desemantized, turned into idioms, e.g.: where was, the daughter of the lord got sick Daunoriai (LKK III where 201); was not been, will come, fox Lt III 147; What is bēsāss (,,means nothing“) to weave a crown for us Sts (LKZ 1, 1217); What has not been, I will sail į the sea Plng (LKZ I, 1216). Similar participants (mostly su dll. or) used in constructions ir of alternative meaning, e.g.: it's a naughty child, told him, O ar ar ne Alif Lam Ar Mim said, ar dog barking — does not ir listen, both Lnkv (LKZ VII both 661); anam said and not said: pro vieną ausį jein(a), pro kitą išein(a) Jnš; Crossed uncrossed — mares stand alone, heads down on the ground (LKŽ V 855); plg. even cases of the same meaning, where the participant is already next to the verb: sakyk jam nesakęs nuleidžia pro ausis — Jnš; teipas lord former, lord will Ppl; will be what it is (none) As. "big thing here" (LKŽ I 1216) ir emphasis constructions su with a ir participle of the same root verb: grown grown green pine forest at daddy's manor 383) and 384). 1.9.3. The verbum finitum position can be occupied by the nouns of participants, ir denoting the main, secondary, subordinate action in the sentence. ne Postpositional o (with respect to verb finitum) participants in constructions with the conjunctives kiek, kur, kada, iki, ligi, pronoun kas in the su vowels correspond to the verbs used in the subordinate elements of connective sentences, e.g.: vaikas... turėjo duonos kiek norėdamas ValPŽK 4; fisherman... went through the forest, not even knowing where ir ko einąs TMPs no 27; longer remember when caught fish Lt III ordered 377; the king a full jacket to be removed, ik saying to tie If they were 46; to have slaves, they would have to give them, and if they ar were to work, they DB 169; would not have to do anything to them. Dglš; She... began to tell, ko seeking Lt III good 290; would be a girl, only džiauna only nutverusi ką Sml; see. aut. LKK IX 43-62. Ending of po komentabiliyjy verbs (especially verba percipiendi et dicendi), such constructions are close to NN, for example, at home, (brothers- ), nothing askedrė Eglei, ką having made Lt III 299, o having a subject of action different from the verb, completely coincide, e.g. su ja karčaninks karčemininkas) ir asked where he (= was going Glbr (With VI 46). However, the po participants of verbs of different meanings denote secondary action be without any NN nuances, e.g. Goes where the executioner ordered Dr. Iš ?** The archaicness of the ir formula is confirmed by the ancient reduplication, plg. smashed smashed daddy's floor NS 341, released released thin mesh In LTt išveža 68: veža mano berniuką the connective words of the LTt, II 58, 24 constructions su clearly show the retelling of the meaning relationship ir of the participants denoting a generally subordinated action. NN characteristic retellingthe to meaning of the action here is secondary, depending on the lexical expression of the verbs, the forms bearing this meaning are only a o certain subset of predicative participants: — 1.9.4. Prepositional participants, connected with su the personifying verb forconjunction, ma and also Denotes secondary action in the sentence goes verbum finitum equivalents, e.g. wolf fled fear ir end pastipo iš ir BsP IV 235*. Such constructions, typical of folklore and ancient writings, often also have a modal meaning: they, as ir NN, often emphasizes the unexpectedness or surprise of the action. 1.9.5. Su modal meanings (command, prohibition, denial, etc.) ir and expressive shades related to ir being. k. 1. I'm sick. use of the participle in the second verb position: to emphasize the action of the main verb a) of the same root, e.g.: gerk dronkęs, brolyti, dimok namo ir JD 72; I'm lying down, so that I ir don't get tired Plng**, similarly with negative su verbs, e.g.: that the undanced bunny kudi will dance! ir LTt 343, sometimir su es with a switch, e.g. go that you've gone, that there's nothing to wear Gs (LKŽ II 771); b) express alternatives (also a verb of su the same root), e.g.: say to him without saying let him down, to denote a negative unwanted action — c) ar (with a verb of a different root), e.g.: tylėk neburbéjes Vkš (LKŽ I 959)42, The cases of predicative participle usage mentioned here have all the characteristics of syntactic archaisms. In the system of syntactic means of the Lithuanian language they occupy a peripheral, isolated place and do not fit into any usual ir type of usage of the participants. They are usually found in phraseologically staggered, staggering ar sentences. They are unproductive in modern language. ir nyksta; occasionally jų occur only in colloquial language in fiction, where they ar are stylistically marked. Su NN They are connected ne only by the identity of form, but by modal and ir expressive nuances, showing a tendency to modally give meaning to disappearing forms that no longer correspond to the changed system. All this suggests that the basis of the indirect pronoun was the ancient predicative usage of the participants. This assumption is confirmed by the non-active participants of the structure. su 2. CONSTRUCTIONS WITH NON-OPERATIVE PARTICIPANTS 2.1.1. In Lithuanian, the verb never has a modal meaning. participle genitive forms with or without the actor's adjective: es. 1. (brother- 's) residence,. sown, but. 1. (brother- 's) lived, sown. Occasionally, the past ir participle forms are used: (brother's) was lived. Their usage was accurately described by J. Jablonski. who has noticed that with such statements the speaker,,as if he wants to speak on the topic now, now notice this trick. (...) as if he wants to tell us that the message he is now telling us is only one of his own — that of another little man from the sidelines, whom he himself has just observed, or that of another person who has given it to him” (RR I 465). At the same time, J. Jablonskis pointed out that such statements are close to,,narrative language” 40 For more on this see aut. Baltistica I (1) 53-66. ** Cf. corresponding Greek constructions with participants of the same stem: gvyfį gedys, ūxodoas... fpovoux etc., cf. ir R. Kuhner, GrGr. 656. 2 See. but J. Balčikonis, Baltistica III (2) 204; aut., LKK and are not used VII 72—3, LKG II 353 —4. 25 in all dialects:,,Augštaičių pasakojimus,,Cia trobos būta“, „girių čia snausta...“ for the Žemaites, their own sayings are replaced, such as: „,Here the trout was, stood“,,,the hills slept here“... (RR I 466, cf. also ibid. 530). In later grammar, the modal meaning of the participle forms of the noun gender of the new participants was either not considered at all, or was satisfied J. Summary of Jablonski's thoughts. More attention has been paid to the significance of the type of these forms. On several occasions it has been stated that the genitive forms of the noun participles are often made from intransitive verbs and do not have the meaning characteristic of other passive forms. or forms corresponding to the active species?. The relationship of the unspecified genus of the nev. participants with other forms of the nev. species was recently discussed by V. Sirtautas, Kalbotyra XXI 71 et al. and E. Geniušienė, ibid. XXIV (1) 27 etc. and concluded that by syntactic features bev. g. forms of constructions with a noun quite correspond to the passive. Nev. participants bev. g. the passive nature of the forms mentioned by the authors is well justified; it is quite clear that they must be considered as a group of forms of a new species. However, the specificity of their meaning and their synonymy with the verb is also clear. forms, especially with modal verbs. participants. It is precisely because of that modal meaning construction with the new participants bev. g. forms are recently sometimes even assigned to NN3, although inconsistently and with some fluctuations?. The inclusion of these forms in NN is actually impeded by the incompleteness and uncertainty of their paradigm, close connection with passive proximity nev. ir for the kind of compound times. 2.1.2. Present and past participle verbs. g. on the basis of modal meaning, forms can form an opposition to the present and past tense forms of the direct pronoun, e.g.: brolio gyvenama: brolis gyvena (see brolis gyvenąs); brolio gyventa: the brother lived (see brolis gyvenęs). However, in terms of formal characteristics, they quite correspond to the conjugated forms of the present tense of the new kind with zero connection." They can be understood both as equivalents of the verbs brother is living | lived, and as statements with a certain modal meaning depending on the context and situation (see see how your brother is living here!). Equally ambiguous and corresponding are the verbs of transitive verbs. g. form (e.g. here his barley is sown | sown). Only the construction broli byla žila (brother had lived) — contrary to the past participle form of the direct pronoun broli byl žil (brother had lived) — has no counterpart in the system of compound tense of the direct pronoun. However, it is quite isolated, because constructions with present tense participants (e.g.: *brolio esama gyvenama | gyventa, *brolio buvota gyvenama), which could form an opposition to other direct tense conjugations, have not been observed in dialects, and they can only be used occasionally and sporadically- ®. In addition, the construction was lived in the sense of many places is used the usual compound form of the past tense was lived, correlated with (is) | was | was | will be lived, cf.:! P. Trost, LKK III 220 tt. ; N. Sližienė, LKK IX 74, LKG II 152. * W. K. Matthews, SEER XXXIII 81, 352 tt. ; A. Paulauskienė, Activities. 