Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu „tapti“

RITA MILIŪNAITĖ Institute of the Lithuanian Language CAUSES OF NORM INSTABILITY IN EXISTENTIAL CONSTRUCTIONS WITH THE VERB TAPTI KEYWORDS: syntax, expression of state, lexicon, codification, language norms, usage. 1. INTRODUCTORY NOTES When preparing new prescriptive works or new editions of existing ones, it becomes necessary to review established norms, especially cases that fluctuate or are not entirely clear, compare codification with new usage data, and sometimes adjust that codification—by making it stricter, more lenient, or more precise, and by differentiating forms of expression and their evaluation. The aim of this article is to identify and describe a problem in the codification and usage of contemporary Standard Lithuanian, concerning variation in the expression of state in constructions with nominal and, especially, adjectival words and the verb to become. The problem is much broader than constructions with this verb alone, but the case of to become, the semantic and grammatical features of this verb, and its usage clearly reveal the nature of variation in the expression of similar constructions and make it possible to seek the causes of norm instability. Prie šios temos tenka nuolat grįžti (plg. Kniūkšta 1983: 30–38; Šukys 1997: 20–32; Miliūnaitė 2004: 26–39), nes ir gerai prižiūrimose bendrinės kalbos vartojimo srityse (pagrindiniuose dienraščiuose, grožinės literatūros vertimuose ir pan.) reiškiant būvį ne visada laikomasi kodifikuotų normų, o mažiau redaguojamoje vartosenoje norminių ir nenorminių raiškos priemonių, pavyzdžiui, nenorminio būdvardžiškųjų žodžių įnagininko konkurencija su kitais linksniais (straipsnyje jie vadinami alternatyviaisiais) gana ryški. Taigi šios normos nėra stabilios. Vartosenoje dažnai galima rasti panašaus modelio, bet įvairuojančios – norminės ir nenorminės – raiškos sakinių, plg.: 46 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 Put more simply, potatoes, especially when stored for a long time, become poisonous, which is why the use of pesticides is not even permitted when growing them today. (mano sveikata.lt, 2012) Dug-up potatoes must be kept in the dark; otherwise they turn green, sprout, and become poisonous. (grynas.lt, 2012 03 31) Variations occur even within the same author's text—although, in the article excerpt presented below, the verb is not tapti but daryti, with which the expression of state is usually more standard: I am talking about a free press, [...] which is free from outside interests that make the media non-objective and biased. [...] Lies make the media's mirror shattered, and who would then want to trust such a mirror? [...] This makes the media maximally free not only from government but also from business interests, while within the media it is also essential to protect journalists from those above them. (delfi.lt, 2011 05 07) In seeking the causes of this ongoing1 and even strengthening competition in usage (a large part of public usage is not specifically regulated), it is first necessary to describe what determines a norm, what criteria are used to define it, and how non-standard cases are distinguished. 2. FACTORS DETERMINING THE NORMS OF EXPRESSION OF STATE AND THE CURRENT CODIFICATION OF STATE EXPRESSION WITH TAPTI On the basis of linguistic literature devoted to the norms of expressing state, prescriptive works, and usage data, it can be argued that the norms of state expression—the choice of case in constructions with various verbs—are determined by the following principal factors: 1) the semantics of the verb and its forms; 2) whether state is expressed by nominal or adjectival words; 3) the nature of the state (permanent or temporary); 4) syntactic position—a hypothetical factor proposed in this article. Interacting in various ways, complementing or conflicting with one another, these factors delineate a space open to variation in which, it must be acknowledged, 1 Jonas Jablonskis has also repeatedly endorsed the instrumental case for expressing the predicative nominal part; compare: the waves [...] became dark blue= (dark blue) (for a more detailed discussion, see Piročkinas 1986: 190). R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 47 Only language users with a good command of the language can be firm and unwavering. Relying solely on rules and not losing one’s way among them is truly difficult. Let us examine how the factors indicated regulate norms for expressing state in constructions with the verb tapti, while also considering this verb in the broader context of state expression. Let us take as our starting point the codification of the verb tapti in the normative Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (DŽ₆ₑ), where the norm is not defined in any particular way, but is illustrated concisely with examples: tàp‖ti, tañpa, tāpo to become, turn into: To become a teacher, a doctor. To become a human being. Is the dream ~s a reality? He became rich. How can one become rich? Two important points should be noted: synonymous usage with the verbs darytis, virsti and the norm’s central feature: 1) in constructions with nominal expression: become what? – instrumental case; 2) in constructions with adjectival expression: become what? – alternative cases. 