Kalbotyra
Not a member yet
2154 research outputs found
Sort by
Regresyvinis minkštųjų priebalsių poveikis trumpųjų balsių spektrui bendrinėje lietuvių kalboje
Get PDFAs the spectral analysis showed, in Standard Lithuanian palatalised consonants have a great influence upon the spectrum of the preceding vowels [i], [u], [e] and [a]. The frequencies of the second formant (F2) change significantly in position [–C’]; the frequencies are much higher. The investigation results are presented in four tables.The research was carried out on a PC in the Laboratory of Experimental Phonetics of the Philological Faculty of Vilnius University
Lietuvių, hindi ir sanskrito kalbų leksinės bendrybės
Get PDFIt is not only linguists who know numerous common lexical items in Lithuanian and Sanskrit. But in a coherent text, one should make considerable effort to find some. It is a paradox, but Hindi texts and the spoken language are an easier source while searching for words common to Hindi and Lithuanian. There are a number of different reasons for this. First, Hindi has unbelievably numerous loan words from Sanskrit, therefore, numerous common items among Sanskrit, Lithuanian and Hindi exist presently, e. g., Lith. smakras – Hind., Skr. śmaśru ‘chin’; Lith. medus – Hind. madhu – Skr. mádhu ‘honey’, etc.Another portion of the common lexicon embraces native Hindi words (the so-called tadbhava layer). It includes common items absent in Sanskrit, e. g., Lith. kulšis – Hind. kūlhā ‘hip’; Lith. kupra – Hind. kūbar ‘hump’; Lith. bėgti ‘to run’ – Hind. bhāgnā ‘to run away’; Lith. kukurbezdalis, kukurdvelkis ‘puffball’ – Hind. kukurmuttā ‘mushroom’, etc. Some of the Hindi words are more phonetically similar to Lithuanian words than to their Sanskrit counterparts: Lith. tu – Hind. tū – Skr. tvám ‘you’; Lith. naujas – Hind. nayā – Skr. navas ‘new’; Lith. augti ‘to grow’ – Hind. ugnā – Skr. úkṣati ‘(he) grows up’; Lith. ūdra – Hind. ūd – Skr. udrás ‘otter’, etc.There are other reasons, as well. Sanskrit has only the written form, while Hindi has both the written and spoken varieties. Contemporary Hindi is closer to everyday style, and this style is the most stable in the Indo-European languages. Sanskrit used to be an elite and purified language: therefore, the most common everyday words could have been avoided in it.The article also includes a comparison of Lithuanian, Hindi and Sanskrit words according to semantic peculiarities. It also makes a couple of observations about the phonetic equivalents in all the three languages
Morfologiniai lietuvių, norvegų ir suomių kalbų kauzatyvai
Get PDFThe aim of the article is to provide an analysis and comparison of the formal structure of the morphological causatives (causative verbs) in Lithuanian, Norwegian and Finnish. Morphological causatives of these languages are grouped into three types: (a) causatives with an affixal marker of causation, (b) causatives with an apophonic marker of causation, (c) causatives without an overt marker of causation.The findings of the analysis lead to the following conclusions:1) In Lithuanian and Finnish, the main type of morphological causatives is causatives with an affixal marker of causation, e.g. Lith. šokdinti ‘to have sb. dance’; Fin. tansittaa ‘to have sb. dance’. In Norwegian, on the other hand, the main type of morphological causatives is causatives without an overt marker of causation that form oppositional pairs with intransitive verbs, e.g. begynne ‘begin; begin sth’.2) Lithuanian and Norwegian have morphological causatives with an apophonic marker of causation, e.g. Lith. kilti : kelti ‘rise: raise’, Norw. fare : føre ‘go somewhere : take sb. somewhere’. Such causatives are not found in Finnish as Finno-Ugric languages are not characterized by root-vowel change.3) In all three languages, a tendency of losing an overt marker of causation can be noticed. In Lithuanian, affixal causatives derived from transitive verbs (curatives) are often replaced by basic transitive verbs, e.g. siūdintis paltą ‘to have one’s coat made’, siūtis paltą ‘to make one’s coat; to have one’s coat made’. In Finnish, this tendency can be noticed as well, though Finnish curatives are still used actively. The number of Norwegian morphological causatives without an overt marker is increased by some Norwegian non-causative verbs which are already beginning to be used with one more – causative – meaning, e.g. stilne ‘calm down; to have sb. calm down’; farge håret ‘to dye your hair yourself; to have your hair dyed’. These tendencies show that certain meanings, clear from the context and social relations, tend to be simplified