157. * J. Balkevičius, Sint. 95—6; N. Sližienė, LKG II 168; LKK XV 78; P. Gailiūnas, LKG II 59; E. Geniušienė, Linguistics XXIV (1) 31. * For example, P. Gailiūnas, Kalbotyra IV 76, does not distinguish the participants in the NN, while LKG II 59 only mentions them briefly, in one sentence, at the end of the chapter. They are not presented by N. Sližienė in LKG II 173—8 in the paradigm of personification of compound verb forms. * For details, see N. Sližienė, LKK IX 74, LKG II 53 etc. $ The constructions esama mokoma, esama mokyta, buvota mokoma have been included in the table of taric expressions by J. Balkevičius, Sint. 95, but did not give any example with them. 20 of us had already been laid down when we jo came Kp; my deepest dream has been, you see Mit; be “I didn’t buy aš the thing, it jo was already Yes; been jo tiogas inlékt(a) Brz; has jo already been exited Alz, Aln, Mlt, VIkv kt. ; been arrived ir at Cancelled Vins: I couldn't jo find it, it was already gone Oak; then I realized, mine here ka was left Kp: man was passed rye Auk; script was banned Stlm (LKT my 316); was twenty years of service Zd; here was gone (cows) Klp; mine was all done, sprinkled, cooked, washed Rgv; before that time it was already painstaking Market; you'll be ir taken, you'll be taken Mžš; our already will be driven Ds; Don't go, jo we'll be gone Kp; maybe it will really ir be brought Mlt; that horse will be stolen sold jo ir Kp. Even in su the present tense, nev. Participant's bev. g. form often used in the lower sense, as ma ta in constructions of connection, ir e.g.: here, be apparently, people ¥(r) ever lived Sk; my fallen y Mr; chest tightness, overdose of medication NmS; rabbits va gi yr laid out by apple trees VKS. On the other hand, the constructionbe al connection may not have ir more clear modal nuances of meaning. For example, such common sayings in the Highlands as kaimyiskūlta, išvažiuota, sakyta, darėta... no jų means tą the same, as the neighbor is out of town, they are gone, said, done, the participair nt in them can be considered nev. a kind of aggregate present-time form with a null conjunctisu on, cf. cereals (is) excavat- | ed excavated. Configurable neu. participle form occasionally used next to ir the conjunction buvota, e.g.: nabašnyko būta pinigai sugefti rūgtu pienu su Neršionys (In the Žemaičių 310). dialects, where instead of the genitive gender the feminine gender forms are more widely used, we sometimes find in the constructions spoken here, jų e.g.: pilnos įsteigos ir jų (by teachers) attached; tų how many yr roots peel Pj'. 2.1.3. So nev. of participants g. forms (different from the previously discussed works. "noun of participants) does not constitute a separate paradigm that could be correlated with the su paradigm of direct reference. In terms of ir structure, the grammatical meaning of time, they are closely related to compound verbs. kind of times?. There is no grammatical basis for considering them as forms of indirect pronoun, since individual morphological categories can -to make only specific systems of forms, contrasting to others according to certain generalized meanings. Su NN ne. of participants g. forms also do not form a clearer "correlation (They cannot be considered as forms of the non-active kind NN because of their meaning) they do not belong to it. Modal values vo that these ir forms most often (but always) ne have in the sentence, is not sufficient ground to distinguish them as separate tenses of the iš compound tenses, because those į meanings are in most cases conditioned by the context; to, they can have other, auxiliary verb be ir su ar be jo 100 mg/ day “conjugated tense forms. For example, an unexpectedly experienced ir surprising action (t. y. admirative) meaning may have nev. ir masculine and feminine noun of participants: goes, looks — jo brother nailed to the deck Grč; girl comes to goose bring oats; see that all the geese are picked up Norvaišiai LKT 244 (cf.: look, and the chickens are already in the house See LKT 159, see 1.2.1). "The Future of the Future". su ir ne. the participants very often expressed doubtful, guessed action, but because of it is not to considered a separate consequence (plg. biaurība “ Plg. clear fractured nevus kind of times forms: iš ancient was left soil manor iš land Zr; already everything cut, brought, carved As; you have to live as long as God has appointed Trish. * As individual cases of the system of passive forms they discuss ir E. Geniušienė, ĮIlnare3ki u 3aJIOTH B COBpeMeHHOM JIHTOBCKOM si3blke, — THO0.iOrH mMacCHBHBIX KOHCTpyKumit, JlnaTe3bi H 3ajioru, Jlenunrpan, 1974, p. 209 et seq. 27 will have stolen Tlz; will the people of the yard come together and invented that name Smln; he will surely have gone Brž; maybe it will be brought Kp)®. All this shows that in Lithuanian we have not special verbs of the indirect noun type. g. forms, but a certain modal usage of the new participants who have joined the conjugated tenses. 2.2.1. The closest to the compound times are such constructions with bev. Mr. Neve. the forms of the participants, as rye (is) sown | sown, e.g.: večer rope vejama KzR; already and potatoes dug Ds; full holes of honey adjuned Ad; thieves to the beams nailed Sk; door opened and left KzR, as well as Rk, Svnč, Gdr, Jnš, Tršk, Trk, Vv, Grl, Zp, Plv and others. *?, similarly in ancient writings, e.g. : Tulszis... su Vksūsu inpilt buwa SG 21,5; latru kaulai lauszit buwa BrG 101, Zr. A. Bezzenberger BGLS 159—160. The difference between these constructions and the cases of the rye (is) séjami/séti type is that the participant is not combined with the noun (pronoun) here. The denominator may not be said; then the construction has a clear impersonal character, e.g.. (now) sown | sown’’. (The impersonality is also evident in constructions with a noun, when the form of the anonymous genus is put in the first place, cf. sėjama | sėta rugiai.) g. forms here correspond to bev. g. adjectives, e.g. beer (is) tasty and tasty, used to accelerate with the combined Male and female forms of g. beer (is) tasty. The parallelism in the present language is only partial: not all verbs have the same form. g. forms with the meaning of state can be replaced by conjugable forms of adjectives and vice versa!? ; differences in their meaning and usage had to be particularly evident when bev. g. forms have become predicative words with mainly a state meaning. In literary language, binary constructions are incompatible with bev. g. forms are about to disappear, but in the eastern part of the Altai dialect area they are still well preserved, and their Baltic character is confirmed by clear Old Prussian equivalents, e.g.: erains boūsei poklusman (= Jederman sey vnterthan) 579, stai peroni... ast poklusman (die Gemeine... ist vnterthan) 65,,9; also with being. I. nev. participants, e.g.: stai grikai ast... etwierpton (die sinde seien... vergeben) 43,,; Stai gannai bousei pomeston (The women are behind) 65.5". In the impersonal constructions of Latvian we find already the senior g. nev. forms of participants, which are used similarly to Lithuanian Žemaičių mot. g. forms, cf. la. not gulets,,unmiegota“, was long thought and hard something ** is lie. Jam. as ordered, go and work Als, everything has been cut, brought, carved Als, from ancient times was left soil Zr, need to live as God appointed Trš. The type of construction here is preserved, only one form has been replaced by another, because the nameless genus is more extinct. The regular occurrence of incongruous binary and unidentified constructions in the Baltic languages suggests that they are not 9 See also N. Sližienė, LCC XI34; LKG II 158. These future tense forms are common even in dialects where other tense forms are rarely used. In addition to the potential, optative and imperative forms, the continuous forms of the future 1. are also used. A. Ja-kulis, The Future Tense History of Lithuanian Language, kand. dis. rankr. Vilnius, 1967, 121 pp. 10 Pig. dar K. Brugmann, LB319; J. Schmidt, Pluralb. 162 pp. ; J. Endzelins, MOPS1C XXII. 2190 tt. ; J. Jablonskis, RR I 464 et seq. ; Ch. S. Stang, VGr. 265; Z. Zinkevičius, Dial. 268. 11 From the point of view of contemporary Lithuanian language, such constructions are considered to be impersonal compound forms of the passive kind, cf. N. Sližienė, LKK IX 74; V. Sirtautas, Linguistics. XXI 72; E. Geniušienė, Kalbotyra XXIV (1) 27 et seq. with lit. 12 J. Jablonskis, RR I 465; A. Valeckienė, DB 555. 13 See also Trautmann, AprS. 244; J. Endzelin, AprGr. 100. 14 For more examples see Trautmann, ibid. 259; J. Endzelin, ibid. 15 A. Blinkena, MLLVG II 533, W. K. Matthews, SEER XXXIII 360. 28 could have arisen from the stabbing of adjectives and participants' flexion due ar to the influence of other languages'®, o explain them bev. g. noun usage of adjectives!" does not allow much lower productivity of such use. Therefore, considering the incompatible constructions of the Baltic languages as newer, formed by the compatible, is iš not grounded. 2.2.2. Correspondents for Baltic incompatible constructions! we find in many ideas. Languages, plg. s. sl. scorpion of the testicle; pleasant.