2.1. Verb semantics Normative expression of state does not conform equally to the general patterns of state expression in constructions with all verbs. Verbs most often used to form state constructions can, provisionally, be divided into various semantic groups, which, as will become clear, are partly associated with differences in the expression of state. The verb tapti belongs to one of the several more important groups: 1) verbs denoting existence (būti, partly (pa)likti); 2) verbs denoting feeling or pretending (dėtis, apsimesti, atrodyti, jaustis, pasijusti); 3) verbs denoting transformation (transition into another state) (tapti, pasidaryti, (pa)virsti, partly (pa)likti); 4) verbs denoting the assignment of status (pripažinti, (pa)skelbti, (pa)skirti); 2 The semantics of the verb (pa)likti are twofold, so it belongs to this group only provisionally: in constructions with nominal expression, its meaning is close to that of transformation—“5. to enter a particular state; 7. to become, to turn into”—whereas in constructions with adjectival expression it more often has the meaning of existence, “to continue to be the same” (DŽ₆ₑ); cf. kūrinys liko nebaigtas. 48 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 5) verbs of naming (consider in the sense of “believe to be,” call). The semantics of these verbs is partly related to the third factor already mentioned—the nature of the state expressed, whether it is temporary or permanent. This is important for the expression of nominal words. There is a marked tendency to express a permanent state with the nominative and other alternative cases, and a temporary or changing one with the instrumental. The group of verbs of transformation (transition to another state) is the most complex: these verbs form state constructions with different cases of both nominal and adjectival words; some verbs tend towards the instrumental, others towards the alternative cases (see section 2.2 for more detail). As indicated in DŽ6e, the verb become is codified with one meaning3, described by the synonymous verbs become, turn into (as noted, these belong to the same semantic group of transformation, or transition to another state). Dictionary of Lithuanian Verb Valency (Sližienė 2004: 297–298) distinguishes two meanings of become: 1) “turn into something” (In the tale, the grass snake becomes a handsome young man); 2) “become something by acquiring new qualities (another profession, a different position in society, a different evaluation, status, etc.)” (Some schools became gymnasiums). A note is also given that “[t]he verb become, when no longer associated with the instrumental and used with the nominative of an adjective or noun, functions as a copula in a compound predicate, e.g.: He became angry, cruel, and merciless. [...]”. Cases of adjectival expression are not described in greater detail because syntactically they do not involve a government relation. An examination of the examples for the first meaning of eLKŽbecome, “become something, become as something, turn into something,” reveals the following main submeanings: 1) transition to another state: become a stone (a spruce, a crow...) 2) transition to another status (temporary or permanent): become a pauper (a ruler, accomplices...) 3) acquisition of a quality: a) acquisition of an internal quality: become healthy (happy, dead...), b) acquisition of an external quality: become rich (poor, red...). 3Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (LKŽe) lists more meanings of become—eight in total—but only the first, “become something, become as something, turn into something,” and, in part, the second, “come about, happen, be suitable,” actually function in contemporary usage, as indicated in DŽ6e as well. R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 49 Thus, describing the meaning of the verb tapti solely by means of synonyms does not reveal all the particularities of its semantics. Moreover, it is important to establish whether tapti and its synonyms virsti and darytis (which belong to the same meaning group when we speak of state constructions) differ in meaning in any way. A closer look at current usage shows that the semantics of these three verbs (like the norms governing the expression of state constructions) overlap only partially (see pav.). The expression of noun and adjective constructions differs, and, most importantly, so do two distinct aspects of change in an object (or subject) and its