Kai kurie beasmenių sakinių tipai Malkavos tarmėje

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, II LIETUVOS TSR MOKSLŲ AKADEMIJA SOME TYPES OF IMPERSONAL SENTENCES IN THE MALKAVA DIALECT (BSSR, Magiliovo district, Mstislavl region)1 M. SIVICKIENĖ The question of impersonal sentences in Lithuanian dialects is undoubtedly very interesting in itself, all the more so because such sentences have not been examined in greater detail even in the Lithuanian literary language. For this reason, many difficulties arise in describing the impersonal sentences of a dialect. Lithuanian-language textbooks intended for schools limit themselves to a few examples of impersonal sentences describing natural phenomena or a person’s physical or mental state. The structural and semantic variety of impersonal sentences is left unaddressed. In J. Jablonskis’s syntax, impersonal sentences themselves are discussed very briefly (a definition and several examples are given), but in discussing the main and secondary parts of a sentence, many different examples are provided, among which are impersonal constructions, although they are not classified as such.2 M. Durys³ discusses Lithuanian impersonal sentences in somewhat greater detail. He also considers impersonal sentences whose predicate is a participle, a personal verb with an impersonal meaning, and so on. However, M. Durys’s approach to grammatical questions is often formalistic. In the preface to his textbook, Durys says that he was guided directly by M. Peshkovsky’s “Русский синтаксис в научном освещении”. But while the presentation of linguistic facts in M. Peshkovsky’s syntax often runs counter to the author’s formalistic stance, Durys’s short textbook remained thoroughly formalistic. Here, it is not the meaning of impersonal sentences that determines their structure, but, conversely, form that determines content. This article does not entirely agree with the traditional view of some of the syntactic constructions examined here. 1 This article is an abridged chapter from the candidate dissertation “Литовский говор в белорусском окружении (БССР, дер. Мальковка, Могилевской обл.)” (manuscript). The dissertation was defended at the Order of Lenin Leningrad State University named after A. Zhdanov in 1956. It describes the phonetics and morphology of the Malkava village dialect, as well as some questions of syntax. For more detail on this and on the origin of the dialect, see the author’s abstract of the same title. 2Jonas of Rygiškiai, Lithuanian Syntax, 10, 19–26, Seinai, 1911. 3 M. Durys, Lietuvių kalbos sintaksė, Kaunas, 1927. 231 Impersonal sentences are considered to be sentences that lack a grammatical subject expressed in the nominative case and denoting the agent of an action or the bearer of a particular quality; the predicate of such sentences is not associated with the category of person. This article describes the impersonal sentences characteristic of the Malkava dialect. They are classified according to their structure. Some more prominent groups in terms of semantics are also distinguished. I. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH IMPERSONAL VERBS OR VERBS USED IMPERSONALLY 1. Impersonal sentences denoting various natural phenomena Impersonal verbs and verbs used impersonally function as the main part of the sentence (the predicate). The predicate takes the third-person form in the present, past, and future tenses. For example: Ale teip spakainiai (calmly) lyja⁴; Vakar labai ke.pina.; Perniai labai kepindava.; Vėl isipaga.di.ja. (it cleared up); Lauki šūla; Pa.piet vėl šūtins; Ai, daug prisni.ga.; Jau de.nos kiek pridėja.; De.noja; Kai iside.nos (it gets daylight), tai ir isipaga.dis; Un pa.vakarius pradėja. laščiot5. Alongside these impersonal sentences, personal sentences also occur in the dialect, for example: rytas aušta, lietus lyja, vakaras jau sute.ma., graužmas (thunder) graudžia... A. Shakhmatov explains the emergence of such sentences as resulting from the later addition of a subject to an impersonal sentence under the influence of personal sentences. M. Peshkovsky holds the opposite view (also supported by M. Durys in his syntax). In his understanding, personal sentences such as lietus lyja, aušra aušta, and so on, are older; only later, when people began to think critically, did they reject the name of the supposed agent, thereby emphasizing their ignorance of the true cause (the true agent). 2. Impersonal sentences expressing a person's mental and physical state Only impersonal verbs in the third-person form function as the predicate. They may also be in the past (simple or frequentative), present, or future tense, for example: Kojas ge.lia; Dunti. baūdžia (aches); Man teip pusiauji. sopa; Matai, le.