- s. .. gentle; Russian. epbxsd caadko a 4-person overhead, got. pannu gatauran is marzeins galgins Gal 5, 11 "Ergo evacuatum est scandalum crucis®, gr. odx dyaddy ToAvxowyavin, lot. mors omnium rerum extremum ir pan." Nev. of participants g. forms in incompatible constructions of Slavic languages are used just like in Lithuanian, since the oldest monuments, before the decline of the inflection of unnamed participants, e.g. :s.sl t. y. The voice is broken. „by uslysano budets, s. rus. 2020861 No. 7 (Ch. (1314 s. the city has been conquered®. The absence of alignment here is also impossible to explain by subsequent syntactic processes? !. These constructions — are the legacy of earlier epochs of sentence development. Historical and Typological Ideas. researches of the sentence structure suggest that ide. During the period of communion, predicative forms of nouns, denoting state, were unchanged, uncoordinatir ed probably corresponded to pure roots? ?. It is the only species of this genus that has white-tailed ir winglets. g. adjectives ir participants su *-in the constructions in question*?. The Lithuanian language never. of participants g. forms in the verb position were probably connected with nouns of different genus since su the times when the present adjective tų flexion was not yet formed,,,pure noun stems used in predicative function were not combined with a factor“ ir su (J. Kazlauskas, Ist. Article 10 304)?. Having in mind the predicative way18 The influence of the German language, which Ch. S. Stangas VGr. 179 see even in such constructions, ass. pr. where you are ni now 57,7 (= lie. it is not good for you), in our opinion, could only stimulate the sen. Prussian language bev. g. forms of usage su bei mot. g. nouns and pronouns. 27 K. Brugmann, Synt. 174—5. 8 Plg. E. Fraenkel, Baltosl. 38. *2 F. Miklosich, VGr IV 29; O. H. Byenaes, Her. Tp. 446; A. A. [Tore6us, 3an. I-10 tt. ; 114 III tt. ; 358 B. Delbriick, United States III 247—248; H. highest, HOPSC XXII tt. ; 192 O. Lagerkrantz, Prad. 19—20. * F. Miklosich, ibid. 365; A. A. ITote6us, 3am. III tt. ; 359 B. H. BopkoBckuii — II. 1998-1999 C. Kissenos, Her. rp. 423 tt. ; O. II. 1998-1999 ®uann, Ilponcx. 495 tt., J. Bauer, OSS II 334. * Opinion on the decline of s. flexion of k. Russian incompatible constructiosu ns of the connection participants (II. C. Questionnaire, MVP III tt. ; 71 C. M. O6kopeknū, Ouepra 159; 3. M. Ilerposa, ¥3 JIN CCIL36 tt.) or on the basis of jų impersonal iš statements of later origin (A. A. [MaxmaToB, CHHT. 1119, T. II. 1998-1999 Jlomres, Ouepku 209 etc.) contradicts the presence of incompatible constructions already in the oldest monuments (plg. O. II. 1998-1999 OH run, ib. 499), jų spread in various Slavic languagir es distinctive of other ide. language parallels. Due to the ancient nature of these structures plg. but O. C. MeibHey, Beryn. 383; Poss. 142—3. #2 Plg. W. Lehmann, PIE, 69 pp., 199 pp., 208 su lit. * For the bev. g. No.-acc. forms su *-osenumo Zr. S. Agrell, Neutr. 18; T. Milewski, Indohitt. 22-23; V. Mažiulis, Balt. 84 tt. It's hard. ; J. Kazlauskas, Ist. Article 10 124. The traditional view is that the white beef. g. forms (gera, eita etc.) rear -a < *from (R. Trautmann, AprS. 244, J. Endzelins, HOPSIC XXII 192, AprGr. 99 tt. ir kt) more difficult to believe because it isolates the stem name ji ZodZius from o others, whose bev. g. form has long been considered a pure trunk (plg. K. Brugmann, Grdr. IT, 144). Fleksijos -d/t is not shown in the Baltic Slavic ir data, nor in the Baltic other-day iš borrowing bev. g. for nouns in Finnish, see J. Kazlauskas, Ist. Article 10 123; V. Mažiulis, ib. 85. 24 Predicative incompatible bev. g. forms (e. g. : lie. cold, nice, sl. s. sladko, got.filu) usage antiquity emphasized O. Lagerkrantzas, Prid. 12, 19 etc., having expressed the view that id. iš initially each predicative adjective had neutr. sing. form, the o differenir ces in the number of the genus occurred later. 29 The archaic form of the nouns and noun participants and the undoubted equivalents of usage” in related languages, the model (alus gardu), as well as its variant (rūgai) sėjama | sėta can be considered Indo-European*?- *. 2.2.3. It is easy to see that this model represents nothing more than a nominal sentence with an incongruous main part (A. Valeckienė, DB 557). In this way, by examining the nev. participants bev. g. forms, we come back to the nominal sentence, on which the constructions with the verb are based. participants. As already mentioned,. there. the participant is usually combined with the denominator of the actor (agent). But: the combinations are not the only ones and probably not the oldest. That the main part of the nominal sentence could otherwise be incompatible verbs with no special inflection. participants, it becomes clear from them bev. g. forms with both masculine and feminine g. nouns and pronouns, e.g., broliai | seserys sėją,. sitting, sitting down, sitting down This usage has survived in the greater part of the Lithuanian language area**,. cannot be new, because the gender antagonism is well preserved in both adjective and participle conjugation paradigms; it can only be explained by considering it a syntactic archaism and assuming that "initially bev. The singular form of the genus could be associated with any number and any genus factor” (J. Endzelins,. HOPSIC XXII 198)?". The two sisters are in love with each other. In g. forms we have also one-members, e.g., (today) sningą, (previously) snigę, snigdavę, (tomorrow) snigsią (e.g.: sako par jums visą vasarą lyją Rk; kur tau nelije Ds; jau buvo praaūiišę, kai sukilo Grž LKŽ. I, 515; sniegutėlio pasnigę Lz LKT 395). These forms are used in the impersonal sense: also in various constructions with connective ZodZi, e.g.: nėra kas darą,, kur einą, etc., see also 1.9.3. We also find them in sentences denoting the existence of certain things, e.g.: tu bežval esq Mz; wolf esq Rk; now da teip still in the CoR; rye non-Slm, VkS; very bruises were Kp, also with bev. g. with adjectives, e.g.: aje gi jak pięknie bywało Ut, cf. Their works and grouping are only a disgrace and a shame to watch DonR 55. Such sentences, from which, apparently, ess has emerged as a modal word (cf. éss, vy máte vyjet Šk), are equivalent in their meaning to sentences with verbs of new participants. g. in forms, e.g.: mare does not have anything Ds; for others in the world it is even worse LKŽ III 740; how many disasters there are VaižgRR II 115; this night there were wolves PIš; There used to be mushrooms there. Activity of active and passive participants. g. the syntactic position of the forms Here they are quite identical, and one can be freely replaced by another. Thus the simplest, and, apparently, the oldest type of construction with active and non-active. of participants in the study g. forms in their structure essentially coincide. The foundation of both. consists of ide. nominal sentences inherited from the times of communion, only in constructions. 23 The age of the (beer)gardu model is confirmed by the Hittite bev. g. the use of adjectives, e.g. aššu, "good, good", mekki, "many", see E. Benveniste, Hitt. 64. 26 See Z. Zinkevičius, Dial. 378–381, 382–383, 384–385, 386–387, 388–389, 389–390, 391–392, 392–393, 394–395, 396–397, 398–399, 400–401, 402–403, 404–405, 406–407, 408–409, 410–411, 412–413, 414–415. Especially pa-. of the past cartographic time. of participants g. forms that did not become norin literary language. The mention is probably only due to the paradigm shift and the influence of the East Prussian Lithuanian written language, especially the grammar of F. Kuršaitis, see V. Rimša, Kalbotyra XXIV (1) 80. 27 Similarly, now we use be. 1. veik. of participants g. form in Lazūnų, Gudėlių, Kabėlių and some other dialects of the Lithuanian language area, e.g.: tį boba būva až pečū proiklaiipi, and alkana GdIŠ (LKT 369). However, such a bev. The generalization of the g. form here may also be subsequent, arising from the stabbing of the participants (cf. similarly stabbing half-participants forms in Gudélis LKT 368, Zietela LKG II 378 and others). 30 with new participants better preserved and more generalized their older structures: model (t. y. su incompatible bev. g. forms). 2.2.4 Further constructions with bev. The development of g. forms is associated with the inclusion of new participants in the verbum finitum system and the formation of the passive. į In the Eastern Baltic languages, the ir passive is formed everywhere. ne In some dialects of the Lithuanian language (e.g., Southern Highlands, some Eastern Highlands) it forms it. only impersonal constructions with bev. g. participants. However, in the dialects of Žemaitija and western and some eastern Highlands, the passive forms with the masculine and feminine g-participants are widely used. Since the beginning of writing, they have been used in many 16th-17th century monuments. In the form of the passive, the adnominal genitive, used in the possessive construction, acquired the meaning of the actor's nobleman (genetivus auctoris)- ??. The usage of the genitive with the passive meaning of the suffix *t0 (especially those that are close to nouns) is also observed in the ancient Indo-Iranians? ?, Greek*?, perhaps, ancient Persian** languages, but nowhere was it as developed as in Lithuanian. Gen. auctoris was here generalized with both transitive and intransitive verbs, and next to the house the father built the widespread type of the father sitting. construction. In other languages, the person who performs the act is called the actor. inverted and prepositional constructions (mostly also possessive origin), they were sometimes also linked to the verb of the new participants. g. formomis, plg. lot. dictum est a te, ahd. iz ist gescriban fona dir (P. Trost, LKK III 221). This usage is especially widespread in Russian dialects, where the expression of the character varies greatly: next to the predominant construction & + genet., e.g.: mpu 06461 Yy 601Ka 3ape3ano (B. A. MarBeenko, MHUPJI II 125) and the instrumentalis of the actor (Oekbeu mecmum nodapéro ib. 128), om+ genet. (om [Temoxu nucaro ib. 130) and others. Number of participants g. forms are also made from intransitive verbs, e.g. And I am 6 xo3ailcmeo 6xoxxexo3?. Although the character’s expression is different, the typological parallelism of these constructions with Lithuanian ones is obvious. By comparing them, W. K. Matthews in SEER XXXIII 365 concluded that in both language groups their basis was impersonal sentences with the verb of the non-participants. g. forms. *8 For the relation of gen. auctoris to possessive nobleman see K. Brugmann, Grdr. 11,601; B. Delbriick, VS. 348; E. Fraenkel, Kas. 95 difficult. ; Baltosl. 