property: transformation (a fundamental change) vs partial change. Thus, these verbs cannot be used entirely interchangeably solely because of their differences in meaning. FIG. Synonymy of the verbs tapti, virsti, pasidaryti (D – in constructions with nominal expression, B – in constructions with adjectival expression) It should also be borne in mind that the verbs darytis (pasidaryti) and virsti have transitive counterparts versti and (pa)daryti, whereas tapti is used only intransitively: they made the city unrecognizable – the city became unrecognizable, Ø – the city became unrecognizable, they turned the city into something unrecognizable – the city turned into something unrecognizable. In some cases, the verb tapti tends toward darytis, and in others toward virsti. This feature of its semantics most likely contributes considerably to the variation in how state constructions with it are expressed, since the norms for expressing state in constructions with the verbs pasidaryti and virsti differ. Thus, the semantic criterion for choosing how to express state in these constructions is unreliable and is one reason why the norms for state constructions with the verb tapti are unstable. 50 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 2.2. Nouns or adjectives The verbs most often used to form state constructions occur in highly varied ways with nouns and adjectives, and the norms include various qualifications and exceptions (see the table; examples with tapti are highlighted). TABLE. Norms for state constructions with nouns and adjectives4 (Į – instrumental; A – alternative cases) Semantic groups of verbs Norms for constructions with nouns Norms for constructions with adjectives 1. Existential meaning (būti) A; sometimes A and Į5: Uncle is a teacher. Grandfather was a bookbinder. Brother will be a banker ‖ a banker (instrumental). A: Uncle is rich. The performance was impressive. Autumn will be long and warm. 2. Meaning of feeling or pretending (apsimesti, atrodyti, dėtis, pasijusti) Į and A: He pretended to be a fool. They seem to be good hosts. The boxer presents himself as a great millionaire ‖ a great millionaire (instrumental). The wronged man felt himself to be in the right ‖ righteous (instrumental). The child was left an orphan ‖ an orphan (nominative). A: He pretended to be ill. His sister-in-law looks upset. The neighbor makes out that he has been badly wronged. We felt happy. 3. Meaning of transformation or partial change (remain, become, come to be, turn into) Into the accusative and instrumental, or into the accusative: He became the community chair ‖ chairperson. Two more candidates became party members ‖ members. The dream became reality. The child remained an orphan ‖ orphan. Into the accusative or instrumental: The secretary is becoming far too insolent. The goal became easily attainable. The wooden spoon turned golden. Everyone remained satisfied. 4 Remiamasi leidiniu Kalbos patarimai (KP 2003), nors jame ne visi atvejai įvardyti. Sakinių modeliai supaprastinti, kad rodytų tik variacijų esmę. 5 The expression is determined by whether the state is permanent or temporary (this is often indicated by the context). R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 51 Semantic groups of verbs Norms for constructions with nominal words Norms for constructions with adjectival words 4. Meaning of conferring status (announce, appoint, recognize) Into the instrumental: They recognized them as winners. The pope is to be declared a saint. He was appointed deputy. Into the accusative and instrumental, or into the accusative6: The court found him not guilty ‖ innocent. I declare the meeting opened ‖ open. We appointed them responsible for organizing the seminars. 5. Meaning of designation (consider, call) Into the instrumental: I am still considered an outsider. He can be called a show-off. Into the accusative: The minister considers these countries’ relations promising. The president called the government’s work historic. Of all the verb groups, the third group—the group expressing transformation or partial change—stands out as having particularly varied codified norms; this is precisely the group that includes the verb tapti ‘become’. Given that constructions with the verb tapti fall between the verbs darytis and virsti, which have different normative patterns (especially with adjectival words), they are, one might say, inherently doomed to be unstable. 