What is necessity, and what is an ought-to-be—real or formal

JONAS KLIMAVIČIUS

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

In Jonas Jablonskis’s 1901 grammar, the passive necessitive verb, and in 1922 the necessitive, or obligatory, passive participle—at first glance, a simple matter. Anyone who looks more closely asks what language of what is missing might mean; whether permissible or allowable (deviation, stress...); where does this half-acceptable come from?

WHAT IS A GRAMMATICAL MEANING, AND WHAT A LEXICAL ONE

“Necessitive participles denote properties arising from an action that needs to be performed” (LKG II 1971: § 563). But this is only a textbook truth; it won’t get you far. The path of standardization runs over bumps and stumps: “Some derivatives with the suffix -tinas, -a do not have the meaning of an action that needs to be performed. Like many present-tense passive participles, they simply denote properties associated with an action performed frequently, continuously, or potentially,” e.g.: undisputable examples, a wondrous world, an incontrovertible story (LKG II 1971: § 563). In the Grammar of Contemporary Lithuanian (1994, 2006), they are already defined simply as “a verbal necessitive form (necessitive participle)” (DLKG 1994: § 957), while the meaning is viewed in an even more up-to-date way: “Forms of some verbs with the suffix -tin-, which do not have the meaning of an action that needs to be performed, are most commonly used in the standard language,” e.g.: a dubious story, an essential matter, a suspicious person, mortal danger, a welcome guest, a wondrous thing (DLKG 1994: § 957). In the three-volume academic grammar, būtinas was treated simply as an adjective (LKG II 1971: § 563). Būtinas does not mean “that which must be,” but rather “that which one cannot do without, very necessary” (DŽ 1993). Moreover, already in Language and Antiquity (1922), K. Būga noted: “In the Samogitian dialect būtinas means the same as the Russian word совершенный (vollkommen, perfectus)” (Būga RR II 1959: 122)—cf. būtinas 2. “whole, universal, complete, final.” He restored necessary peace to the world, M. Valančius; būtinai: I am necessarily not drinking and not smoking, Šatės (LKŽ I₂ 1968).

Terminologija | 2007 | 14

61

Thus, the primary grammatical meaning of necessity has often turned into a meaning of possibility, while some frequent words in this category have various distinctive lexical meanings, entirely detached both from necessity and from possibility.

There is also a process in the opposite direction: “The present-tense passive participle, while denoting a property arising from a generalized passive action, often also indicates the possibility of performing that action” (a pull-out bed, a person who can be reasoned with, an intelligible language); “closely related to this is the meaning of purpose and suitability” (fodder beets, a dwelling house), and less often (more commonly in dialects) “it may also have a meaning of necessity”: Why praise an unpraiseworthy (undeserving of praise) thing? Pagiriai, Kėdainiai district (LKG II 1971: § 549–551).

Here one should say: language is not mechanics (and that is not regrettable but good, because otherwise thought too would freeze and be frozen).

Grammar is not readily available to most people, does not list all those words, and lexical meanings are not its concern either. The Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian (1993) therefore places words that have not a meaning of necessity or possibility but simply of actuality not in verb entries, but separately; correspondingly, it defines them as follows:

doubtful – “not genuine, unclear, questionable”

undoubted – “leaving no room for doubt, genuine”

regrettable – “arousing pity or regret”

pitiable – “arousing pity, wretched, insignificant, poor”

lamentable – “pitiable, wretched, difficult”

sufficient – “adequate”

horrifying – “causing horror”

enviable – “inspiring envy, very good”

The definitions of some such words also include an element of possibility:

choosable – “possible to choose, selectable”

acceptable – “possible to accept”

credible – “that can be believed”

The meaning of necessity here has, of course, existed (the flourishing of necessity participles belongs to the past; not all dialects still have them), but has been lost (hence doubtful, horrifying, enviable... are now rather unusual). It is not difficult to find a common denominator for this little group: these are not derived from any specific type of word formation, but from verbs denoting abstract actions, more precisely, evaluative meanings, although they certainly do not include all such verbs—necessity is still present in praiseworthy, blameworthy, condemnable, correctable, recommendable, usable, avoidable...