37 su lit. ; H. Pedersen, KZ XL 152. For the gen. auctoris in Latvian J. Endzelins, LaGr. 561.Possessive Lithuanian gen. auctoris nature is also shown by the forms of adjective pronouns that follow it: mano, tavo atnešta (not mano, tavęs), cf. E. Fraenkel, Kas. 96; V. Žulys, Baltistica V (2) 170. 2 K. Brugmann, ibid. ; B. Delbriick, AiS. 153; VS T 348; E. Fraenkel, Baltosl. 37. 30 K. Brugmann, ibid. 601; LB 321. 31 Zr. H. Hiibschmann, Cas. 270, B. Delbriick, VS. I 348; E. Benveniste, BSL XLVIII 52 tt. on lit. In Old Persian, the mana krtam type constructions found in its structure are quite similar to lie. my created (gen.dat. + *to verbZodinio adjective bev. g. form), but the passive nature of the *fo form in them is recently discussed: E. Benveniste’as, ib. 52—62, considers it a verb noun, and the construction itself possessive; on the contrary, G. Cordona, Lg XLVI 1-12. The difference of opinions appears to be due to the insufficient separation of this construction from possessive, i.e. a very early stage of passive development; passive-- possessive they consider D. I. Edelmanas, BJ 1974. 1 23 —24, unlike M. M. Guchman, pp. 71—72, which strictly distinguishes possessive construction from passive construction, For the genus auctoris prepositions in other ide. in other languages, see G. Cordona, ibid. 2—3. 2 H. B. KyssbuMuna—E. B. HeMuenxro, Cunt. 109; ibid. 17—116 in detail about passive constructions of Russian dialects with bev. g. forms with lit. 31 2.4.2. Weak. The coincidence of the main modal meanings of NN and nev. participants in different areas of use is an important argument showing the connection of NN with other cases of predicative participant use. If we consider the indirect conjugation as simply derived from the nominative with participant (VD) or the adjective with participant (GD), it would be completely incomprehensible how the verbs of the new participants could have received the same meanings in different areas. g. forms, which are not used at all in VD construction, and in GD occur only rarely and sporadically (e.g.: parėjus radau ir Antano atvažiavusi Jrk; radau duonos parnešta Vins). The same meanings could not have arisen by chance, and considering them archaic does not allow other, especially the oldest, id. language data®. Apparently, they have arisen as the character of predicative use of both active and passive participants has changed over a certain period of time. The prerequisites for this process were prepared by more general changes in the mutual relations and structure of the nominal and verbal sentences. After the old nominal sentences were included in the paradigm of verbal sentences (see 1.9), many predicative participants remained outside of it. Some of them have become fixed in idiom or semi-idiomatic sentences, others have acquired modal meanings and thus ir have been given new meaning in the changed syntactic system. The formation of modal values of participants was determined by a whole complex of internal external conditions. 3, CONSTRUCTION OF MODAL EXPRESSIONS 3.1. tendency to use nominal verb forms with modal meanings, which lose their original function, i.e. in the history of languages quite often. Among many such cases, the inclusion of participants, later combined, in the optative paradigm of the Baltic languages is particularly noteworthy. The periphrastic optative of Slavic languages (e.g., Russian dan Gel) is also composed of verb adjectives with the suffix -/ and the auxiliary verb?. The same participants with-/, losing inflection, became a narrative suffix and an admirative in Bulgarian (see 3.6.1 et seq.). In Greek and Latin, indirect language was expressed by infinitives (called infinitivus narrationis), i.e. also forms of nominal nature. In general, when a verb’s ‘di’ form begins to decline and its productivity decreases, the use of ‘os’ in various modal meanings usually becomes active. According to J. Kurytowiczius (Infl. cat. 136tt.), even the old optative derived from the secondary, modal, indicative use after the primary indicative function was taken over by other forms. 3.2 The tendency of nominal verb forms to be used in a modal way is related to the fact that the indirectly experienced action is expressed in most languages by $0 Morphology of modal meanings ide. in the languages is not very old: the Hittite language has only the indicative and the imperative, in other languages, which have well preserved the ancient state, there is at least one more old suffix, so ide. for the period of communion is usually reconstructed a system of no more than three lines, cf. A. Hahn, Subjunctive and Optative, New York, 1953, p. 56; J. Gonda, The character of Indo-European moods, Wiesbaden, p. 1956; J. Kurytowicz, Infl. cat. 136; A. Erhart, SPFF A XX (1972) 23; P. Lehmann, PIES 105-6; otherwise (4 lines) A. CaBuenkro, Cp. rp. 288 pp. In such circumstances, to hold lie. k. participants modal meaning primary (C. H. Tpy31esa, BJIY XX 129—30) is not grounded. ! Plg.K. Brugmann, Grdr. I132873—4; B. Delbriick, VS. 11409; B. H. BopkoBckuii — II. C. Ky3ueuos, Her. rp. 288; J. Kurytowicz, Infl. cat. 137. ? A. Meillet —J. Vendryes, Traitė 672 etc. 3? A striking example here may be the modal use of the aoristic in Serbo-Croatian, and partly also in Bulgarian, observed since the 15th century. See M. Jlesnogsa, CC6 63 etc. 38 'Perfect. The Lithuanian perfect form consists of veik. ir ne. participants in su the verb to be, ir jo connection su NN is obvious (see section 4.4). 1.8.2 tt. ). New perfect forms, which include į participants of other verb nouns, in some ir Slavic (Bulgarian, Macedonian) ‘donieciy?) ir Roman (French, Italian, Spanish) languages® also denotes an action learned from iš other lips, recounted. That this use of the perfect is quite old is seen from sen. iš in Hindi, where the perfect (different from the aoristic ir imperfect) already in the Vedic period meant actions of which the speaker was not a witness, about which he was informed indirectly, indirectly®. As is known, ide. perfect (as well as later ir periphrastic jo variants in individual language groups) meant the state arising from iš the previous action that exists in the present. Based on this, some researchers jo associated modal usage with the previous su action”, others — su status value*. Exploring the history of the perfect in Greek ir s. Indian languages*?, where the jo forms are best preserved, Germanic ir languages vad. Preterite-present verbs*?, it turned out that the meaning of the state is primary, the rise of the meaning of the past action, the inclusion of the perfect in the system of verb tenses is a later o phenomenon"?, Due to such a meaning, root vocalism other circumstances already ir once raised the idea that the perfect has been erupted verb į nouns??. Recently — 0 ir ne iš J. Kurytowiczius (Apoph. 41 tt., Infl. cat. 61 tt. )ir C. Watkins (IdgGr. III 1 105 tt.) the hypothesis of the origin of the perfect nominalis by the method of morphological reconstruction. In this way, new arguments have emerged to suggest that the tendency to use the NN perfect in meaning is at least indirectly conditioned by noun nature. jo In other languages, the forms of nominal origin are also used to indicate recounted facts. For example, the Turkish languages Forms of the,,off-campus past tense” su -gan, -mys, which iš initially had a perfekting meaning, are derived iš from participants." In medieval Arabic, the verbum finitum was replaced by the verb names, named ZodZias, to denote indirect speech, and similarly, the conjugated forms of verb nouns are used in some dialects. ar iš jų Caucasian Kalbosels. Ta the fact that Lithuanii an See-3.6. ]1. * Meyer— Liibke, Grammar of the Romance Languages, III, Leipzig, 1899, § 107; O. Griinenthal, KZ LXIII 135 su lit. &.7r. J. S. Speyer, VedS. 175; J. Lohmann, KZ LXIV 42; J. Bloch, MSL XIV 48; L. Renou, La perfect du value in the Vedic hymns, Paris, 1925, p. 87. * L. Renou,ib.88.J. Kurytowicz, BPTJ XXIX 29— 30. Formation of modal usage J. Kurytowiczius considers it a common idea. the tendency of the development of the perfect in languages, resulting from the transformation of už the secondary function of the perfect (,,action, preceding the moment of speech“) into the main one. ® O. Griinenthal, KZ LXIII tt. 135 W. Fiedleris, ACB VI 369, the modal use of ną the perfect was explained by the fact that it connects two time dimensions. * J. Wackernagel, Studies on the Greek Perfektum, Göttingen, Germany 1904; P. Chantraine, Histoire du parfaite grecque, Paris, 1927; L. Renou, ibid. 10 D, Beusenuct, OJl. 144 tt. " Plg. J. Wackernagel, Vorles. I 166 tt. ; 3. Beuseunuct, OJI. 217, J. Kurytowicz, BPTJ XXIX 28; A. H. CaBuenko Cp. rp. 326. '* Plg. O. Griinenthal, KZ LXIII tt. ; 133 H. Hirt, IdgGr. IV 273 tt. On the contrary J. Lohmann, LXIV etc., KZ where the 42 use of the 48, perfect modaliné is associated only su jo semantics, apart from the genesis of forms. 