žiu.vi. jai niešti; Vis galvu. ne.štėdava; Vakar galvu. sa.pėja; Neskaityk, galvu. sa.pės... In the dialect, newer personal constructions are often used alongside such impersonal constructions; cf.: Oi, lūpa.s sopa labai; Galvà pradė sa.pėt; Aštripa. runka; Jan runka.s knieti, kadniec (necessarily) kad teip padaryt; Nosis niešti, miris kas; Kaip sopa ažu.pinčiai, tai pre.ma (straight) ra.du. nera... It is worth noting that the accusative as well as the nominative case is used with the verbs sopa, niešti, peršti. But with the verbs užtirpsta, tvinksta, ⁴ To render the dialect's phonetics more accurately, phonetic transcription is used, though in a considerably simplified form. Half-long sounds are marked with a dot at the lower right of the sound symbol. Stressed long vowels are marked as in standard Lithuanian. Stress and sound softness are indicated only in individual cases. Some dialect words are explained in parentheses. ⁵ The final t of the infinitive is more often soft in the dialect. 232 *knieti* is used only with the nominative, whereas the verbs *gelia, maudžia* take only the accusative. Such twofold usage of these sentences is characteristic of the Eastern Aukštaitian and Dzūkian dialects.6 In the literary language, impersonal constructions—i.e., those with the accusative—are more commonly used in such cases. Among the impersonal sentences in this group there are also sentences of a different structure and meaning, e.g.: Ale ži.na.t. *prisvarga*. already; Tadu jai labai *pazbausa*. (it became very frightening); *Paru.pė* (became of interest) *padaboo*, what is happening there; Ajagi, how *gert noris...* (how one longs to drink...) In some of these, an impersonal verb, or one used impersonally, together with an infinitive forms a compound predicate (*gert noris, paru.pė padaboo*). II. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH A PAST-TENSE PASSIVE PARTICIPLE OF NEUTER GENDER These are sentences used very widely in the dialect. Depending on how the agent is expressed, we divide these sentences into two groups: sentences with an unspecified agent, and sentences in which the agent is expressed in the genitive case. 1. Sentences with an unspecified agent, e.g.: Atvažiuo.va. imt, tai sa.ka., well, the wall is *sukrauta* (about the wall); *Negrėpta* ut lik tiem žaliem; Here it has already been *pravaruóni.ta* (overlooked); The wine had been *nugerta bu.va.* a little; Jai pâltas ge.ras *nu.pirkta*; Vi.sa.s ku.psna.s *nukūnkinta* (turned inside out) *bu.va.*; The bricks are standing *sugriáuta* (collapsed); The advance payment had been *bu.va. duota...* As can be seen from the examples, there are two possibilities here. In some sentences there is a noun in the nominative case; in others it is absent.7 Because the agent is entirely absent from the sentence, the nominative-case object seems to acquire the meaning of a subject. Such a change in the meaning of sentences, whereby their form comes close to that of ordinary personal sentences, is also known in some Russian dialects.8 J. Jablonskis classifies sentences of this kind with a nominative, even though that nominative denotes an object, as personal sentences.9 The question arises why a neuter participle functions as the predicate in these sentences and why it does not agree with the subject. Jablonskis gives no answer to this question. Most likely, neuter participles are used here because the agent is not expressed. 2. Sentences with the agent in the genitive case. The agent expressed in the genitive may be a pronoun or a proper noun, e.g.: *Kinduriu. ra.da.m*, when we arrive, *ineita* into the new houses from the chimney; Already 6 In some works, examples of such sentences are found in I. Specht’s *Litauische dialektische Texte aus Russisch Litaues*, Leipzig, 1920, and also in J. Otrębski’s *Wschodniolitewskie narzecze twereckie*, part I, Kraków, 1934. 7 Both types of these sentences are characteristic of the northern Russian dialects; see А. Б. Шапиро, Очерки по синтаксису русских народных говоров, 144—145, Москва, 1953. For their use in monuments of the Russian language, see С. Д. Никафоров, Глагол, его категории и формы в русской письменности II-й пол. XVI в., 321, 1952. 8 F. D. Filin. Notes on the recording of materials on syntax. — “Bulletin of the Dialectology Section of the Institute of the Russian Language,” issue 4, 45—47, 1948. 9 Rygiškių Jono Lietuvių kalbos sintaksė, 30, Seinai, 1911. 16. Kalbotyros klausimai II. 233 nume.gota began well mūsų.; to knock (to rap); Sodi ke.no it was; Jo already ata.nėšta firewood; Ma.na, gone there is no news where; The guest arrives, and my cuff (wristband) is about to come off; Levasios is buried under hay, with the stubble... F. Specht regards constructions with neuter past passive participles and a genitive of the agent as Polish¹⁰, but it would be more accurate to consider them common to Lithuanian and Slavic languages; their widespread use in Lithuanian and Russian dialects demonstrates this. III. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH MODAL WORDS The compound predicate consists of an infinitive, which denotes an action, and a modal word, which indicates tense and aspect. The following modal words are most often used: (not) need, (not) will have to, (not) will be necessary, (not) possible, (not) possible. This sentence type encompasses two kinds of sentences: sentences with a nominative object and sentences whose action object is in other cases. 1. Impersonal sentences with modal words in the predicate and a nominative object. Such sentences are very frequently used in the dialect, e.g.: Now the fire needs lighting; Kibà (if only) it rains, then the hay will have to be loaded; The herring need not be peeled, only skinned; The handle cannot be removed at all; Now nothing will have to be said (not spoken); I need to repair the roof; Tomorrow, who knows, whether the hay will have to be dried... In Lithuanian-language textbooks, such sentences are conventionally regarded as personal sentences having both principal sentence constituents. The nominative case together with the infinitive is considered a compound subject, and the modal word the predicate. It would be more accurate to classify such sentences as impersonal sentences with a compound predicate (modal word + infinitive). It may not be entirely correct to regard the nominative here as the subject, since it denotes an object. Here the nominative has the meaning of the accusative, and attaching the infinitive, as part of a compound predicate, to the nominative—separating it from the modal word—is artificial. In literary language, the accusative is increasingly used instead of the nominative in such sentences. J. Žiugžda¹¹ notes this. In sentences where the accusative is used instead of the nominative, J. Žiugžda sees a change in the expression of the principal sentence constituents. He analyzes the sentence in summer the gardens must be watered12 as follows: the gardens must be watered is a compound subject, must is the predicate, whereas in the sentence in summer the garden plots must be watered, only to water is considered the subject, and must the predicate. In fact, no changes occur here in the composition of the principal sentence constituents; rather, the object in the accusative case simply becomes fully apparent. J. Jablonskis, discussing sentences with a nominative and a compound predicate¹³, points out that there may be considerable subjectivity in analyzing such sentences. In the sentence the rye needs harvesting, if we ask what needs to be done, the subject will be the rye needs harvesting, but if we ask what is said about the rye, we will answer: the rye needs harvesting. Thus, we shall regard needs harvesting as the predicate. 10 F. Specht, min. veik., 69—70. 11 J. Žiugžda, Lietuvių kalbos gramatika, 2, 8, 1955. 12 The example is taken from the same source. 13 Rygiškių Jono Lietuvių kalbos sintaksė, 25—26, Seinai, 1911. 234 As we see, J. Jablonskis provides no criterion by which the infinitive could be assigned to the subject or the predicate, noting that this depends on the question, logical stress, and so on. Analogous constructions with a nominative case form bearing the meaning of the accusative are used in the northern Russian dialects14, and until the 18th century they were also used in written Russian.15 2. In impersonal sentences with a compound predicate consisting of a modal word and an infinitive, the genitive case may function as the object. The use of the genitive here is always determined by the semantic meaning of the noun or verb, e.g.: Raiks susmal’t dabar miežiu. (some of them, not all there are); Do man raiks ža.les pasraut (the prefix pa- indicates incompleteness of the action); Nėr kadu sedi, Pranokas atvažiuos, raikia re.šutu. jam atne.št; Raikia duot jam kruopu. let him eat..." If there is no such conditioning, the nominative case is used, cf.: Raikia sumalt rugiai (the whole supply); Muožna išraut aguona.s; Nemu ožna miltai iškraty t, do as you like, and so on. 3. Impersonal sentences of a somewhat different kind in this group are also common in the dialect. These sentences have the same construction, but lack a modal word—it is only implied. With a transitive verb, the nominative is likewise used, e.g.: Kur to ža.le do gau t; Čia liesva.s (kopėčios) paduot. or per tos nulipsi; Kur a.ni.s dėt, pinigai... 