Search

The aim of the current paper is to analyze Latvian reflexive verbs from the point of view of their polyfunctionality and distributon.The polysemy of the reflexive verbs is not usually disucussed in the connection with its distribution pattern in the sentence either. This can be partly explianed by the fact that the reflexive verb can have some non-standard language meanings, which following the established practice of the traditional grammars and sometimes even dictionaries, were not depicted in the language system description either. So the current paper is an attempt to analyze the polyfunctionality of reflexive verbs in connection with their semantic and syntactic functions, without judging the language use from the normative point of view.The classification of Latvian reflexive verbs is based on the relationship between semantic roles and syntactic structure according to the principles devised by Palmer (1994) and Saeed (1997).One and the same reflexive verb may have different lexical meanings with a different distribution for each of the meanings. One and the same verb can belong to different subclasses of the subject and object (or impersonal) verbs.Some reflexive verbs have evaluative or aspectual (iterative) meanings. The evaluative meanings usually are manifested by a positive or negative assessment of the event (the context can be enhanced by the adverbs good or bad) and the consequences while the aspectual meaning is manifested by the intensity of the action, that is – iterativity.The study confirms the assumption that reflexive verbs are independent lexemes as opposed to non-reflexive verb forms. Each reflexive verb has its distinct semantic system and distribution which is different from polysemy of non-reflexive verbs and their distribution. The system of reflexive verbs in Latvian is open where new meanings and even new reflexive verbs arise particularly in colloquial use.

LEXICAL “DIVERGENCE” AND “CONVERGENCE” BETWEEN BALTIC AND SLAVIC LANGUAGES: A STATISTIC ANALYSIS OF MATERIALS IN R. TRAUTMANN'S DICTIONARYSummaryAs far as a clear answer has not been given with respect to the theory of “Balto-slavic lin­guistic unity”, apparent similarities in lexemes between these two linguistic groups should be exa­mined in comparison with those among other linguistic groups.This paper is an attemp to show the “degrees” of similarities in the lexemes between Baltic and Slavic languages in a statistic manner. For this purpose, lexical materials are taken from R. Trautmann's Dictionary (1923), and the analysis is based on two notions of “divergence” and “convergence”.On the basis of all the items in the Dictionary, the author of this paper distinguishes some groups of items in terms of their distributions. First, he draws a dividing line between the “convergence” type and the “divergence” type, the latter of which turns out to consist of three sub-types (D-1, D-2 and D-3). Then he regards the items of the “convergence” type as the “candidates” of the “Balto-Slavic lexemes” with the highest degree of commonness. The author finds in the Dictionary a group of 83 independent items on one hand, and a group of 10 deriva­tive items on the other, which are both considered to belong to the “convergence” type.From the author's point of view, other groups of items are, more or less, ranked in the peripheral position with respect to those “central” two groups of items.

IMPERSONAL VERBS PROPER AND IMPERSONALLY USED PERSONAL VERBS IN MODERN LITHUANIANSummaryThe aim of the paper is to investigate the grammatical and semantical properties of impersonal verbs, to discuss the relations between impersonal verbs proper, impersonally used personal verbs and impersonal reflexive verbs.From the morphological point of view impersonal verbs proper distinguish themselves by the fact that they are not conjugated for person and number and occur only in the 3rd person singular form. Impersonal verbs proper are characterized by certain syntactic peculiarities: their infinitives can never be used as subjects or objects in a sentence. On the semantic plane these verbs denote an agentless state or process, never an action.The relations between impersonal verbs proper and impersonally used personal verbs are treated in terms of the notion of polylexeme.Impersonal reflexive verbs constitute a specific class of verbs different both from impersonal verbs proper and impersonally used personal verbs.

ON SYSTEMATIC CHARACTER OF THE SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF LITHUANIAN ZOOMORPHISMSSummaryIn the paper an attempt has been made to establish three types of systematic relations, namely, hierarchical, associative and associative-hierarchical, in the semantic structure of Lithuanian zoomorphisms, or animal terms in figurative use.The above relations exist in the meanings of one and the same zoomorphism as well as among all the zoomorphisms in question. They can be determined by the components of the semantic struc­ture under discussion, i. e. by the content plane and the forms of realization of the content plane in speech.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CATEGORY OF DUAL NUMBER IN LITHUANIAN NOUNS AND PRONOUNSSummaryThis paper attempts to prove the existence of a single-word dual number in Proto-Lithuanian (as well as in Proto-Baltic).The change of the single-word dual into a two-word dual was determined by the causes of the internal development: several forms of the single-word dual coincided with the singular forms. This process became more prominent, especially after Leskien’s law. With the emergence of a two-word dual, the single-word dual of nouns denoting „a pair of something” was the first to dis­appear: it was replaced by the plural form, because, due to the rules of selective restriction, the singular dual of nouns denoting „a pair of something“ could not build word groups with the nu­merical forms du, dvi ‘two’.The dual of nouns denothing „not a pair of something“ started to be replaced by the plural (i.e. the unmarked member) in those cases when it was no longer in the focus, i.e. when it had the feature -Fm (not first mention).However, the disappearance of the dual in Lithuanian had begun long before the introduc­tion of the written language, and in the dialects this process is not yet over.

ON THE PROBLEM OF LITHUANIAN-BYELORUSSIAN LEXICAL CONTACTSSummaryThis paper deals with some translation loans in Byelorussian from Lithuanian, namely, ten semantic loans (the type of blr. адбiты “enclosed, fenced” atmùšti “to enclose, to fence”; blr. адбiцца “coire” atsimùšti “to mate”; blr. каза́ “blemish, flaw” ožỹs, ožkà; blr. сярэ́дзiна “waist” < lith. pusiáujas etc.), eigt word-building loans (the type of blr. абiя́кi < lith. apmuštìniai (klumpės) “kind of wooden boots”; blr. акíдацца < lith. apsimèsti “to slip on”; blr. еы́стрыгаць < lith. iškir̃pti “to cut out”; blr. приты́ка priẽkaištas “reproach” etc.) and three cases of loans of morphological formant (blr. бураке́ “borshch” < lith. burókai; blr. вайлакí< “kind of felt boots, valenki” < lith. veĩlokai; blr. кру́пы “groats” < lith. kruõ­pos). The author believes the translation loans can be considered as an essential linguistic argument in favour of the hypothesis about the great role of the Baltic substratum in forming Byelorussian dialects.