18 H. 3. Taaxuena, Och. 179—180 su lit. “B. M. Tpangne, BBenexne B cpaBHHTejibHoOe H3yueHHe CeMHTCKHX $3BIKOB, MocxrBa, 1972, p. 397. '* H. Vogt, LII IF tt.,J. 245 Lohmann, ibid. 43 tt. ; for gruziny vad. rezultatiniy I verb forms meaning other lips iš ar i§ results experienced actions, su the k. relationship of Latvian even. defined in Y. JI. CanrxyunurBHjiu, Syntagmatics in 146— 149. 39 language the meaning of the indirect sentence received participants, most of whom also denotes the resulting state, probably is not random, but based on more general laws of semantic development. 3.3.1. The Lithuanian NN is characterized by the meaning of the narrated, indirectly experienced action in other ide. in languages usually described as optative. The first signs of such use have been observed already in ancient Indian monuments, where the optative, according to J. Gonda, enables to describe the action more carefully, with a certain reserve, to emphasize the subjective content of the message’- ®. In Greek, the optative also had a connotation of caution, reserve, and could indicate an action whose certainty the speaker does not guarantee. The optative to convey non-verbal language is barely used in Homeric epics, but later, around Herodotus's time, it becomes quite common'- ®. The expression of an indirectly experienced or unreal action in the conjunctive, which included the old optative, spread even further in Latin and was partly passed on to the Romance languages!?. The Germanic languages also have this optional meaning. Indirect conjugation of Lithuanian language with the optative was linked by J. Kazlauskas Ist. Art. 402-3. He believed that the significance of the recounted action was the one of Ch. S. Stango NTS XVIII 348 —56 reconstructed periphrastic optative forms, consisting of auxiliary verb and participant, e.g.: *bi negelbąs, *bi nekéles (=see p. ašte bi bylas); after the charge of the optional meaning had been transferred to the participant, bi or be disappeared, and thus the peripheral optional became NN. The reconstruction of the periphrastic optative is undoubtedly important for the genesis of NN: from this it can be concluded that the participial verb forms were used in the prehistoric past of the Baltic languages and had a modal meaning. However, the particle bi derived from the auxiliary verb has been preserved in many of the historically paliudyty forms of the optative in Lithuanian, which include supinas; so it wasn't gone before the supination took hold in the optative. The participant himself was pushed out of the peripheral forms of the optative, so he could not remain an optative expression alone. The peripheral forms of the optative in Slavic languages, which correspond to the Lithuanian ones, have no NN meaning. In such circumstances, it does not seem possible to derive NN simply from the periphrastic optative. In our opinion, the periphrastic optative could only indirectly contribute to the formation of the modal usage of the other participants, with or without auxiliary verbs. 3.3.2. The connections between the optative and translative (translated action) and dubitative (doubt) meanings are also noticeable in the history of the Lithuanian language itself. S. Vaišnoras, "Žemčiūga" and other writings perifrastinés forms of the pronoun, composed of the pronoun being and es. 1. veik. of the participants, sometimes used through16 J. Gonda, The character of the Indo-European moods, Wiesbaden, 1956, p. 61. In the examples given by the author, the optative approximates lie. NN and can be translated by it, e.g., skr. gacchet kadacit, "it will come someday- ". Zr. dar E. Fraenkel IF XLVI 44—5 su lit. 17 Usually in indirect questions (J. Gonda, ibid. 124), where it can be translated into ilietuviy language ir NN, ir predikaamaja nuosaka, plg. p 368: etpovzo tic cif “they asked him who he was” or ,,whatever he is“. '8 B. Delbriick, VS. III 287; H. Hirt, IdgGr. VII 206; P. Chantraine, Le Grec et la structure des langues modernes, —Language, TCLC IX, 1959, p. 28; J. Gonda, ib. 125—6;. JI. O. Jloces, O 3aKoHax CJOKHOTO INTEGRATION B JAPEBHErPEUECKOM s3bike, CraTbH — H HCCJIe/IOBAHHUS 110 5I3bIKO3HAHHUIO H KJjacchHueckoit Oujojioruu, Mocksa, 1965, p. 42-43, 47. * A. Attached— J. Vendries, Treaty of 674—5; J. H. Schmalz—J. B, Hofmann, Synt. 568 su lit. 20 P, Diels, KZ XLI 194-8; H. Hirt, Urg. III 207. 40 telling unbelievable or, in the opinion of the author, controversial things, i.e. quite similarly to NN, e.g.: mokin | ir kaip būk Sacramentai butu malone dudą 120,_,; anis says jdant Zodczei Christaus... isch eye and mud would be returned 160%; 120.4; as nessa would have been | idant Dwassia.- .. would not have reminded | that such an ijednones affair would have been PM 9,,2, In connecting sentences in the secondary démens they signify and doubt things, e.g., apparently iog nūdemais Misscho affiera nepareitusi kunigistosp MT (PM) 7*,. Similarly, the verbal forms of the noun are used in the current language, e.g., paklausė, kas jis toks būtų (greesąs- ). ta On the other hand, NN be Connection S. In some cases, the phrases are written in the form of peripheral forms of the pronoun, e.g. : Nessa that such treczoses nūbutas | po schei gjwatai priwalu essa (= would have | been) tikek tam S. Powilas butu tą pacze|... neuschmirsches PM 339,,? *; schitatai wiss teip... stipru ira | as buk Diewas patsai Baszniczoie pribudams darąs bei iskpildąs (=does and fulfills) 109,,. The same can be said for the participles, which are used in S. Vaišnor's works in general instead of the participles bev. g. forms (see 1.5.2), e.g. tatai tur nusidėti ne tú budu | kaip buk dinkscze reikalingas sluszbas priwalu sant ant tiketies to 202243. The NN and pronoun forms are accelerated in subordinate elements of connective sentences that depend on the same verbs and have the same functional meaning, e.g.: (pontifical) netikumus statczei uschstoie taraitami... iog ipaczia wiera ing Christu | buk nesanti dallis Pakutos. The 148,3,,, would be the most pitiful punishment for the wrongdoers. Thus there will be no more suffering and blood for the redemption of our imperfect bodies, as there would have been suffering and blood for the redemption of our imperfect bodies. And some of them will not be left for our good deeds 264—264*. This synonymous use of NN and the implied clause in some places is perhaps partly explained by the fact that,. that they were probably used to translate verbs of the same conjunction. Nevertheless, the points of contact between the two are obvious, they exist in the present language, so the influence of the forms of the periphrastic optative on the spread of the modal usage of the active participants is quite possible. 3.4. A very important role for the “attachment” of the meaning of the narrated or supposed action to the act. the nominative forms of the participles had to be played by VD (nominati-vus cum participio) and other, probably even older constructions, in which the predicative participants followed the verbs of speech or mental perception: he said (he was),. (where) walking (see 1.7.2). In them, the main load of information is usually held by the participants, and the verbs, formally forming the basis of the sentence, indicate only the source of information or a certain modal aspect of it. Words in sentences conveying indirect language tend to become insertions, modal words or even certain particles (see Russian m04 from mossumu). Thus, the meaning of the per-told action could easily be linked to the predicative parts themselves and transferred to sentences where they had long been used in verbum finitum position without verbs of information or mental perception, e.g., he walked- *1 Similarly 16044, PM 2453. ?2 Apparently, without any influence of the original language, cf. For when of such a third state after this life vonnėhten (J. Vietor, see W. Witte, Der Uebersetzer Simon Waischnoras d. Ae., Braunschweig, 1931, p. 104, 115; Latin text quite different). Similarly MT 202844 43. 41 - Yeah, I do. Iš the construction inherited from GD the distant past could also stimulate the participants’ use of the word to describe the recounted action. The influence of these constructions well explains the fact that the tą meaning of the recounted action is most characteristic of the act. nominative of participo ants, nev. of participants g. forms, unrelated to structures, su VD ir GD have much less ją (plg. 2.3). All the circumstances discussed here were favorable for the formation of modal usage among the participants. However, they do not yet allow to definitively answer the question: why did the į predicative participants get the meaning of an indirect pronoun in Eastern Baltic languages? ? Very similar conditions were in Slavic languages, where the participants could also have a predicative function, where otherwise constructions were used, but did not form. GD ir VD NN The use of the participle is generally narrower in Slavic languages than in Baltic, and o even more reduced in ji Germanic languages. However, in Greek ir Indo-Iranian languages, where the participant system is richly ir developed, o jų the predicative function has also been preserved, the participants do not have the meaning of the narrated action. It seems NN that only the internal, but certain external conditions ne helped to form the eastern Baltic ir languages. 