2.2.1. Let us briefly examine the nominal expression of constructions with tapti ‘become’. Like the other verbs in the third group, given its semantics (expressing a changeable rather than permanent state), tapti is predictably inclined to be used with the instrumental case. The norms for the verb pasidaryti vary, but the instrumental is considered more promising. With virsti, only the instrumental is considered standard; it is also firmly established in usage. The instrumental is prescribed as the norm with tapti not only by DŽ6e but also by other codification sources, yet alternative cases are recognized as well (especially the frequent nominative). They are regarded as dialectal, outdated norms that nevertheless persist in usage (partly, one must suppose, because of overcorrection and fear of the instrumental) (KP 2003: 20): becomes (became...), wants (can...) to become someone dialectal; obsolete ‖ becomes (became...), wants (can...) to become somethingto express a state when it is denoted by a noun or another nominal word 6 Dėl būtino šios grupės normų kodifikacijos koregavimo jau rašyta (žr. Miliūnaitė 2004: 35); realioji norma aiškiai linksta į įnagininką. 52 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 and temporariness, becoming something, is emphasized: She became a swan (|| swan-instrumental). One day I, too, will become a director (|| director-instrumental). He very much wanted to become a member of that delegation (|| member-instrumental). This case in itself raises no particular concerns about the norms, although in actual usage to become with the nominative is not very rare, cf.: The young swimming star—15-year-old Rūta Meilutytė became an Olympic champion. (balsas.lt, 2012 07 30) What does Lithuania need to learn in order to become an ideal country [headline]. (alfa.lt 2012 06 24) The difficulty is that the unstable, fluctuating norm for nominal expression cannot but affect the norms for adjectival expression as well. 2.2.2. The instrumental case of adjectival words with many of the verbs under discussion is considered an influence of Slavic languages (see Ambrazas 1990: 6–7); these are said to be errors “fundamentally destroying our traditional syntactic system,” and therefore are strictly corrected; cf. Šukys 2003: 160 (also 1997: 20–32): When a state is expressed by an adjective or an adjectival word (a participle, an adjectival pronoun, e.g., what kind, such..., or an adjectival numeral, e.g., first, fifth...), the instrumental is considered Slavic and must never be used. [...] The instrumental case expressing the state of adjectival words, which displaces the second element of the double-case construction, is a frequent and very serious error that destroys the traditional Lithuanian syntactic system. It is considered an indisputable norm of Lithuanian that, in a personal sentence, the nominal part of a compound nominal predicate (which many syntacticians call a “compound predicate”), when expressed by an adjectival word (an adjective, participle, ordinal numeral, or adjectival pronoun what kind, such, any, this kind, all kinds, and so on), must agree with the subject (usually a noun or a nominal pronoun). Verbs used only with the instrumental case of adjectival words (to turn into what kind), or constructions whose expression varies, are considered exceptions (cf. also Rasimavičius 1972a: 18–20; Kniūkšta 1983: 32–34). The verb to become is not considered an exception7; the adjectival instrumental in constructions with it is corrected as a serious error, although such errors and variations abound in actual usage, cf.: 7 To be sure, Pranas Kniūkšta places the verb to become in the group of “verbs with a semi-independent meaning” to turn into, to make into, to make, to consider, to recognize, with which “the instrumental of an adjective can function as the nominal part of a predicate”; but this may be an oversight, since in the same article he also groups to become with the verbs to remain, to feel, to seem, to be, with which the instrumental forms of adjectives and nouns “are most objectionable,” and corrects those instrumentals (Kniūkšta 1983: 33; 35). R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 53 At the origins of democracy, it was not taken for granted; the founders of modern democracy, who laid its foundations in Europe and America, understood perfectly well that only an autonomous and independent citizen can freely express their will in elections. For freeing slaves or serfs is one thing, but quite another is creating the conditions for them to become self-reliant and responsible for the consequences of their actions and choices. (alfa.lt, 2012 10 31) Two or three minutes before death, a person becomes symmetrical. When dying, a person, if uninjured, becomes quite symmetrical. (balsas.lt, 2012 10 20) The study found that knowing a happy person increases the chance of becoming happy oneself by 15.3 percent. If your friend has a happy friend, your chance of becoming happy increases by 9.8 percent. Even a happy friend of your neighbor’s sister increases your chance of being happy by 5.6 percent. (delfi.lt, 2008 12 05) Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that sentences with normative double-case constructions used in older writings may sometimes “now seem lifeless, unnatural” (Kniūkšta 1983: 37; Šukys 1997: 30); therefore, when correcting the instrumental case to double-case constructions, other ways of expression are also suggested, including subordinate clauses and the like. Thus, it may be said that the difference between noun-based and adjective-based expressions of state with become is another reason—albeit a minor one, but one identified long ago (cf. Rasimavičius 1972b: 16–25; Šukys 1998: 256)—for the occurrence of norm violations, both under the influence of internal analogies8 and because users confuse the forms. 