There are also inconsistencies in DŽ 1993 and its presentation: if horrifying exists, why is there no

62 Jonas Klimavičius | Kas esamybė, o kas reikiamybė...

admirable, disgusting; if there is credible, why is believable not included (only believing is listed, “possible to believe, credible, trustworthy”), nor incredible (only unbelieving is listed: 1. “impossible to believe”; 2. “very large, extraordinary”).

Separate entries in DŽ 1993 provide quite a number of present-tense passive participles, albeit inconsistently. Some are explained only by cross-reference (existing participle → to be) or by synonyms (changeable “changing, inconstant”); sometimes lexical meanings are extensively subdivided (writable participle 1. “used for writing,” 2. “that is written on,” 3. “which is written”), but for some, the component meaning possibility or suitability is indicated: edible 1. “possible, suitable to eat,” eatable 2. “suitable for eating” (drinkable — not listed; smokable, sniffable — not listed), indisputable “impossible to reject, certain” (disputable — not listed), imputable “able to understand one’s actions and therefore responsible.”

Pairs of necessity forms and present-tense passive participles are rare in DŽ 1993, and their distinction is (a) not emphasized or even (b) erased: a) mortal 1. “bringing death, threatening death”: mortal danger, a mortal illness, 2. “very great”: mortal hatred, a mortal enemy (irreconcilable), mortal silence (complete); mortally (absolutely) money is needed – “dying” → to die 1: a fatal illness (one from which people die); mortally frightened; also undying “immortal, eternal”: undying glory; further, mortal “having to die, doomed to die,” whereas immortal 1. “that does not die,” 2. “always remaining in memory, eternal”: immortal works [the terminological abstract meanings differ fairly clearly: mortality (case fatality) “the ratio of deaths from the disease to the number of people with that disease,” whereas mortality rate means “the ratio of deaths to the population”]; rare. mortal 1. → death 1: mortal (fatal) blow, 2. “great, boundless”: mortal enemy; b) suspicious “suspected” – suspected “arousing suspicion.”

Thus, the matter is already quite clear for normative academic grammar; the normative dictionary still needs work, while usage is farthest from perfection. It contains several genuinely difficult cases.

MISSING AND MISSING-TO

Standard language is a variety of language that is cultivated and ought to be cultivated. Those who cultivate or standardize it need to think in terms of systems. If ordinary users of the standard language sometimes fail to sense the system and leave gaps, then it is certainly necessary to help. DŽ 1993 gives missing 1. → to be lacking, 2. “defective”: Δ defective verbs (having an incomplete set of forms), an inadequately prepared report. It also gives sufficient and sufficiently, the less common adequately, and also gives enough and

Terminologija | 2007 | 14

6 3

three times more frequent than that is fairly (DažnŽ 1998; fairly is quite rare, as is to satisfy). Standard-language usage also includes missing-to, missing-to, missing-to, but the normative dictionary does not list these, although it does list the adverb sufficiently “sufficiently, enough.” According to LKŽ XVI 1995, trūktinas is very widely used by Samogitians: 1. “lacking something, insufficient”: Better that you be more lacking than come home drunk Šatės. Work or don’t work, you’ll still be short of that money, short of it Pikeliai (2. “not quite right in the head, stupid”: He’s kind of lacking something, not like everyone else Rietavas. Barbelė was a little (that is, somewhat) deficient Endriejavas). Used by Antanas Salys: All dialect texts are very deficient phonetically; by the Aukštaitian Petro Avižonis: deficiency of convergence. Academic grammar lists insufficiently “too little, with deficiencies”: If there is too little salt, add some LKG II 1971: § 760. Used by language-cultivation specialists. Most importantly, it is a systematic element of the language.