4. Impersonal sentences with modal words and the infinitive of an intransitive verb are frequently used, e.g.: Pasiset un ke.lia. raikia (before a journey); Šiunde važiuot in posa.džia. raikia; Maž do un bazora. (to the market) prieis nuveit; Nemu ožna un jo jot (on horseback). 5. One more kind of such impersonal sentences is interesting. A form of the third person of the verb “to be” in the past frequentative tense may be added to the compound predicate (modal word and infinitive). E.g.: Ryt raike. bu.va. blynu, išike.pt; Pirtis raike. bu.va. pasku.rint, nėr kadu; Sakau, maž (gal) pasėset jau raike. bu.va.; Raike. bu.va. lik šiol ir atait, nėr ir nėr; Raike. bu.va. jau pade.taut... In meaning, these sentences resemble the subjunctive mood; that is, they express an action that does not actually take place but is desired. Cf.: Ryt reikėtų blymų išsikept. “Was” in these sentences does not specify past tense. The verb “was” in such sentences undoubtedly arose under the influence of the Slavic languages. Cf. Завтра надо было бы блинов испечь. In Russian, Belarusian, and Polish, “reikia” нужно, treba, trzeba—predicative words with a modal nuance—are classified as belonging to the category of state. With the copula “быть,” they are used as predicates. In these Slavic languages, “reikia” cannot by itself express grammatical tense; it only describes a state with a modal nuance. In Lithuanian, however, “reikia,” although it expresses the concept of necessity as a state, is still a verb and can express verbal tenses without the copula “būti.” Therefore, “buvo,” added to “reikėjo,” contributes nothing new in meaning; it merely emphasizes the unreality of the action. 14 Бюллетень диалектол. сектора АН СССР. вып. I, 17, 1947. 15 A. Б. Шапиро, Очерки по синтаксису русских народных говоров, 141—142, Москва, 1953. 235 Sentences with such constructions also occur in other dialects, e.g., in the Tverečius dialect16, as well as in the Linkmenys dialect, from which the Malkava dialect split off. This means that they arose before the dialect under study came into contact with the Belarusian-language environment. J. Špechtas provides examples of this kind already from “Summa arba trumpas izguldimas Ewangelių szwentų”. IV. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH NEUTER ADJECTIVES In these sentences, the predicate is expressed by a neuter adjective. These sentences differ with respect to whether an agent is present. In some, the state expressed by the predicate is not associated with any agent; in others, the agent is implied or expressed in the dative case, e.g.: Pre. saulai teip balta; In saula.s labai sveika; Ai, bloga be duntu.; Matai, kaip par mus ramu (cheerful); Gal neramu (sad) Malkava.j, kai jaunim, tai vis miestai geriai... Often, the predicate here is the Slavic baika || baika, meaning: not bad, good, well (cf. Belarusian байка = басня), e.g.: Kad ir užlyt trupučiu.ku., tai baika; Šiunde baikta, nelabai karšta; Jau kai rugius suvės, tai tadu bus baika... In the dialect, “baika” acquired the meaning of a neuter adjective. It can function as a predicate or as part of a predicate in personal sentences as well, e.g.: Kas metai mūs bulba.s baika; Kalniai (fur coats) bus baika... The word байка is apparently used in a similar sense (not bad, good, well) in some Belarusian dialects17. V. COMPOUND IMPERSONAL SENTENCES Impersonal sentences with the following construction are widely used in the Malkava dialect: 1. { there is not / there is } + what + present tense, 3rd-person singular verb form Examples: Nėr kas ra.ša. (there is nothing to write about); Nėr kas walga. (there is nothing to eat, no food); Nėr kas rūna (there is no grass); Nėr kas pe.ni (there are no pigs); Paliūte. (a rainy period), tai nėr kas dirba (there is nothing to do); Yra kas pjauna (the grain is good); Yr kas ma.la. (there is grain), but there are no millstones.; Yr kas siu.wa (there is cloth), but I have no time. 2. { there is not / there is } + where, when + present tense, 3rd-person singular verb form. E.g.: Tai čia nėr kur mauda.s (there is nowhere to bathe); Nėr kadu ir apsvelka; Gal nebua.wa. kadu ra.ša.; Nėr kur de.da la.pai; Aš girdėjau, ale nebu.wa. kadu klau-sa.; Yr kur gama. Yr kadu čia man ple.pa... (there is somewhere to graze); 16 Žr. J. O t r ę b s k i, Wschodniolitewskie narzecze twereckie, cz. I, 400. 17 In D. Telentiuko’s unpublished candidate dissertation, “Исследование в области белорусской диалектологии”, Пинск, 1949, we find the example “Тэпэр зайихаты у Пінск, байкы, а ранчь, праўда што было трудно”. 