2.3. The nature of the state For the norms governing noun-based expression, the nature of the state expressed by the constructions under discussion is significant—whether it is permanent or temporary (see Kniūkšta 1983: 31–32). This is related to verb semantics (sometimes even to the differing meaning of the same verb, especially to be, in various tenses), but there is no direct correspondence. The nature (and expression) of the state may be determined by context, for example: For a while they were good friends; They were French. In constructions with the verb become, which denotes a change of state (transformation), noun-based expression of state varies, as we have seen, but this variation is not associated with any shades of meaning concerning the nature of the state—its permanence or transience. 8 As one of the motivating factors behind the adjectival instrumental expression of state, the potentially elliptical nature of such constructions is often also cited: He became a sage → became a wise man → became wise. 54 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 2.4. Syntactic position When considering the norms for expressing state, two syntactic positions are most often discussed: syntactically, state can be expressed by a compound predicate and by a predicative modifier (see Šukys 1997: 20–25). Examining usage examples, one notices that even in the most carefully edited texts there is another case (admittedly, a somewhat marginal one) that neither the rules nor usage nor editors seem willing to acknowledge. These are constructions involving double-case marking with tapti, occurring not in the position of a predicate or predicative modifier, but in that of an ordinary modifier. Several such cases are included in the List of Major Errors alongside strictly corrected violations of double-case norms (see KP 2003: 82): Nobody asked us, who did not want to become like that (=like that; who did not want to be like that) tapti. This year we declined to attend the fairs, which had already become traditional (=traditional; which had already become traditional). Usage offers quite a few sentences of a similar pattern with the instrumental case: Such love is loved by a mother who has become disabled. (literary translation from French, 2010) He kept sticking that photo, which had become immortal, everywhere. (literary translation from English, 2010) Sometimes the instrumental case is required by the sentence construction itself, when an instrumental case in the modifier position agrees with the instrumental case of the word it modifies: However, there is no need to rely on well-known facts that have become banal today. (delfi.lt, 2010 07 20) In usage overseen by language editors, an attempt is made to follow the aforementioned KP recommendation, but such a codified norm does not always seem natural and is not accepted by language users; similar sentences also strike language specialists themselves as unnatural, judging by those I have had occasion to ask: Over the weekend, on September 14–16, the Nations’ Fair, which has become traditional, is being held on Gediminas Avenue in the capital. (Lietuvos rytas, 2012 09 14) Brought to our region half a century ago as fodder for livestock, and later becoming an ornamental plant, the plant known as Sosnowsky’s hogweed is one of the greatest threats. (alfa.lt, 2011 07 08) R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 55 Salvatore Ferragamo’s eldest daughter, Fiamma di San Giuliano, created iconic products: the “Gancino” bag made of plexiglass and the “Vara” shoes. (Lietuvos rytas (Stilius), 2012 08 14) The instrumental case, incidentally, is also used in this position in predicative constructions with other verbs: “When organizing the mock examination, we took the numbers into account,” said A. Kniška, who promised to look for ways to compensate the graduating students for a day that was supposed to be free. (alfa.lt, 2012 02 14) Grammar specialists should define what happens to the case expressing a state when a compound predicate or predicative modifier is transformed into a simple modifier. Compare: The plant became ornamental – An ornamental plant that had been brought here (: one that had become ornamental?); The fair became traditional – A traditional fair held again (: a fair that had become traditional?); We felt happy – We, having