Download DATIVE SUBJECTS IN LITHUANIAN AND ICELANDIC

SLE 2012
Baltic languages in the European context: Theoretical, comparative and
typological perspectives.
45th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea
29 August-01 September 2012
Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Valgerður Bjarnadóttir
Department of Baltic Languages, Finnish and German
Stockholm University
[email protected]
DATIVE SUBJECT CONSTRUCTIONS
 Man
(yra)
šalta
 me:DAT is:3pres cold:ADJ.NEUT
 Mér
 me:DAT
er
is:3pres
 ‘I’m cold/ I’m freezing’
LITH
kalt
ICEL
cold:ADJ.NEUT
OUTLINE
 Introduction
 Case and argument structure
 Semantics (domains of occurrence of DS




constructions)
Few tests for ´subjecthood´
Circum-Baltic parallels
Different historical development
Conclusion
:
Case and argument structure in:
Lithuanian
Icelandic
ACC
DAT
ACC
DAT
ACC-#
DAT-#
ACC-#
DAT-#
ACC-NOM
DAT-NOM
†ACC-NOM
DAT-NOM
ACC-ACC
(DAT-ACC)
ACC-ACC
(DAT-ACC)
ACC-GEN
DAT-GEN
†ACC-GEN
†DAT-GEN
ACC-PP
DAT-PP
ACC-PP
DAT-PP
ACC-S
DAT-S
ACC-S
DAT-S
DATIVE SUBJECTS IN LITHUANIAN
 Kaip tau
 How you:DAT
sekasi?
do :3PRES
DAT #
pavasaris
spring:NOM
DAT NOM
pagalbos
help:GEN
DAT GEN
eiti
go:INF
DAT INF
 ‘How do you feel/do? ’
 Man
 I:DAT
patinka
like: 3PRES
 ‘ I like spring’
 Man
reikia
 I:DAT need:3PRES
 ‘I need help’
 Man reikia
 I:DAT need:3PRES
 ‘I need to go’
DATIVE SUBJECTS ICELANDIC
 Henni leiðist
 She:DAT bore:3PRES
DAT #
 She is bored
 Henni
 She:DAT
líkaði
like:3PAST
bókin
book:NOM
DAT NOM
 She liked the book
 †Þuríði batnaði sóttarinnar (oldIcel)
 Turid:DAT recovered illness:GEN
DATGEN
 Turid recovered from her illness
 Henni virðist
líða vel
 She:DAT seems to feel:INF well
 She seems to feel fine
DAT INF
DATIVE +ADJ/NOUN/ADV
LITHUANIAN
 Man šalta
 I:DAT cold:ADJ NEUT
DAT ADJ
 Man gėda dėl mamos
DAT NOUN
 I:DAT shame because mother:GEN
 ‘ I am ashamed of my mother’
 Man gaila tavęs
 I:DAT sorry:ADV you:GEN
 ‘ I feel sorry for you’
DAT ADV
DATIVE +ADJ/NOUN/ADV
ICELANDIC
 Mér
 I:DAT
er
is:3PRES
kalt
DAT ADJ
cold:NEUT
 Mér er vorkunn
 I:DAT is pity
‘One should feel sorry for me’
DAT NOUN
 Mér er sama
 I:DAT is same
 ‘I don´t care ’
DAT ADV
Lithuanian DAT Subj Cxns
Dat-[XP]
-Experiencer
+Experiencer
Possession
verb
Obligation/necessity
Happenstance:
Emotions
Success
Cognition
Failure/mistake
Perception
Gain
Bodily states/changes
verb
verb
adj
Valgerður Bjarnadóttir
Attitutes
verb
verb
verb
adj
DATIVE SUBJECTS SEMANTICS
Hate
Love
Disgust
hope-wish
Possession
Be of concern
Be difficult
Sorrow
Shame
Lack/need
Suit/become
Be sufficient/suffice
Occur to one´s mind
Be pleased/like/dislike
Succeed/benefit/get
Bodily state/change
Have fear /agony
Seem/appear
Be surprised
Obligation
Valgerður Bjarnadóttir
Be in danger
Find strength in
Speaking
Expect
SUBJECTHOOD