3.5. Jau 1935 m. P. Arumaa drew attention to the indirect, or į narrative, descriptive modus obliquus of the Latvian language ir (kaudne kėneviis, hereinafter also referred to as indirectly) similarity? ?. In Estonian, there is no virk. forms of participants su - What? (e. g. : coming ",returning, returning", tddtavat ,,pracując, pracując”, denoting the action of which the speaker learned from another iš person, used for ir direct speech ar iš to recount things heard elsewhere, e.g., meie tddtavad halvasti ,,we worked badly”**. As in ir Lithuanian and Latvian, the verb olema The participle of the meaning "to be" being here can be the equivalent of an auxiliary verb ir su suffixes -nud participants to form perifrastinated past tense forms of indirect pronouns, e.g. mina olevat kirjutanud ,,a$ (has) written’ (D. IlaJins, ib. 156), plg. la. es had written. Such Estonian language constructions E. Matthews gretino lietuvių nev. su k. of participants g. modal use of forms (e.g., our parents taught all those songs) came to the conclusion that the latter is autochthonouir s, independent of the influence of other languages (SEE EER XXXIII 370). V. In the su English language, it is similar to the IPA. the forms of active participants of the corresponding meaning in the Baltic languages. Because of the similarity of meaning and structure, he proposed the word ryt. whites NN to hold in debt iš The Baltic Finnish languages or the old common isogloss inherited from the iš present Finnish and Estonian ancestors taky®. I. Marwan, critically evaluating V. The Finnish language NN has iš borrowed some words from the ir Estonian language. differencNN es in the structure of the Baltic languages: Estonian modus obliquus participant su -vat has a partitive form distinguiir shing the si participants su -van, spoken in Lithuanian GD ir VD in corresponding constructions*". The influence of Finnish languages in the 19th century. Balts indirectly, according to I. Marvan, WU. * Mapsau, Baltistica V (1) 18. ** In the article printed ,,Eesti Keel’ 1935 m. No. 4—6, which is min J. Lohmann, KZ LXIV 46. ?3 D. Manas, YueOHUK 3CTOHCKOrO si3sika, Tassiuu, 1955, p. 155; A. Kack, SH CCCP III 48. * V. Pisani, Zu one Baltic— Estonian-Finnish Partizipialkonstruktion, — Writing country J. Edzelinam, Riga, 1959, p. 215 et seq. 27 4, Mapsan, Kalbotyra IV 35-37; Baltistica V(1) 18. Regardless of the į tą difference, A. Sauvageot, BSL L 208, the Estonian modus obliquus leads to constructioiš ns such as GD ndin isdn tulevan "I see the father coming." 42 secondary, modifying factor, internal, systemic conditions must o be considered primary. — Ši view, supported by ir other Baltic-Fi- — nnish parallels, is very important helps to better ir understand ryt. formation NN of whites. 3.5.1. In the Baltic Finnish languages, the narrated action is marked by forms of different morphological nature and origin. Be of participants su -vat, deverbatives with meaning NN in Estonian me su -ma (A. Sauvageot, BSL L 208). NN here form ir infinitives su -yes, which up to XX a. early writings were even more prevalent than the participants su -wat, only in ir recent decades is withdrawing literary iš Language?28. Su GD ir VD in type constructions these infinitives are also not related; modal usage jų A. Sauvageot ib. 208—209 explains that the infinitive is generally characterized by the meaning of uncertainty, uncertainty. In the Livonian language, which has many archaic features from old ir contacts with the su Baltic languages? ?, NN the forms are again different: they are here derived from the character's iš name (name of agent) su -iji forms the ir present-future and periphrastic past tense paradigms, e.g.: lu'ggiji fa ,.jis skaitąs“, ta vol" lu'ggiji "he read"3?. Almost all The formants of the Baltic NN Finnic languages are phonetically į similar to the suffixes of the Baltic language participants denoting the narrated action, e.g. is. - Get it. ir -ot, est. -ma lie. ir es. I. ne. dlv. su -mas, -ma, lyv. -I'm not. ir one. I. dlv. su -ijis (writing), although in their origin they apparently have nothing in common. More cases jo of similarity ir of morphological forms of different origins in the Baltic-Finnic languages have been observed, ir cf. iliative su formantu -n, specifically formed in ir one or ir another language family (A. Sabaliauskas, LKK VI 112 su lit. ). Kitose Baltic Finnish (as in ir Finno-Ugric languages in general) is not NN used, there is ir no evidence that it would have otherwise disappeared ji there. ir On the contrary, the variation of forms would rather show that the ši sequence was morphologically The Baltic Finnish Languages. 3.5.2. Both white and In the Baltic Finnish languages, verb nouns were used to denote the narrated action: participants, “participants”, infinitives. Do Finnish languages generally have a rich system of participles and infinitives? ir jų Plagia It is closely related to the Baltic languages. Participles here are the main means of expressing the secondary action of the sentence; therefore, they can often have be a separate action agent to go verbum finitum equivalents*?. ir Many Finnish participle constructions (e. g. GD ir VD type statements- ®®) correspond to the Baltic ones according to their original structure model. The example of the eastern Baltic languages in the Estonian language formed even «dual past tense of the verb olema su Forms of ‘,being’’ ir adverbs -now -participant®, On the other hand, contacts su Baltic finals, apparently, helped tomorrow. white ** A. Kask, The indirect speech in Estonian written language, —Congressus Tertius Internationalis Fenno—Ugristarum, Tallinn, Estonia 1970, I, p. 49. ?2* II. A. Apucra, THS IV 257 tt. ; JlnBbhr H auBCKuit s3bIK, „Eesti NSV TA Toimetised, ökikonnateaduste s.“, 1, 1958, p. 42 tt. ® II. A. Apucrs, B3H 15; 3. 3. Baapu, AH CCCP III 148. 3 For example, Finnish has 3 subjects and 5 infinitives, Livonian has 4 subjects ir 2 infinitives, in Karelian active, — 2 passive 3 participants and ir also 7 participles iš of various participants of funny forms, see. G. Décsy, Einf. 205; 2. 3. Baapn, SIH CCCP III 148-9; D. H. Makapos, ib. 73. #2 JI. XakyauneH, pass. IT 248 tt. su lit. ; K. E. Maiituuckas, IH CCCP II 23. 3 Plg. JI. Xaquiaues, ib. 248 pp., 253. *“* II, Apucrs, A. BBH 12-13; 3. IIaaas, op. cit. 148—9; A. X. Kack, IH CCCP Il 48; G. Décsy, Einf. 205; A. Sabaliauskas, LKK VI 112. 43 up to these days to maintain a variety of old-fashioned usage of participants, which in other ide. languages was greatly reduced and disappeared over time. In the Slavic language area, the predicative constructions of the participants were also best preserved in the northwestern dialects of Russian, which form an adstrate layer in the old Finnish language area**. That participants, infinitives, etc. The predicative usage of forms in Finnish is very ancient, as can be seen from their very verbum finitum structure: most of the personified verb forms here have still retained the forms common to nouns®®. 3.5.3. Thus, the meanings of the directly and indirectly experienced action are morphologically differentiated only in a relatively small and closed area of Baltic and Baltic-Finnic languages, which begins in the north with the Estonian language area and extends to the south along the Baltic coast, encompassing the present Latvian dialects and a large part of the Lithuanian language: dialects. The semantic category of indirectly experienced action is realized here by morphological forms of different origin: participants (Lithuanian), non-conjugated participle forms (Latvian, Estonian), infinitives (Estonian- ), verb-subject nouns (Lithuanian). However, the significant characteristics of this category and its relationship to the language situation are very similar throughout the area*". This category cannot bevery ancient, because neither tomorrow. Neither the Baltic nor the Estonian and Livonian nearest neighbors know it. It was probably formed when the Baltic-Finnish language community was already broken up, and the Eastern Baltic peoples still formed a relatively homogeneous linguistic community, in which newly emerging phenomena could spread unhinderedly. Expansion of the semantic category of indirectly experienced action The development of the Baltic languages can be linked to their advance into the areas inhabited by the Livonian and Estonian ancestors in the V —VI century e.C.®® Almost all of its range is characterized by long-term linguistic contacts and wide substrate and bilingualism zones: this is primarily the substrate of the Livonian and Estonian languages in northern Latvia, the Curonian —Latvian and Lithuanian in the western part of the speaking area, the Selysian —in southern Latvia and northeastern Lithuania. It is not difficult to see that NN has spread in the part of the Lithuanian language area where the Curonian and Selysian languages were used in the past. It was through the Latgalian, Curonian and Sely dialects, influenced by the Estonian predecessor language- ?