Determination and modification: Topology of prenominal attributes in Lithuanian (original) (raw)

ADJECTIVAL DEFINITENESS MARKING IN LITHUANIAN -ONE MORE PUZZLE PIECE: QUALITATIVE ADJECTIVES THAT COULD BUT DO NOT TAKE DEFINITE FORMS

Baltistica, 2021

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.

Strong vs. weak definites: Evidence from Lithuanian adjectives

Definiteness across languages, 2019

While Lithuanian (a Baltic language) lacks definite articles, it can use an adjectival system to encode definiteness. Adjectives can appear in a bare short form as in graži ‘beautiful.nom.f.sg’ and a long form with the definite morpheme -ji(s) as in gražio-ji ‘beautiful.nom.f.sg-def’. In this paper, I explore definiteness properties of Lithuanian nominals with long and short form adjectives. Recent cross-linguistic work identifies two kinds of definites: strong definites based on familiarity and weak definites licensed by uniqueness (Schwarz 2009; 2013; Arkoh & Matthewson 2013; Jenks 2015; i.a.). Following this line of work, I argue that short form adjectives, in addition to being indefinite, are also compatible with situations licensed by uniqueness, and in this way resemble weak article definites. Long form adjectives pattern with strong article definites, as evidenced by familiar definite uses and certain bridging contexts parallel to the German data (Schwarz 2009). This study provides novel evidence for the distinction between strong versus weak definites showing that this distinction is not necessarily reflected in determiner patterns, but it can also be detected in the adjectival system

Towards a semantic map for definite adjectives in Baltic

The paper deals with semantic developments in the Lithuanian and Latvian definite adjectival forms. The basic function of definite adjectival forms in Baltic is to mark the definiteness of the noun phrase. However, the adjectival marking of definiteness creates an interesting situation in which the noun phrase has several slots for the marking of (in)definiteness. In certain cases, different values for definiteness may appear in different slots: the adjective may be in the definite form whereas the noun phrase as a whole may be viewed as indefinite and can occur with formal markers of indefiniteness such as indefinite pronouns. These cases afford certain insights into the periphery of definiteness and the mechanisms of extension of definiteness markers into the domain of indefiniteness. The factors involved in this spill-over of definiteness markers are (i) genericity, realised in the form of so-called definite generics, whose definite markers are often retained when descending from the level of kind-reference to that of individual reference (this is referred to here as rigid or fossilised generic definiteness), and (ii) nominalisation of the adjective, which enables the retention of definite marking when a noun phrase shifts from definite plural description to singular or plural indefinite description. An important factor in the spread of definite adjectives beyond the domain of definiteness of the noun phrase seems to be their ability to evoke ad hoc taxonomies. The instances of extended definiteness marking discussed in this paper have parallels in article languages that have only one slot for (in)definiteness marking. The presence of two slots for definiteness marking in Baltic brings to light the layered nature of the definiteness of many noun phrases, which leads to what is here called ‘definiteness conflicts’ and indeterminacy between the semantic zones of definiteness and indefiniteness.

Parameterizing definiteness: the relevance of the definiteness feature in the morphosyntax of the Romanian nominal phrase

The claim of the paper is that in contrast with other Romance languages, but in the same vein with languages like Hebrew and Arabic (Danon 2010: 149), and, possibly, Albanian and Scandinavian varieties which possess an enclitic definite article (Julien 2005, Dobrovie-Sorin and Giurgea 2006), Romanian has grammaticalized a morphosyntactic definiteness feature. The aim of this presentation is to examine the consequences of this fact from a synchronic and diachronic point of view, by investigating several relevant phenomena: the distribution of the two definite articles of Romanian; the historical evolution of the suffixal definite article, and the emergence of the freestanding definite article (a well-known fact being that Romanian has two definite articles), the various double definite structures of Romanian, present both in the old language and in the modern one.

A Definite Problem: The Morphosyntax of Double Definiteness in Swedish

Morphology at Santa Cruz: Papers in Honor of Jorge Hankamer, 2011

Swedish is well known for the fact that it appears to show two reflexes of definiteness in its definite nominals. The language makes use of a definite article at the beginning of the nominal and a definite suffix on the head noun. There have been a number of approaches to dealing with the distribution of these elements. Some claim that there is but one determiner in the DP structure, but these do not permit an account of how semantic features influence the independent use of the article and the suffix. Other theories posit more functional material in the nominal, but these do not provide a satisfactory syntactic account for the distribution. The theory I develop here takes the most satisfying elements of each of these kinds of theories and unifies them to provide an approach that can account for the semantic facts and provide a more theoretically sound syntax.

Lithuanian nominalizations and the case marking of their arguments [2016]

The article focuses on case marking of the arguments of deverbal nouns (action and agent nouns) in Lithuanian, with particular attention paid to argument alternation. As nominalizations derived from verbs taking nominative, accusative and genitive have already been studied, I mainly analyse nominalizations from verbs taking dative, instrumental and locative NPs, as well as PPs. Action nouns in Lithuanian retain more verbal features than agent nouns. Though action nouns tend to retain their oblique arguments, the choice of the argument with action nouns can depend on productivity, word order, semantic role and the animacy of the argument, while the alternation with agent nouns can depend on the form of the NP/PP and on the frequency of the word.