(Initial position preferred +)

Control of reflexive pronouns +

(Control of converbs -)

Raising to subjects +

Control of infinitive –

(Coreferential deletion –/+)

(Source of diathetic change –)

Double Dat cxns ?
Control of reflexives
Katrei
reikėjo savo/*jos
draugės
Katrė:DAT need:3PST her:_+refl/-refl friendGEN
‘Katrė needed her friend ’
Katrės
reikėjo
*savo/jos
Katrė:GEN need:3PST her
‘The friend needed Katrė’
draugei
friend:DAT
(Christen, 1995, 23)
Control of reflexives
Old Lithuanian
 koġ berêikia mumus
ape ſawé
rûpintiś?
 what:GEN need us:DAT about us:REFL
care:INF
 ‘what do we need to care about ourselves’
 (DP. 81.21, 1590)
Raising to subject
 Man
pradėjo
skaudėti
 I:DAT
began:3PST hurt:INF
 ‘My head began to hurt ’
 Iegu kad
 If that
galvą (Mod Lith)
head:ACC
pradeſti mumis neſ kaneti Pana dewa ßadis
begin we:DAT not like lord God´s word:NOM
‘If we begin to dislike God´s word ’
 (WP 209,r19, 1573)
Control of PRO Infinitive
 *Jis tikisi [PRO] patikti ši knyga
(Lith)
 He:NOM hopes like:INF this book:NOM
 Hann vonast til að líka þessi bók
(Icel)
 He:NOM hopes like:INF this book:NOM
 Intended meaning: ‘He hopes to like this book’
Striking parallelisms across Eastern
Circum-Baltic area
 Seržants (2012) :DAT subj pred. in
West Finnic, Baltic and Russian
show structural parallelisms in lexical,
morphological and syntactic levels
Subject control of PRO in infinitival
complements
* Nenoriu
būti šalta
not.want:PRS.1SG be:INF cold:ADV
*Negrību
būt auksti
not.want:PRS.1SG be:INF cold:ADV
*Ne xoču
byt’ xolodno
not want:PRS.1SG be:INF cold:ADV
*Ei taha olla
külm.
not want be:INF cold:ADV
 ‘I don’t want to be cold’
(Seržants 2012)
LITHUANIAN
LATVIAN
RUSSIAN
ESTONIAN
Double dative cxns
Mergaitei buvo baisu vienai
eiti per mišką.
Girl:DAT be afraid:3PRS alone:DAT go:INF
through forest
‘The girl was afraid to go alone through the forest’
Nepakanka būti geram
not enough be:INF
good:DAT
‘It is not enough to be good/kind’
Double dative cxns in old Lith
Neger
jra szmogui wienam
buti
not good
is man:DAT alone:DAT be:INF
‘It is not good for a man to be alone’ (VE 50 14, 1579)
Prisieinas jam búti
nuògam
Need
he:DAT be:INF naked:DAT
‘he needs to be naked’
(Fraenkel, 1928, 120)
Double Dative
 Vytautas paprašė tėvo
[PRO ateiti vienam]
 Vytautas asked father:GEN PRO:DAT to come alone:DAT
 ‘Vytautas asked father to come alone’
(Lavine, 2000, 76)
 Honum leiðist einum
 He:DAT is bored alone:DAT
 Honum leiðist að vera einn/?einum
 He:DAT is bored to be alone:NOM/DAT
(Icel)
DAT-INF LITHUANIAN
 Mumus wissiems mirti (Old Lith)
 weDAT allDAT dieINF
 ‘we all must die’
(BrB II Moz 12,33)