®, that the category of indirectly experienced action could spread to a large part of the area of the present Lithuanian language. (The direct influence of Baltic Finns on Lithuanian dialects does not seem to have been possible.) The intensity of the use of indirect pronoun in the Baltic language area is approximately proportional to the degree of closeness of the Baltic-Baltic Finnic linguistic contacts: it is the highest in the Latvian territory.35 In this case, the Baltic Finnic language could have had a similar,,conservative,, influence on the Baltic and Slavic participants as nominativus cum infinitivo constructions according to V. Kiparski’s,,refrigerator theory,” cf. % B. Collinder, Comparative grammar of the Uralic languages, Stockholm, 1960, p. 243; G. Décsy, Einf. 160—1. Since the verbZodZio—firstnameZodZio categories are correlative, it has recently been considered methodologically inaccurate to talk about the origin of verbs from firstnamezodziy,. However, the closeness of the verbum finitum of the Finno-Ugric languages to the noun roots and their genetic relationship is beyond doubt, see K. E. Maiitauckasa, OO-V S 219, 300 et seq., 330 et seq. with lit. 37 In this respect, the semantic category of the indirectly experienced action can be compared with the category of the action to be performed, which in Latvian and Livonian languages and in the Saaremaa Estonian dialect is realized in different forms of the debitive, cf. J. Endzelins, LaGr. 885 pp., 971 pp. ; II. 1998-1999 A. Apucra, THUS IV 288; 3. 3. Baapu, SH CCCP II 147—8. 3 Both archaeological and linguistic facts (remnants of the Es-ti and Livonian languages in northern Latvia, Finnic toponymics etc.) show the Baltic movement northward during this period, see II. A. Apucts, BAU 16 tt. ; M. Gimbutas, The Balts, London, 1963, p. 141; V. Mažiulis, Baltistica X (2) 124. 3 For the intermediate influence of the Baltic Finns on the Lithuanian language through the Curonian and Selysian languages, see V. Mažiulis, Baltistica participants' bev. X (2) 124. 44 -ryje, the smaller — Lithuanian language area in the north-eastern corner, the northern outskirts of je Žemaitija, further o south į weakens and fades. ir Pietų Used in New Zealand. g. the form of the recounted action has a significantly less significant meaning than the north-eastern Altai and Žemaičiai acting. nominatives of participants. Thus, the category of indirectly experienced action in the Baltic language area probably spread iš north-south į with gradual weakening and, perhaps, had not even reached the Prussian language area. 3.6. The formation of the category of indirectly experienced action in the r.t. belonging to different families. white ir The Baltic Finnish languages have a distinct parallel in a completely different ide. language area, namely, the Balkan language area. The Bulgarian data are particularly interesting in this respect. 3.6.1. In Bulgarian, the adjectives in su the verb /, position can form the form vad. narrative forms or narrative sequence®. Ja describes indirectly experienced, recounted doubtful ar things, the truth of which the speaker does not guarantee. Forms of ir the first second person have an auxiliary verb «com and, being formed of the iš perfect root, coincide su with the indicative periphrastic perfect (e. g. : nuwea com "I wrote", nuwea cu ,,you wrote“), o third person (which is most commonly ir used?®') goes the participant of an auxiliary be verb, thereby distinguishing it from other compound tenses, e.g.: iš numen ,,(he) wrote”, I remember ‘‘(they) have signed’. This difference is not absolute, as the narrative forms may occasionally have a personal auxiliary verb, the perfect being his*2. 3 o be Forms made of the iš imperfect root are used only in the meaning of a ar recounted doubtful mo verb, e.g.: nucaar com, nucaA cu, nucan ,,I, you, he wrote“*“- ?. Į The narrative narrative paradigm, in addition to the simple ones, also includes the so-called emphatic forms, which are formed in the same way as the compound forms of the Lithuanian language, i.e. with the participant of the auxiliary verb with the meaning of,,being“, e.g., 6us nucaA,,(he) had written“**. They denote such recounted actions, the truth of which the speaker doubts, i.e. they have a more emphasized modal connotation and in this respect also correspond to the conjugated NN *forms** in Lithuanian. From the other Slavic languages, the narrative forms with /participants are also found in Macedonian- **, whose grammatical structure essentially coincides with Bulgarian. Serbian — 40 The place of these forms in the Bulgarian grammar is debated. In grammar, they are usually considered to be one of the verb conjugations —translative, commentative, npeusKa3HOTO HaKJIOHeHHe, see. A. Aupapefiuun, H. Kocros, K. Mupues, E. Hurojos, Cr CroiikoB, Bearapcku esuk, Codus, 1955, pp. 212-234; IO. C. Macnos, Ouepk 288 tt. Since the narrative forms are correlated with the imperative and imperative subjunctive, some scholars have proposed to distinguish a whole system of secondary (narrative) subjunctives in the Bulgarian language, cf. E. H. JleMuna, BIBJISI 359 et al., or to consider narrative forms in certain cases of modal use of direct pronoun (H3;BHTEJIHO HaKJIOHeHHe), see B. Craxkos, Bpem. 155 et seq., in particular 162-4 with lit., recently and E. H. /leMnna, Te. 4 According to V. Kosesko IFRS XIII 166, in the current language 3 personal forms comprise about 9094 total samples. 42 Plg, M. T. Poxknosckas, Cunt. 218; IO. C. Macjnos, Ouepk 250; V. Koseska, SFPS XIII 166; B. Craunkos, ibid. 78; E. IlsoMuua, BE XX 407 pp. 42 M. T. PoxnosBexras, Cunt. 117. 44 E. M. Ilemuna, BIBJIA 353 pp. ; B. Craukos, Bpem, 166. 45 As regards similar emphatic forms in the Albanian language, see W. Fiedler, ACB VI 369. 46 H. G. Lunt, Grammar of the Macedonian literary language, Skopje, 1952, 91 tt. However, in Macedonian, the narrative forms are used with the auxiliary verb as well as the perfect form, so they are not formally different from the latter. 45 in Croatian, with these participants, we make the perfect of the 3rd person singular. verb can be used in the indirectly experienced action and other modal meanings- ?". In general, the participants derived from consonant verb adjectives with the suffix / formed the paradigm of indirect (referred to as narrative) consonant only in a very limited area of individual Slavic languages and, apparently, relatively vélai®. 3.6.2. The same forms of the imperfect and perfect participles, which denote the recounted action, are used in Bulgarian to describe an unexpectedly experienced, surprising action. In such cases they are called admirative. Some scholars consider the Bulgarian admirative as a variant of the narrative narrative (translative, or commentative)? ?, others discuss it as a separate group of forms® or as a particular case of the use of modal indicative tenses*!. However, the genetic link-- Sys between the narrative narrative and the admirative is recognized by both?®2 The admirative of Albanian, which is formed with the postpositional “have” verb meaning according to-bial forms of verb nouns (so-called short participants)?®, also denotes not only unexpectedly experienced or surprising, but also recounted action with a certain emotional shade®. Both meanings are closely related (to amaze can both the directly experienced and the recounted action) and, in the opinion of some Balkanists, have emerged from the emphatic use of the perfect*- *, only in Bulgarian the commentative (recounted) meaning component was more emphasized, and in Albanian — the admirative (wonderful) meaning component**. It is not difficult to notice that according to the relationship of the meaning of the narrated and surprising action, the Bulgarian and Albanian admirative corresponds quite to the Lithuanian NN*". Bulgarian languages: narrative- -admirative forms,. When used with the conjunction da, they also have an optional meaning, e.g., Oa xe cu omuwiaa mam! (especially after 7 HU. Tpuukar, O nepogekry 6e3 MOMORHOT rjarojia H CPOJAHHM CHHTAKCHUKHM TOjaBaMa y cprickoxpBaTcKaM jesuky, Beorpag, 1954; J. Kurytowicz PPTJ XXIX 30—1;:M. JleaHosa, HHBE XIX 847. 18 According to K. Mirčevo, Her. I'p. 123, the use of the perfect modaliné in Bulgarian began to spread from the 14th century E. Diomina Tes. 15 and BE XX 410 indicate that the Bulgarian writing of the 17th century reflects an early period of the formation of narrative forms. 49 JO, C. Macaoe, K Bonpocy o cucreme dopM nepeckKa3biBAaTEJIbHOTO HaKJIOHEHHKS,, C60pHuK B uectT Ha Auekcauasp Theozopos-Bajan, Codus, 1956, p. 314 tt. ; Ouepk 250—15, W. Fiedler, ACB VI 369; WZL XV. 3 565. 0 E, H. Ilemuna, BIBJIF 327-8 su lit. 31 B, Crankos, Bpem. 176 su lit. 52 | At the International Balkanist Congress in 1968 and at the Grammatical Typology of Balkan Languages: Symposium in 1973 it was emphasized by E. Diomina, present. from the point of view of language considering admirative and narrative forms as different categories, see E. H. lemuna, ACB 387; Ten. 14. 53 As regards the admiralty of the Albanian language, see G. Weigand, Albanian Grammar, Leipzig, 1913, p. 122 tt. ; W. Fiedler, ACB VI 367 tt. ; W ZL XV.3 561 tt. su lit. ; A. B. Jlectuukas, AnGancknū s35IK H ero auanexkTsl, Jlenuurpaj, 1968, p. 17tt. : 54 W. Fiedler, WZL XV. 3563-35. 