PERMISSIBLE – PERMITTED ↔ PROHIBITED – FORBIDDEN

DŽ also lists permitted → to permit: permitted (not forbidden, not obstructed) entry, permissive mood (grammar) DŽ 1954, → to permit 1: permissible value, permissible limit, permissive mood (grammar: “expressing consent”) DŽ 1993, and permissible, impermissible, but the presentation of these forms is inconsistent and still not perfect – permissible “allowed, not forbidden”: permissible conduct; he acted permissibly, impermissibly “that which cannot be allowed, tolerated”: impermissible conduct; to impermissibly delay the harvest deadlines DŽ 1954, permissible “conforming to certain norms, allowed, not forbidden” DŽ 1972, “based on certain norms, allowed, not forbidden” DŽ 1993 (excusable — not listed). We see that permissible, although its definition includes both a synonym with the meaning of existence, permitted, and a synonym with the meaning of necessity, not to be prohibited, in fact retains its categorical meaning of necessity (especially impermissible — “that which cannot be permitted”). Moreover, the present-tense passive participle permitted is available (unlike in some cases), and DŽ provides the terms permissible value, permissible limit. It is true that the term permissible (adjectival form) has also existed in terminology, and still does in some places, and is particularly frequent in various periodicals, for example: permissible limits for emissions of greenhouse-gas pollutants into the atmosphere Vd 2006 29 10. But even a small harvest removes nutrients from the soil, and they must be replenished. With what? Well, with the “natural substances” permitted under the rules of organic farming MkslL 2006 9 5. Also fairly common, but likewise in need of correction, are permissible limit Vd 2007 36 10, permissible and impermissible limits Sav with TV 2006 49 5, permissible quantity Vd 2007 46 38, permissible concentration.

64

Jonas Klimavičius | Kas esamybė, o kas reikiamybė...

Vd 2007 44 10, permissible speed Vd 2006 48 48, Sav su TV 2007 4 8, permissible degree of intoxication Vd 2006 48 49, permissible blood alcohol level Vd 2007 36 14, permissible period of stay in the USA Vd 2007 31 6, permissible building height Sav su TV 2007 4 8.

The position of the term component permissible is reinforced by the system—the antonym is usually prohibited: a prohibited action, prohibited conduct, prohibited work, prohibited substances, prohibited weapons, although errors also occur here from time to time, for example: one sometimes has to leave a car in a prohibited place Sav su TV 2007 37 8.

It should be noted that in terminology (and not only there), negative actions are more often expressed by necessity participle forms: impermissible deviation, impermissible activity, a dose that must not be exceeded, a limit value that must not be exceeded, an urgent response… But the converse must also be remembered: for instance, although a crime ought to be punished, a court ruling (even the most unjust one) can only be appealed; a ruling of a court of last instance is not subject to appeal, that is, it cannot be appealed.

HALF-WORTHY

The attention of language mechanics should be drawn to the word pusėtinas. Its meaning is “mediocre; fairly good, rather strong” DŽ 1993 (LKŽ X 1976 – 3. “half, partial”: When a father dies, the children are half-orphans, but when they lose their mother, they are truly destitute! Lazdynų Pelėda. Do you love me at least halfway, as I love you?! Žemaitė). The formation of this word is not explained in P. Skardžius’s Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryboje (1943). In the Lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje, the word pusėtinas is considered an adjective formed, like baisėtinas “terrible,” with the secondary suffix -ėtinas (LKG I 1965: § 964 4), although the verb baisėtis is quite usual (and pasibaisėtinas is indeed a necessity participle); there is also pusėti, though usually įpusėti.

When is necessity genuine, when is it merely a form of necessity, when can there be no necessity at all given the concept’s content, or when is there an opposition between necessity and actuality? These are important but difficult questions for terminology, requiring special attention from term creators, users, and editors. There can be no automatism here—the meaning is decisive. When considering which standards should be permitted, one can speak of an permissible standard, but what is decided upon and adopted must be a permissible standard. Damage must be compensated, and thus it must be compensable damage; but in life, if someone fails to comply with the law, damage that is not compensated may occur. The consultant may

Terminologija | 2007 | 14

65

be paid or unpaid, compensated or uncompensated, but an uncompensated consultant is a pointless necessity form, whereas a consultant to be compensated. makes sense.

NEUTER GENDER AND ADVERBS

The meanings of the neuter forms of necessity participles also vary: they may express necessity, possibility, or actuality, and they may also have distinctive lexical meanings. Here what matters more is not meaning (which depends on the meanings of the base words—the participles), but usage. The academic grammar notes that they are characteristic only of folklore and fiction, for example: If it is to be lived through, one will survive; if it is to be endured, one will endure (proverb). We will cry ourselves out eventually (that is, afterwards), if there is cause to weep, Žemaitė (LKG II 1971: § 596). However, these forms are particularly common in functional texts to express evaluations: regrettable, deplorable, suspicious, noteworthy, likely; (un)doubtable, (un)forgivable, (un)disputable, (un)praiseworthy, (im)permissible, (unen)viable, (un)blameworthy, (un)acceptable, (un)reprehensible, (in)correctable, (un)recommendable, (un)usable, (un)avoidable...