Pristatomieji sakiniai anglų ir lietuvių kalbose
No full textThe article focuses on the type of existential sentence which is known in linguistic literature as a presentative construction. This type is distinguished on functional grounds: its communicative function is to introduce a new entity into a discourse. In addition, presentative structures exhibit different syntactic and distributional behaviour from that which is evident in the existential sentence. In Lithuanian scholarly writings the presentative type is referred to as ‘introductory’ or ‘existential’; however, no systematic treatment of the issue is available in the literature. The article advances arguments for the need to distinguish a corresponding presentative construction in Lithuanian and offers a linguistic description of the basic characteristics of the structure under discussion.Straipsnio tyrinėjimų objektas – vadinamieji pristatomieji sakiniai. Anglų kalboje šio tipo sakiniai skiriami jų atliekamos funkcijos pagrindu, nors struktūriškai jie yra tapatūs egzistenciniams sakiniams. Traktuoti juos kaip du atskirus sakinių tipus leidžia skirtinga šių sakinių sintaksinė organizacija, be to, pristatomiesiems sakiniams netaikomi tam tikri apribojimai, būdingi egzistenciniams sakiniams. Pavyzdžiui, egzistenciniuose sakiniuose apibrėžtos referencijos veiksnys gramatiškai nepriimtinas, bet pristatomuosiuose sakiniuose toks veiksnys yra gana dažnas. Tam tikrų skirtumų randama ir šių sakinių veiksmažodžių semantikoje. Pagrindinė pristatomųjų sakinių funkcija pasireiškia teksto lygmeniu; daugelio tyrinėtojų nuomone, šios konstrukcijos vartojimo tikslas – įvesti naują svarbų referentą į ‘diskurso erdvę’. Atitinkama konstrukcija lietuvių kalboje nėra plačiau nagrinėta. Straipsnyje aptartas lietuvių kalbos pristatomųjų sakinių skyrimo pagrįstumas, pasiūlyta tam tikra jų klasifikacija, aprašyti ir analizuoti esminiai egzistencinių ir pristatomųjų sakinių panašumai ir skirtybės
Anglų-lietuvių kalbų leksiniai pseudoekvivalentai
No full textThe paper presents a contrastive description and analysis of English and Lithuanian lexical units identical or similar in form (spelling and/or pronunciation) but having some differences in meaning. The semantic structure of lexical pseudo-equivalents has been investigated in order to establish the level of their systemic equivalence in the two languages. The results of the research show that 26% of the selected word pain do not share any denotative/propositional meaning (absolute lexical pseudo-equivalents). The rest 74% share at least one meaning and have at least one different meaning (partial pseudo-equivalents). Among them, cases when the English word has all the meanings of the Lithuanian word and some of its own (the inclusion of Lithuanian into English) account for 51%, while the reverse (Lithuanian words having developed their own meanings in addition to the shared ones) constitutes only 6%. About 17% represent cases of meaning overlap.The comparison also allows us to make some conclusions about the nature and character of borrowing in the two languages. The Lithuanian lexemes in the word pain are mostly borrowings of either Greek or Latin origin, which are more or less isolated in the lexical system of the Lithuanian language from both formal and semantic point-of-view. This is reflected in their narrow, often specific/terminological meaning. Borrowed words tend to remain isolated and very rarely (6%) develop their own meanings. In English lexemes of the same origin are motivated elements of the system with all the properties typical of the ‘native’ word.Straipsnyje nagrinėjami anglų-lietuvių kalbų leksiniai pseudoekvivaentai – panašios arba identiškos formos žodžiai, turintys denotatinės reikšmės skirtumų. Tokių žodžių semantinės struktūros sutapatinimas – dažna besimokančiųjų