55 From the perfect albany admirative historically differs only the participant and auxiliary action-. word position: in perfect forms the auxiliary verb goes before the participle and is not grown with it, cf. A. B. Ileciūnuxras, ibid. 17-18; W. Fiedler, WZL XV. 3 562. The gradual transition from the perfect to the admirative in the written tradition of Albanian is indicated by E. Cabej, ACB: 386—7. % W. Fiedler, WZL XV. 3 565. 57 A. Nepokupnas pointed out the similarity of the Bulgarian admirative to the Lithuanian participants, denoting a surprising action, when proposing to distinguish the admirative category in the Baltic languages as well, cf. A. You. Henokynnkii, ApeanbHsie acnektsl GanTo-ciaBsHCKHX oTHouweHnif, Kues, Mocksa,, 46 1964, p. 26-7. f gino, see V. Koseska, SFPS XIII thus also 168—9), coinciding with the predicative participants su of the Lithuanian language (e.g., not speaking! ir Sir. see. 1.9.2). Be to, they represent ir iš past action*? (plg. 4-wheel drive. NN value). Therefore, the connection of the admirative with su narrative forms, perfect and at the same time ir predicative use of the participants is su quite unquestionable. 3.6.3. How the East Baltic indirect derivation is semantically close The modus of Baltic Finnish is obligatory, so the narrative forms of Bulgarian, Macedonian and Albanian are the same as those of the adjacent Turkish languages. — „,neakivaizdiniam praeritui®, išriedėjusiam iš dalyvio priesaga su -myš ir indicating indirectly, iš other lips experienced actions®. It is believed that this modal meaning of the present time has arisen on the basis of the older perfect meaning®. Non-temporal preteritum forms derived from participants with -myš and -gan are zoned in other Turkic languages ir (su -gan captured from 16th century, su -from the — beginning of the Oghuz language writing)? !. Be therefore, the Turkmen language still uses non-temporal preteritum forms with -an®2. Since the modal category of non-present, i.e., indirectly experienced action, has been widespread in the Turkish languages since ancient times, it is quite understandable that during the long ages of mutual linguistic contacts it could have influenced the Bulgarian, Macedonian and Albanian languages. ir Some scholars believe that the Bulgarian and Macedonian narrative forms were influenced by the Turkish verb system during the period of Bulgarian-Turkish bilingualism. — (XIV — XIX a. )** or due to the Turkish Proto-Bulgarian substrate (after VII a. )$. Better investigation of the semantic ir structure of the category of indirectly experienced surprising action and the peculiarities of morphological realization, The nų Balkaslavic ir Albanian languages have the assumptions of this category®®. However, there is no doubt that the category ši was formed under difficult conditions of intensive linguistic contacts®. It is very limited in its area in southern India. language area and its relatively recent formation indicate that the most important focal point of its spread must have been the area of the Turkish languages®’. *8 E. Diomina calls this meaning conclusive, see. E. H. Lemona, Lin. 14; E. J[b0MuHa, BE XX 411-2. ** About it zr. O. Griinenthal, KZ LXIII 134; A. H. Konounos, 'pamvMaTika COBpeMeHHOro Typeukoro sisbika, Mocksa —Jlennnrpan, 1956, p. 231 et seq. ; H. 3. Tanxnesa, Ocu, 182 pp. The Turkish verb forms with -mys, as in Bulgarian with -/, are also used as a participium coniunctum. O. Griinenthal, ibid. 134; A. H. Kouonos, ibid. 251. % O. Griinenthal, ibid. 134. a H. 3. Tamxnesa, Ocn. 179 pp., 182-3. 6 Ib. 181-2. 8 B. Iloxes, Mcropust na 6parapeku eux, III, Codus, 1937, p. 106; K. Mupues. Here. rp. 48, 123, 187; JI. 1939. pp. 39. ; 3. Beubeunct, OJ. 223-4. *4 This opinion has been expressed by K. Popov, zr. E. H. Jlemuna, Tex. 14. 8 The Bulgarian narrative forms were already regarded as an autochthonous phenomenon by S. Mladenov, Symb. Rozwadowski II 205 tt. ; see also V. Koseska, IFRS XIII 168 and E. Diomina’s study BI'BJISI 314 specified in lit. % According to E. Diomina, the explanation of its origin must be sought,,in the whole complex situation of long-term linguistic contacts of the Balkan Peninsula” ((E. H. JlemMnna, Tex. 17). $7 The influence of the Turkish languages on the narrative forms of the Bulgarian language (e.g., for the release of the auxiliary verb in the first person) is recognized even by those scholars who emphasize the specificity of these verb forms in the 3 Balkan Slavic and Albanian ir languages, cf. W. Fiedler, WZL 565, E. H. Jlemuna, Ten. 15—16; A. C. Come on, Poss. 86—8. ! 47 pojta B auBepOHa/iH30OBaHHbIe IIpejįHKATHBBI, BHYTPH TaCCHBHOH KOHCTPYKIMH NpOHCXOJIHT mepeOCMBICJIEHHE CHHTAKCHYECKHX CB53EK, BCJIEeJĮCTBHE Yero HOMHHATHB BO MHOTHX CJIy4uUasIX OCO3HAeTCSH ye He Kak NajjeX CyObeKTa, a Kak najex IIps1iMOTO OO bek Ta JĮEHCTBHSA, BbIDpaxKEHHOTO MpHuacTHeM, cp. he writes a letter (BropnuHasi “apraTHBH3alLHSA” KOHCTPYKIHH). 3. Pa3BurHe MOJaJIbHbIX 3HaueHHH TpejiuHKATHBHbIX KOHCTPYKUHH C ĮEHCTBHTEJIbHbLIMH H CTpajaTeJIbHbIMH IIpHuUaCTHSAMH OGYCJIOBJIEHO [EJBIM KOMINIEKCOM BHYTPEHHHX HM BHeLIHHX ¢dakTopoB. 060pOTOB B CHHTaKCHYECKHE nmapafurMbl BepOaJIbHbIX IHpejiJIOxXeHHH B KauecTBe 060pOTOB C HYJIEBOKH CBA3KOH 4acTh APEBHUX IIpeJIHKATHBHbIX NPHYACTHH OKa3aJIaCb Ha TIepH(jepHH CHHTAKCHYECKOH CHCTEMbi H BMOCJIEACTBHH ObIJIH TIep EOCMBICJIEHbI HA OCHOBAHHH HX BTOPHYHOH —MojanbHOH OyHKuHH. Ha Tenpenuuio HCTI0/Ib30BaTh HOMHHAJIbHBIE (DOpMBI IJIaroJjia JŪJISI BbIDažKEHHA KOCBEHHO BOCTPHHATOrO AeiCTBHSA (kaTeropuu 3a cBueTe1bCTBOBaHHOCTH 110 P. $IKoGcoHy) yKaseiBaeT ynoTpeb/ieHHe KaK ApPEeBHHX, Tak H HOBHIX (nepudpacTuueckux) (opm riepibekKTA B JpeBHEHHJNHCKOM, CJIABSHCKHX H POMaHCKHX $I3bIKaX, a Take THIIOJIOTHYeCKHe MapaJliesH B TIODKCKHX, CEMHTCKHX, HEKOTOPHIX KapTBEJBCKHX 53bIKax. TNPEOCMBICJIEHHIO TNpPEAHKATHBHHIX NPHYACTHH TakKXKe MOTIJIO CINOCOOCTBOBATb HCINOJIb30BaHHEe IIpHUACTHLIX (opM Aus obpa3oBaHus NepHPacTHYECKOro OTITaTHBa, T.e. HMEHHO TOTO HAKJIOHEHHA, KOTOPOe BO MHOTHX HJ. 53bIKAX BblpaxKaeT KOCBEHHYIO peub. JlaHHBIE APEBHEJHTOBCKHX MaMSITHHKOB CBHJETEJIbCTBYIOT O CBS3H ONTaTHBHOTO H TPaHCJIaTHBHOTO 3HA UEHHH; Ha 3TO yKa3biBaloT H cayyan CHHOHHMHH KH xn onratusa B tpynax C. BaiiHopaca. Emme Goabliee BAHSHHE HA,,IPHKDENJIeHHe “ 3HAYEHHS NEPEeCKa30YHOCTH K NpeJuKaTHBHBIM eH CTBHTeJbHBIM NPHYACTHAM JOJKHA Oblla OKasaTh KOHCTPYKIMS nominativus cum participio mocJie rjiaroJioB yMCTBEHHOI- 'O BOCIIDHATHA H peuH, Hamp., he saké(si) ěhé; 3TuM OO psCHSeTc1 3aMeTHoe npeoOjiajaHHe TpaHCJIaTHBHOTO H ĮyOHTATHBHOTO 3nauennii KH no cpaBHeHHIO C COOTBETCTBYIOUIHMH MAaCCHBHBIMH OOOpOTAMH, this BremHuMH YCJOBHSIMH, CNOCOGCTBOBABIIHMH pa3BHTHIO MOJAJIbHBIX 3HaueHHH MpeAHKaTHBHBIX NpHYACTHH, IIpexxJIe BCero CJeAyeT CUHTaTh HCTOPHYECKHE CB53H ČaJITHŪCKHX H IIpHOAJITHHCKO-OHHCKHX 513bIKOB. CpaBHEHHE JIHTOBCKO-JIA TEILICKHX TIpHUACTHbIX KOHCTPYKUHH C COOTBeTCTBYIOUUMH NO 3HaueHHIO OOOopoTaMH 3cTOHCKOro (direct way) Hu JIMBCKOTO S13bIKOB yKa3bIBaeT Ha OOINHOCTb CEeMaHTHYECKOH KaTeTODpHH NepeckasouHOCTH, KOTOpas B CpaBHHTeJIbHO HeGOJIbINOM H 3AKDpbITOM apeajie, 3aHHMAIONIIeM UACTb BOCTOUHOro IIOOepe:xxbs bBaatuiickoro MOpsi, peaJu3yeTcsi pa3JiHYHbLIMH OTTJIATOJIbHLIMH (opMaMH: NMpHYACTHAMH (JMT.), ĮĮeenipHuaCTHaM (JiaT., 3CT.), HHOHKHHTHBAMH (3CT.), OTTJIATOJIbHbIMH CYLIECTBHTEIbHBIMH (JIHBCK.), MpHUYEM reHeTHYEeCKH TOXJĮECTBEHHbI TOJIBKO JIHTOBCKHE HM JaThiluckue opmel. Pacnpocrpanenue sTOKH CeMaHTHYECKOH KaTerOpHH MOXKeT ObITh CBA3aHO C NMPOABHKEHHEM GaJITHKHCKHX IJIeMeH Ha CeBep, B OOJIACTH, HaceJieHHbIEe NpeJlIeCTBeHHHKaMH JIHBOB H 3CTOHLEB, KOTOpoe Aatupyercs V—VI B. H. 3. B 3710 Bpema npuba,iThiiCKO-(PHHCKOE S3BIKOBOE €JHHCTBO yiKe He CYMeCTBOBAJIO, a BOCTOYHOGaJITHĖCKHE SI3BIKH elle OOpa30BAJIH Takylo OOLIHOCTh, B KOTOPOH HOBbIe SIBJIEHHS MOIJIH CBOGoauo pacnpocTtpansthesi. UHTeHcHBHOCTE ynoTpebsennss KH B BocTounoGanTHiHCKHX S13bIKAX NPHMEPHO COO TBETCTBYeT OJIM30CTH MX CBs3ell ¢ npubaiTHIICKO- -(PHHCKHMH SI3bIKaMH: OHO HaHGojiee ynoTpeGHTeJIbHO B JIATHILICKOM S13bIKe, MeHee —Ha cepepe H ceBepo-BocToke JIuTBHI, a TAKE B XKH1 MA KHTCKOM HapeuuH, T.e. B 30HaX KOHTAKTOB JIHTOBCKOTO S13bIKA C CeJIbCKHMH H KYDpIJICKHM S3bIKaMH, Gojiee IOjBEeprHYyTEIMH NpHOAJITHHOCKO-OHHCKOMY BJHSIHHIO; B IOxHOH JluTBe KH BcTpeuaeTcs yxe coBceM pejįko. DTO n03BOJISIET NMpejnoJiaraTh, UTO KaTeropus rnepeckasoyHOCTH B Ga/THHCKUX S3bIKAX pacHpOCTPaHsJach C CeBepa Ha IOT H, BEPOSITHO, Jake He JOCTHraja TEppHTOpHH JPEBHENPYCCKOro f3bIKa. Tunosornueckas napaJyenb BOcTOuHOOaJITHĖCKOMY H mnpubaatuiicko-¢puackomy KH Habsofaercs Ha Bankanax. Boarapo-makejionckue nepeckasbiBaTesibHbie (DOpMEI H aJIŪ02HCKHĖ ajMHpaTHB, O(OPMJIEHHIO KOTOPBIX CMNOCOOCTBOBAJO BJIHSHHE TYPEIKOro s3blKa, COOTBETCTBY10T JIKHTOBCKO-JIAaTbInICKOMŲY KH kak no cpoeii cemanTuueckoii cTpykType, Tak H Mo MOp(oJoruYeCKHM CpPeJCTBaM BblpakeHus (OTTJIATOJIbHbIe HMeHa, TEeCHO CBfi3aHHbIE C MepH(ppacTHUECKHMH dopmamu nepdekrta. Mopdosorusauus ceMaHTHYECKOH KaTEropHH NEepecKa3oyHOCTH TOJIbKO B OKPaHHHBIX [10JI0CAX H/Ie. 2012-01-11 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 I3bIKOB, YKa3blBaeT HA 3HAYHTEJbHYIO POJIb SI3bIKOBBIX KOHTA4KTOB B 3TOM IIPOLECCE H SABJSAETCH SPKHM NPUMEPOM PaCHpPOCTPAHEHHS TOXKAECTBEHHLIX CEeMaHTHYECKHX KaTeropui B KOHTAKTHBIX 00/1aCTAX reHeaJIOrHYecKH HepOACTBEHHbIX fA3BIKOB. 54