236 These are peculiar complex impersonal sentences with impersonal main clauses containing only a predicate expressed by verbs denoting existence nėra, yra, and impersonal complement subordinate clauses (kas ra.są, kas valga, kur mauda.s, etc.). These sentences are interesting both in terms of their structure and their meaning. As can be seen from the explanations, in sentences with pronouns, the nominative case “kas” denotes an object. In some other dialects, that “kas” denotes an agent (nėr kas valgo — there is no one to eat). Lithuanian grammar textbooks have not discussed such sentences. J. Jablonskis, in discussing the principal parts of the sentence, gives many such examples from various dialects.¹⁸ Regardless of whether the nominative in them denotes an object or an agent, the nominative and the verb form are treated as the logical subject. With respect to the Malkava dialect, this would be incorrect, since here the nominative denotes an object. The dative is used to express the agent: Nėr kam aina (there is no person who would go); Yr kam padeda (there is someone to help); Nėr kam padeda (there is no one to help). It is possible that in all the subordinate clauses of these constructions the verbs rašo, valgo, etc., only happen to coincide in form with the third-person form. In origin, however, they may be some other form. Jablonskis’s examples show that the verb form varies in this respect across dialects. It may be a present active participle, an imperative, a conditional, and so on. In these sentences, the third-person form resembles impersonal verbs in meaning, since it likewise does not indicate an agent. Alongside the sentences nėr kas valga, nėr kur mauda.s, nėr kam aina, sentences with infinitives are also used: nėr ko valgyt, nėr kur maudytis, nėr kam ait, yr kam padėt, etc. It was not possible to establish any rules governing this variation in usage. Undoubtedly, all these sentences are very interesting in terms of their structure and meaning and should be examined in greater detail on the basis of data from other dialects. SOME TYPES OF IMPERSONAL SENTENCES IN THE DIALECT OF THE VILLAGE OF MALKOVKA (Byelorussian SSR, Mstislavl District, Mogilev Region) М. К. СИВИЦКЕНЕ Abstract The article describes the impersonal sentences most characteristic of the dialect of the village of Malkovka. Impersonal sentences are considered chiefly in terms of their composition and the expression of the predicate. The following types of sentences are considered: I. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH IMPERSONAL OR IMPERSONALLY USED VERBS; 18 Rygiškių Jono Lietuvių kalbos sintaksė, 25, Seinai, 1911. 237 II. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH A NON-GENDERED PAST PASSIVE PARTICIPLE (IN THE PREDICATE). These sentences are widespread in the dialect. They include sentences with an unspecified agent and sentences with a specified agent (in the genitive case). In the former, the complement is used in the nominative case. Because there is no real agent of the action at all, the nominative case of the object is reinterpreted, coming closer in meaning to the bearer of the state expressed by the participle. For example, Jai pal’tas ge.ras nu.pirkta (a good coat has been bought for her). In his grammar, J. Jablonskis classifies such sentences as personal. III. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH MODAL WORDS. The most interesting here are sentences with modal words and the nominative case used as an object. Nuelet silke. neraike (literally: herring wash not necessary). In Lithuanian grammars, such sentences are also classified as personal. The infinitive and the nominative-case noun are treated as a complex subject, while the modal word is treated as the predicate. This type of sentence includes several varieties, among them sentences in which the complex predicate (modal word + infinitive), under the influence of Slavic languages, is further compounded by the third-person past-tense form of the verb „to be“: Ryt raike. bu.va. blynu. isikept (literally: tomorrow it was necessary to bake pancakes). The influence is longstanding, since a similar complication of the predicate is also found in the Linkmenys dialect (from which the Malkava dialect split off) and in other dialects. IV. IMPERSONAL SENTENCES WITH A NON-GENDERED ADJECTIVE. The word baika may be used as the predicate with the meaning “well,” “all right” (cf. Belarusian baika = fable), and is understood as a non-gendered adjective. V. COMPLEX IMPERSONAL SENTENCES. The following are regarded as complex sentences: ner (yr) kas valga. (literally: there is not (is), what they eat), ner (yr) kadu apsvelka (literally: there is not (is) when one gets dressed). The main clauses consist of verbs of existence (there is, there is not). In the subordinate object clauses with pronouns, the nominative-case pronoun „kas“ denotes the object. The verb in these clauses apparently only corresponds to the third-person form, though by origin it may be another form. Different verb forms occur here across the dialects.