Ringaile Trakymaite | Vilnius University (original) (raw)
Papers by Ringaile Trakymaite
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Baltistica, 2021
This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, mor... more This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, more specifically, definiteness marking in Lithuanian by providing some insights into why a large group of qualitative adjectives that could, in principle, derive definite (long) forms rarely do so in practice. This group of adjectives is not homogenous but could be divided into a number of rather clearly defined subgroups, based on semantic-pragmatic factors or on functions performed in the NP/ sentence. It will be argued that the inability to establish a category (both taxonomic or ad hoc), and hence to assume a morphological definiteness marker, occurs for two reasons: 1) a property denoted by the adjective does not meet the semantic-pragmatic requirements needed for the underlying category; 2) the adjective denotes not a property, but rather something else, e.g., quantification, possession, similarity, ordinal relations, specificity or similar.
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Baltistica, 2021
This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, mor... more This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, more specifically, definiteness marking in Lithuanian by providing some insights into why a large group of qualitative adjectives that could, in principle, derive definite (long) forms rarely do so in practice. This group of adjectives is not homogenous but could be divided into a number of rather clearly defined subgroups, based on semantic-pragmatic factors or on functions performed in the NP/ sentence. It will be argued that the inability to establish a category (both taxonomic or ad hoc), and hence to assume a morphological definiteness marker, occurs for two reasons: 1) a property denoted by the adjective does not meet the semantic-pragmatic requirements needed for the underlying category; 2) the adjective denotes not a property, but rather something else, e.g., quantification, possession, similarity, ordinal relations, specificity or similar.
Анализируя разные грамматики как русских, так и зарубежных авторов, читатель задается вопросом, с... more Анализируя разные грамматики как русских, так и зарубежных авторов, читатель задается вопросом, сколько же в русском языке падежей. Точки зрения авторов по этому поводу значительно различаются. Количество падежей может варьировать: от традиционных шести до, например, четырнадцати. Самые большие споры о количестве падежей связаны, в первую очередь, с такими известными формами, как в лесý и в лeсе, в кровu и о крoви, чашка чaю и чaя, и т.д. Сколько таких форм должно существовать в языке, чтобы мы начали дискуссию о них? Мы не ставим своей задачей проанализировать все точки зрения и ответить на все вопросы. Мы хотим описать несколько наиболее распространенных подходов к этому вопросу, а также критерии выделения падежей и попытаться дать представление о сложности этого, на первый взгляд, простого вопроса – сколько же в русском языке падежей? (Less)
Denna uppsats har ett tvafaldigt syfte – dels att diskutera grammatikaliseringens teori och de vi... more Denna uppsats har ett tvafaldigt syfte – dels att diskutera grammatikaliseringens teori och de viktigaste teoretiska problem som denna teori adresserar i fraga om sprakutvecklingen; dels att forsoka applicera den teoretiska del av grammatikali-sering som man kallar for subjektiviseringsprocess (process of subjectivisation) pa en del av de moderna ryska adverb som ar motiverade av adjektiv, i sin tur deriverade fran substantiv. Studien ar baserad pa tva sprakdatabaser: en rysk korpus, som ar skapad vid Uppsala Universitet - darfor benamnd Uppsala Corpus, UC 1) - samt en korpus ryska intervjutexter, utarbetad vid Tubingens Univer-sitet, TIC som ar del av en storre databas over ryska texter (Russian Text Corpora) 2). Dessa tva har valts for att folja utvecklingen i bade tal- och skriftspraket. UC omfattar sakprosa och skonlitterara texter, medan TIC innehaller intervjuer och darfor aterspeglar det talade spraket battre. 1) Mer information om denna korpus finns tillganglig pa foljande h...
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Baltistica, 2021
This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, mor... more This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, more specifically, definiteness marking in Lithuanian by providing some insights into why a large group of qualitative adjectives that could, in principle, derive definite (long) forms rarely do so in practice. This group of adjectives is not homogenous but could be divided into a number of rather clearly defined subgroups, based on semantic-pragmatic factors or on functions performed in the NP/ sentence. It will be argued that the inability to establish a category (both taxonomic or ad hoc), and hence to assume a morphological definiteness marker, occurs for two reasons: 1) a property denoted by the adjective does not meet the semantic-pragmatic requirements needed for the underlying category; 2) the adjective denotes not a property, but rather something else, e.g., quantification, possession, similarity, ordinal relations, specificity or similar.
Kalbotyra , 2018
This paper offers a description of the linear structure of the definite Lithuanian noun phrase (N... more This paper offers a description of the linear structure of the definite Lithuanian noun phrase (NP) with an emphasis on prenominal attributes. Morphological and syntactical coding of definiteness is examined through the comparison of NP structures in Lithuanian (a language with relatively ungrammaticalised marking of definiteness) and Swedish (a language with fully developed overt marking of definiteness). The special role of definite attributes, quantifiers and adjectival modifiers is shown through identifying key positions in a linear structure of the Lithuanian NP. A topology of the Lithuanian NP is then suggested reflecting the multi-layered nature of the referenceassigning process mirrored in multi-exponential marking of definiteness, with adjectival marking being a very important one. Variations in NP structures are described using Lithuanian and Swedish data focusing on the combinatorial possibilities of definite adjectival modifiers and other determiners.