felt happy (: happy?), no longer cared about anything. Some sentences transformed in a similar way can be edited to avoid the dilemma of case choice, but this is not a solution. As language becomes more intellectualized (or bureaucratic) and sentence structure grows more complex, the demands of colloquial language do not suit every style. Therefore, rather than ignoring as unnecessary for Lithuanian the more complex models of expressing a state that are in use, we should examine them and assess the instances of state expression that often occur in them but do not conform to the codified norm. 3. IS THE TARGET NORM REALISTIC? A review of the codification and usage variations of constructions with the verb tapti expressing a state reveals this verb’s contradictory position among verbs in the same semantic group, darytis and virsti. Clearly, in usage, both the adjectival and the nominal expression of state constructions with tapti tend closer to the forms of constructions with the verb virsti, although the codified norm seeks to preserve their similarity to constructions with the verb darytis. 56 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 Two questions arise: 1) Are there arguments that could justify and legitimize the instrumental case for expressing a state with the verb tapti, at least in the position of an attributive modifier? 2) What consequences might this have for the system of norms governing all constructions expressing a state with tapti and other verbs? If we view codification not as homogeneous but as comprising several layers—the real and the unreal (i.e., those that do not conform to the real norm), with the latter further divided into the ideal (target, or superstandard) and the unpromising (see the diagram of the relationship between codification and usage, Miliūnaitė 2006: 22)—then the codification of various cases in constructions with tapti expressing a state will fluctuate between the target and the unpromising. The instrumental case in the position of a simple attributive modifier with tapti should probably be regarded as unpromising codification, unsupported by usage. If sound arguments emerged that the instrumental case is syntactically possible here, the question would then remain whether this codification ought to be changed—that is, whether the assessment should be softened: first, by not treating such an instrumental as a gross error, or perhaps, after carefully considering the possible consequences, by legitimizing it as a secondary variant. CONCLUSIONS 1. In usage, where the instrumental case of adjectival words expressing a state competes in constructions with the verb tapti, the alternative cases—the nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, and locative—may be regarded as a codified option supported by editors in written language, but not as a real norm: only as a target norm (the so-called superstandard). 2. This unstable norm is influenced not only by the distinction between nominal and adjectival expression of a state noted in linguistic scholarship, but also by the distinctive semantics of the verb tapti, as well as by the particularly strong competition from the nonstandard instrumental case in adjectival expressions of state in usage and, in the position of a simple attributive modifier, by the instrumental case as a real, though uncodified, norm. 3. The reasons for variation in the expression of state with the verb tapti suggest that the language system itself contains internal preconditions for structural changes, and thus grounds for revising the codification of certain cases. R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 57 4. In the forthcoming Dictionary of Standard Lithuanian9, the verb tapti should be defined more precisely in semantic terms, and a wider range of examples of constructions with it expressing grammatical meanings should be provided. LITERATŪRA Ambrazas V. 1990: Kamieno braškėjimas. – Gimtoji kalba 2, 5–7. DLKG 2005: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Red. Vytautas Ambrazas. 4-as pataisytas leidimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. DŽ6e: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. Stasys Keinys. 6-as (3-ias elektroninis) leid., Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2006; internetinė versija, 2011. Prieiga per internetą: <http://dz.lki.lt>. Kniūkšta P. 1983: Tarinio įnagininko bėdos. – Kalbos kultūra 45, 30–38. KP 2003: Kalbos patarimai. Kn. 2: Sintaksė: 1. Linksnių vartojimas. Sud. Rita Miliūnaitė, teksto aut. Vitas Labutis, Aldonas Pupkis ir Jonas Šukys, vyr. red. Aldonas Pupkis. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2003; 2-as leid.: 2005. LKŽ6e: Lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Red. kolegija: Gertrūda Naktinienė (vyr. redaktorė), Jonas Paulauskas, Rიტutė Petrokienė, Vytautas Vitkauskas, Jolanta Zabarskaitė. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas; elektroninis variantas, 2005. Prieiga per internetą: <http://www.lkz.lt/>. Miliūnaitė R. 2004: Būvio raiškos būdvardžiškaisiais žodžiais vartosenos polinkiai. – Kalbos kultūra 77, 26–39. Miliūnaitė R. 2006: Kodifikacijos ir vartosenos santykių modelis. – Kalbos kultūra 79, 9–28. Piročkinas A. 1986: Jono Jablonskio kalbos taisymai, Kaunas: Šviesa. Rasimavičius A. 1972a: Dėl dvejybinių linksnių vartojimo. – Mūsų kalba 5, 18–20. Rasimavičius A. 1972b: Dėl dvejybinių linksnių vartojimo. – Mūsų kalba 9, 16–25. Sližienė N. 2004: Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių junglumo žodynas II (2), S–Ž, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Šukys J. 1997: Būdvardžiškųjų žodžių linksniai būsenai reikšti. – Kalbos kultūra 69, 20–32. Šukys J. 1998: Lietuvių kalbos linksniai ir prielinksniai: vartosena ir normos, Kaunas: Šviesa. Šukys J. 2003: Kalbos kultūra visiems, Kaunas: Šviesa. Gauta 2012 11 05 9 Plačiau žr. informaciją internete: <http://www.lki.lt/LKI_LT/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=592&Itemid=1>. 58 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85 REASONS FOR INSTABILITY OF NORMS IN PHRASES WITH THE VERB TAPTI EXPRESSING STATE Summary The article analyses the reasons why norms concerning phrases with the verb tapti (‘to become’) or the semantically contiguous verbs darytis (‘to turn’) and virsti (‘to convert, to become’) expressing state are not well-established. Four factors which in general determine the norms of expression – choice of the case used with various verbs – are indicated and illustrated with examples: 1) semantics of the verb and its forms; 2) expression of state using adjectival and nominal words; 3) the character of the state (permanent or temporary); 4) syntactical position. These factors interacting in various ways, complementing each other and intersecting create a space open for variations and make the system of norms complicated and difficult for language users to understand. The unsteadiness of norms concerning the expression of state is influenced not only by the difference between nominal and adjectival expression shown in works of linguistics, but also by the distinctive semantics of the verb tapti, by particularly strong competition in usage between adjectival instrumental (seen as the result of the influence of Slavic languages) and alternative cases (nominative, genitive, dative, accusative and locative) and by the instrumental in the position of ordinary attribute as the real but not codified norm. The fourth factor – syntactical position – is proposed in this article as hypothetical. There are some cases in usage when the phrase expressing state is not in the position of predicate or predicative attribute, but in the position of ordinary attribute (cf. Mugė tapo tradicinė and Vėl surengta tradicinė tapusi mugė). Use of the instrumental in the position of attribute (second example) as well as in other phrases expressing state with the verb tapti is treated as a mistake, although alternative cases used in phrases with a double case in the position of an attribute could be viewed as prospectless codification. Double cases here look artificial: this is acknowledged by language users who ignore such codification as well as by language specialists. Therefore having in mind the semantics of the verb tapti (clear meaning of transformation, moving into a different state similar to the meaning of the verb virsti which is used only with the instrumental) two questions could be raised: 1) are there any arguments which would justify and validate the instrumental denoting state with the verb tapti in the position of an attribute? 2) what consequences could this have for the whole system of norms applied to phrases expressing state with the verb tapti or with other verbs? The reasons for varying expression of state with the verb tapti suggest that there are inner preconditions for the statement of structural changes in the sys- R. MILIŪNAITĖ. Normų nestabilumo priežastys būvio konstrukcijose su veiksmažodžiu tapti 59 tem of the language, therefore there is a basis for reconsidering codification in some cases. In the new works of codification (for instance in Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas (Dictionary of Standard Lithuanian) which is being prepared) or in the new editions of existing works the verb tapti ought to have a more precise semantic description and a greater variety of examples of grammatical expression. After consideration of possible consequences a decision about a milder evaluation of some cases and a correction of the norms might be made. KEYWORDS: syntax, expression of state, lexis, codification, language norms, language usage. RITA MILIŪNAITĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius [email protected] 60 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 85