užsienio kalbos ir net vertėjų klaidų priežastis. Atlikus sinchroninį gretinamąjį leksikografinį tyrimą paaiškėjo, kad 26% atrinktų žodžių porų visai neturi bendrų reikšmių, likusieji 74% turi bent po vieną bendrą ir vieną skirtingą reikšmę. Tyrimas taip pat parodė, kad anglų kalbos žodžiai yra žymiai daugiareikšmiškesni kalbos sistemos lygmenyje. Taigi net jei pagrindinė sisteminė angliško ir lietuviško žodžio reikšmė sutampa, angliškas žodis dažnai naudojamas tekste savo šalutine reikšme. Angliški žodžiai yra motyvuoti sistemos elementai su visomis anglų kalbai būdingomis savybėmis. Jie turi pilną darybinę ir gramatinę paradigmą, tuo tarpu lietuviški žodžiai yra gana izoliuoti lietuvių kalbos sistemoje tiek formos, tiek semantiniu požiūriu. Dažnai tai siauros reikšmės žodžiai, terminai, neturintys pilnos darybinės paradigmos. Kadangi šie žodžiai į lietuvių kalbą pateko kaip skoliniai, tyrimas leidžia daryti kai kurias prielaidas apie skolinimosi prigimtį ir pobūdį lietuvių kalboje. Šios rūšies skoliniai lieka izoliuoti ir tik labai retai (6%) išsivysto naujos reikšmės. Galbūt tokią padėti sąlygojo puristinės tendencijos, kurios visada buvo stiprios lietuvių kalboje
Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos nekirčiuotų balsių spektrai
Get PDFThe article analyses the spectra of unstressed vowels in Standard Lithuanian, their acoustic and articulation characteristics. The unstressed vowels are compared with the stressed ones.The results of the experiment have demonstrated that there are no big acoustic differences between the first and the second before stress-situated vowels and between the first and the second after stress standing vowels. All before stress and after stress-situated variants have similar shifts.The low rise vowels [a.], [e.] have the biggest qualitative reduction. The high rise vowel [u] has the smallest qualitative reduction.The unstressed compact vowels are less compact than the stressed ones, the diffuse vowels are less diffused. The timbre of low unstressed vowels is higher (except the vowel [a]) than the stressed ones. The timbre of high vowels (except the vowel (e.]) is lower than the stressed ones. The unstressed open vowels are closer, the unstressed close vowels opener than the stressed ones. It means that unstressed Lithuanian Standard vowels do not have utmost front, back, high and low articulation – they are focusing in the centre of the spectra. The short vowels after the stress have a more noticeable qualitative reduction than the ones found before the stress. The long vowels found before stress have a clearer qualitative reduction than the ones after the stress
Pašušvio šnektos izoliuotų balsių spektrų tyrimas
Get PDFThe article examines the spectra of isolated vowels, their acoustical features, articulation and their relationship with the corresponding vowels of the subdialects of Akmenė, Eržvilkas, Lukšiai, Kučiūnai, and D. Jones’ cardinal vowels.The system of the isolated vowels of the Pašušvys subdialect is the closest to the system of the Lukšiai subdialect, what is especially true of the vowels [a.], [a.], [a] which are lower as compared with the same vowels of the other subdialects.The distance between the articulation place of separate vowels of the Pašušvys subdialect is small: the back labialised [u.], [u.], [u], [o.] are pronounced almost in the same back place of the mouth (values of F2 are similar), the front [e̤.] [ε̣.], [i.], [i], [ẹ] differ a little from each other by the vertical movement of the tongue and degree of the openness of the mouth. The [o.] is the most back and [e̤.], [ε̣.] are high vowels. Compared with the very open [i̲], [u̲] of the Raseiniai sub dialect, Pašušvys analogic vowels are more close, but more open than half-long and long ones. The long [a.], [æ.] are higher and closer than the corresponding half-long [a.] [æ.]. The reason for this must be the surviving traces of nasalisation.The spectral analysis and the acoustic data allow us to claim that the isolated vowels of the Pašušvys subdialect are more similar to the secondary rather than to primary cardinal vowels. Neither the extreme front nor the extreme back articulation is characteristic of the vowels of the subdialect