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Baltistica, 2021
This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, mor... more This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, more specifically, definiteness marking in Lithuanian by providing some insights into why a large group of qualitative adjectives that could, in principle, derive definite (long) forms rarely do so in practice. This group of adjectives is not homogenous but could be divided into a number of rather clearly defined subgroups, based on semantic-pragmatic factors or on functions performed in the NP/ sentence. It will be argued that the inability to establish a category (both taxonomic or ad hoc), and hence to assume a morphological definiteness marker, occurs for two reasons: 1) a property denoted by the adjective does not meet the semantic-pragmatic requirements needed for the underlying category; 2) the adjective denotes not a property, but rather something else, e.g., quantification, possession, similarity, ordinal relations, specificity or similar.
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Baltistica, 2021
This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, mor... more This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, more specifically, definiteness marking in Lithuanian by providing some insights into why a large group of qualitative adjectives that could, in principle, derive definite (long) forms rarely do so in practice. This group of adjectives is not homogenous but could be divided into a number of rather clearly defined subgroups, based on semantic-pragmatic factors or on functions performed in the NP/ sentence. It will be argued that the inability to establish a category (both taxonomic or ad hoc), and hence to assume a morphological definiteness marker, occurs for two reasons: 1) a property denoted by the adjective does not meet the semantic-pragmatic requirements needed for the underlying category; 2) the adjective denotes not a property, but rather something else, e.g., quantification, possession, similarity, ordinal relations, specificity or similar.
Анализируя разные грамматики как русских, так и зарубежных авторов, читатель задается вопросом, с... more Анализируя разные грамматики как русских, так и зарубежных авторов, читатель задается вопросом, сколько же в русском языке падежей. Точки зрения авторов по этому поводу значительно различаются. Количество падежей может варьировать: от традиционных шести до, например, четырнадцати. Самые большие споры о количестве падежей связаны, в первую очередь, с такими известными формами, как в лесý и в лeсе, в кровu и о крoви, чашка чaю и чaя, и т.д. Сколько таких форм должно существовать в языке, чтобы мы начали дискуссию о них? Мы не ставим своей задачей проанализировать все точки зрения и ответить на все вопросы. Мы хотим описать несколько наиболее распространенных подходов к этому вопросу, а также критерии выделения падежей и попытаться дать представление о сложности этого, на первый взгляд, простого вопроса – сколько же в русском языке падежей? (Less)
Denna uppsats har ett tvafaldigt syfte – dels att diskutera grammatikaliseringens teori och de vi... more Denna uppsats har ett tvafaldigt syfte – dels att diskutera grammatikaliseringens teori och de viktigaste teoretiska problem som denna teori adresserar i fraga om sprakutvecklingen; dels att forsoka applicera den teoretiska del av grammatikali-sering som man kallar for subjektiviseringsprocess (process of subjectivisation) pa en del av de moderna ryska adverb som ar motiverade av adjektiv, i sin tur deriverade fran substantiv. Studien ar baserad pa tva sprakdatabaser: en rysk korpus, som ar skapad vid Uppsala Universitet - darfor benamnd Uppsala Corpus, UC 1) - samt en korpus ryska intervjutexter, utarbetad vid Tubingens Univer-sitet, TIC som ar del av en storre databas over ryska texter (Russian Text Corpora) 2). Dessa tva har valts for att folja utvecklingen i bade tal- och skriftspraket. UC omfattar sakprosa och skonlitterara texter, medan TIC innehaller intervjuer och darfor aterspeglar det talade spraket battre. 1) Mer information om denna korpus finns tillganglig pa foljande h...
Vilnius University Open Series, 2021
In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the d... more In this paper, we discuss the morphosyntactic properties and the functional contribution of the discourse-structuring element mat in Lithuanian, which was largely overlooked in previous research. We demonstrate that in each function mat is associated with peculiar morphosyntactic behaviour. We argue that it is the construction in which it occurs as a whole that bears meaning, rather than mat as a lexical unit on its own. In our analysis, we invoke insights and some apparatus of Construction Grammar approaches, which fit well with our observations in their focus on non-compositional aspects of linguistic structure.
Baltistica, 2021
This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, mor... more This data-driven paper adds to the broader discussion on adjectival definiteness marking and, more specifically, definiteness marking in Lithuanian by providing some insights into why a large group of qualitative adjectives that could, in principle, derive definite (long) forms rarely do so in practice. This group of adjectives is not homogenous but could be divided into a number of rather clearly defined subgroups, based on semantic-pragmatic factors or on functions performed in the NP/ sentence. It will be argued that the inability to establish a category (both taxonomic or ad hoc), and hence to assume a morphological definiteness marker, occurs for two reasons: 1) a property denoted by the adjective does not meet the semantic-pragmatic requirements needed for the underlying category; 2) the adjective denotes not a property, but rather something else, e.g., quantification, possession, similarity, ordinal relations, specificity or similar.
Kalbotyra , 2018
This paper offers a description of the linear structure of the definite Lithuanian noun phrase (N... more This paper offers a description of the linear structure of the definite Lithuanian noun phrase (NP) with an emphasis on prenominal attributes. Morphological and syntactical coding of definiteness is examined through the comparison of NP structures in Lithuanian (a language with relatively ungrammaticalised marking of definiteness) and Swedish (a language with fully developed overt marking of definiteness). The special role of definite attributes, quantifiers and adjectival modifiers is shown through identifying key positions in a linear structure of the Lithuanian NP. A topology of the Lithuanian NP is then suggested reflecting the multi-layered nature of the referenceassigning process mirrored in multi-exponential marking of definiteness, with adjectival marking being a very important one. Variations in NP structures are described using Lithuanian and Swedish data focusing on the combinatorial possibilities of definite adjectival modifiers and other determiners.