 Nesa
iam buwa sawa Walnistes mieste pasilikti, ikki smerties
 Because himDAT was his free
cityLOC stay
till death
 ‘because he has to stay in his refuge city till death’
 (BrB II Moz 35,28)
DAT-INF in other languages
 Tev
nebūs zagt!
 you:DAT not to:FUT steal:INF
 ‘You shall not steal’
(Latv)
 Mi budetь nynĕ poĕxati
 I:DAT be:3sg now leave:INF
 ‘I have to leave’
(Old Russ)
 Me
ys
to erigenne
 I:DAT
is:3Pr to plough:INF
 ‘I have to plough’
(Old English)
(ME I 359)
(Ambrazas, 2006,339)
(Bauer, 2000,212)
DAT with participles and absolute DAT
Geresnia butu
tam Szmogui ne gimmusiam
Better be:3COND this man:DAT not born:DAT
‘It would have been better for this man not to be born’
(BrB Mrk 14, 21, 1590)




Mumus iautantemus preg graba staghis est didis
We:DAT waking:DAT at grave suddenly is big
drebeijamas szemes
shaking:NOM earth:GEN
 ‘while we are waking by the grave there was suddenly a violent
earthquake’
(WP 157. 1)
DAT. SUBJ. WITH NEUT. ADJ.
LITHUANIAN
 Jis šaltas ‘he is cold’ vs. Jam šalta ‘he is freezing, he




feels cold’
Jis sunkus ‘he is heavy’ vs. Jam sunku ‘it is difficult for
him’
Jis nuobodus ‘he is boring’ vs. jam nuobodu ‘he is
bored’
Jis baisus ‘he is terrifying’ vs. Jam baisu ‘he is afraid’
Jis juokingas ‘he is funny’ vs. Jam juokinga ‘he thinks
it is funny’
DAT. SUBJ. WITH NEUT. ADJ.
ICELANDIC
 Hann er kaldur vs. Honum er kalt (cold-freezing)
 Hann er heitur vs. Honum er heitt (hot)
 Hann er ljúfur vs Honum er ljúft (sweet/pleasing)

 Hann er illur ‘he is evil/mean’ vs. Honum er illt ‘He is
hurting/feels sick’
 Honum er óglatt ‘He is nauseated’
 Honum er bumbult ‘He is nauseated’
DAT. SUBJ. WITH REFLEXIVE VERBS
LITHUANIAN
 Aš matau mišką ‘I see the forest’– Man matosi
miškas ‘To me the forest is seen’ or ‘I can see the forest
/ man girdisi muzika ‘I can hear music”

 Jis čia gerai miega -Jam čia gerai miegasi
 ‘He sleeps here well’ heDAT well sleep3Pr.Rfl
 Jis (intensyviai) dirba - Jam (*intensyviai) dirbasi
 ‘he (strenuously) works ’ heDAT (*strenuously) works
DAT. SUBJ. WITH REFLEXIVE VERBS
ICELANDIC
 Ég heyri ‘I hear’ vs. mér heyrðist ‘ I:DAT thought I
heard’ /mér misheyrðist ‘I misheard’
 ‘*mér heyrðist tónlist’
 Ég finn ‘I find’ vs. mér finnst ‘ It seems to me’
 Ég sé ‘I see” vs. mér sést yfir ‘it escapes my notice’
 Ég mæli ‘I speak’ vs. Mér mælist vel (*af ástettu ráði)
I:DAT delivered a good speech
(*deliberately)
CONCLUSION
 Similarities:
◦ Argument structure : however more variation in Lith
◦ Main semantic groups
 Differences:
◦ Certain semantic differences(possession, speaking,
sorrow/shame, lack/need)
◦ Subjecthood
◦ Circum-Baltic parallels
◦ Less semantically restricted in an be assigned in almost all
instances -non-finite- regardless of the lexical semantics of
the verb
Tack! Takk! Thank You!
Ačiū!