Many adverbs, too, are derived from necessity participles (with various meanings). In DŽ 1993 they are listed in the entries for those participles, for example: doubtful, ~a <...>. ~ly adv. The language also has certain peculiarities here—there is no adverb leistinai, only neleistinai; there is no participle užtektinas (only pertektinas, and also pertektinai), but there is a very characteristic adverb užtektinai. DŽ 1993 gives separate entries only for those necessity participles that do not fit their categorical meaning. Adverbs formed from ordinary necessity participles that do not have their own dictionary entries are listed separately: imtina, įskirtinai, išsimokėtinai, pabrėžtinai, pareikalautinai, verktinai. The dictionary also contains similar adverbs alongside participial adjectives with the suffix -inis: atmestinai “poorly” and atmestinis “done unwillingly,” atsitiktinai and atsitiktinis, įskaitytinai and įskaitytinis, išpirktinai and išpirktinis, lygtinai and lygtinis, pabaigtinai “completely” and pabaigtinis “final, last,” primygtinai and primygtinis, priverstinai and priverstinis, sudurtinai and sudurtinis, sutartinai and sutartinis, vogtinai and vogtinis. Some such adverbs are listed in adjective entries: dirbtinis, ~ė <...>. ~ai, pakartotinis, ~ė <...>. ~ai, žūtbūtinis, ~ė <...>. ~ai. Does this indicate different derivations: these from participial adjectives, and those from necessity participles? Hardly (except žūtbūtinai). In the three-volume academic grammar, all such forms are “adverbs derived from necessity participles” (LKG II 1971: § 760); there are even more there: atsiskait ytinai, “not in vain,” baigtinai “completely, very,” grįžtinai “with a return planned,” išsinėstinai, liktinai 1. “staying somewhere permanently”;

66

Jonas Klimavičius | Kas esamybė, o kas reikamybė...

2. “so that some is still left,” nuomotinai, nusigriautinai “with the right to demolish something,” pasigerėtinai “to improve oneself,” peiktinai “reprehensibly, badly,” suprastinai “understandably,” svertinai “by weighing, rather than by guesswork.” Incidentally, LKG II 1971: § 760 also omits ganėtinai, pasibaisėtinai, priimtinai, pusėtinai, sudurtinai. There are certainly more of them that a normative dictionary needs; quite a number could be used in specialist language. For instance, the 1938 Prekybinės korespondencijos žodynėlyje lists the adverbs atsisakytinai, atskaitytinai, išmestinai, išpirktinai, išskait ytinai, išsivežtinai, įskaitytinai, neatsakytinai, pamestinai, pareikalautinai, pasirašytinai, pristatytinai, trauktinai (A. SalR I 1979).

Another peculiarity is that the section on the Būdinys unexpectedly mentions verbal adverbs that are otherwise unheard of, for example, išsimokėtinai (LKG II 1971: § 684).

NOMINAL TRANSFORMATIONS

Necessity adverbs are most often used in combinations with verbs, e.g.: apsuktinai siūti, atmestinai dirbti, gręžtinai sušlapti, išsikirstinai pirkti (miško), mirtinai sirgti, paveldėtinai gauti (ūkį), užgultinai reikalauti (less often—with adjectives: pavydėtinai gražus). When a verb is transformed into an abstract noun, the adverb also changes: išsimokėtinai parduoti – išsimokamasis pardavimas, pareikalautinai pirkti – pareikalautinis pirkimas (A. SalR I 1979: 463, 472), lyg tinai: nuo bausmės lyg tinai atleisti – lyg tinis: lyg tinis nuteisimas DŽ 1993. “Noun phrases with adverbs are very rare” (LKG III 1976: § 396); the examples are exceptional (mokymasis mintinai ar atmintinai certainly cannot serve as a representative example).

CONCLUSIONS

Among the grammatical issues important to specialist and scientific language and terminology is the difficult question of the so-called necessity participles. The difficulty arises not from terminology but from grammar itself: this category, which flourished in the past and was retained by not all dialects, has a meaning that has been substantially diluted—some formations no longer carry the meaning of an action that needs to be performed (or carry it only in some combinations, while merely denoting—as do passive present participles—the possibility or even the characteristic of an ongoing action (būtinas, mirtinas, stebėtinas...)); moreover, they also have highly distinctive lexical meanings far removed from the category’s core meaning (trūktinas – 1. “of which there is a shortage; insufficient”; 2. dialectal “not quite in one’s right mind, foolish,” pusėtinas – “middling; fairly good, rather strong”). Although these forms have moved away from the category, they are nevertheless an inherited and precious linguistic resource, ensuring-

Terminologija | 2007 | 14

67

continuity and a sense of community. However, the logic of terminology and the relations among grammatical oppositions in microsystems do not allow us to follow this path blindly. For example, what need not be leisti, but is leidžiama only by necessity, must be termed leidžiamasis, -oji (greitis, norma…), and not leistinasis, -oji. The opposite term draudžiamasis, -oji (veiksmas, medžiaga, ginklas…) is more firmly established in terminology (although, in fact, everything draudžiamą must also be drausti). A sense of grammar, and of grammatical and logical reasoning together, is greatly needed here by those who create and use terms, editors, and secondary users—journalists.

ŠALTINIAI

DažnŽ 1998 – L. Grumadienė, V. Žilinskienė, Dažninis dabartinės rašomosios lietuvių kalbos žodynas (abėcėlės tvarka), Vilnius.

DŽ 1954 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, Vilnius.

DŽ 1972 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, Vilnius.

DŽ 1993 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, Vilnius.

LKŽ I₂ 1968 – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 1, Vilnius.

LKŽ X 1976 – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 10, Vilnius.

LKŽ XVI 1995 – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 16, Vilnius.

MkslL – Mokslo Lietuva (laikraštis).

A. SalR I 1979 – Prekybinės korespondencijos žodynėlis. – A. Salys. Raštai 1, Roma, 453–484.

Sav su TV – Savaitė su TV (savaitraštis).

Vd – Veidas (žurnalas).

LITERATŪRA

Būga K. RR II 1959: Rinktiniai raštai 2, Vilnius.

DLKG 1994: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika, Vilnius.

LKG I 1965: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1, Vilnius.

LKG II 1971: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 2, Vilnius.

LKG III 1976: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 3, Vilnius.

WHAT IS A REALITY AND WHAT IS A TRUE OR FORMAL NECESSITY

Amongst matters of grammar which are important to special language, language of science and terminology there is the tricky issue of necessitive participles. The difficulty arises not from terminology, but from the grammar itself – a content of this category which flourished in the past, but did not survive in all dialects, lacks clarity of usage. Some formations do not any longer have the meaning of an action which should or must be done (or have it, but not in all collocations and it signifies – like the present passive participle – the possibility or even the property of continual action (būtinas, mirtinas, stebėtinas…), but in addition they have very peculiar lexical meanings, which are distant from the categorial meaning (trūktinas – 1. „kuriam ko trūksta, nepakankamas“, 2. žem. „ne viso proto, kvailas“, pusetinas – „vidutiniškas; gerokas, smarkokas“). Despite moving away from the category, such gerundives ought to be cherished, since they are an inherited treasure of the language, which ensures tradition.

68

Jonas Klimavičius | Kas esamybė, o kas reikiamybė…

Logicality of terminology and relations of grammatical oppositions of microsystems do not allow a blind following of this root, for instance, a thing which should not be be allowed, but is allowed only because of inevitability, is leidžiamasis, -oji (greitis, norma...), but not leistinasis, -oji. The opposite draudžiamasis, -oji (prohibitive) (veiksmas, medžiaga, ginklas...) keeps a tighter hold in terminology (every draudžiamas (prohibited) thing needs to be prohibited). In such cases a sense of grammar together with grammatical and logical thinking is very necessary for creators and users of terminology, editors and secondary users – journalists.

Gauta 2007-11-20

Jonas Klimavičius Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT – 10308 E. paštas [email protected]

Terminologija | 2007 | 14

6 9