基于符号的立陶宛方言言语多元性研究

K. Kozhanov, B. Wiemer
{"title":"基于符号的立陶宛方言言语多元性研究","authors":"K. Kozhanov, B. Wiemer","doi":"10.15388/kalbotyra.2019.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the use of the verbal suffixes -(d)inė- and ‑dav‑ in Lithuanian dialects. Both suffixes express pluractionality, although of different types, and their distribution in Lithuanian dialects differs as well. Using corpus data, we find that in South Aukštaitian ‑dav‑ is rarer and -(d)inė‑ is more frequent than in East Aukštaitian; in Lithuanian dialects of Belarus -dav- is almost absent. We argue against the assumption that -(d)inėforms have extended into the domain of the past habitual at the expense of ‑dav‑ forms; a slightly higher token frequency of -(d)inė‑ in South Aukštaitian seems to apply irrespective of any particular tense. We also argue that only token-based analyses can substantiate claims concerning areal distribution of certain grammatical forms and constructions.","PeriodicalId":30274,"journal":{"name":"Kalbotyra","volume":"72 1","pages":"7-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A token-based investigation of verbal plurality in Lithuanian dialects\",\"authors\":\"K. Kozhanov, B. Wiemer\",\"doi\":\"10.15388/kalbotyra.2019.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines the use of the verbal suffixes -(d)inė- and ‑dav‑ in Lithuanian dialects. Both suffixes express pluractionality, although of different types, and their distribution in Lithuanian dialects differs as well. Using corpus data, we find that in South Aukštaitian ‑dav‑ is rarer and -(d)inė‑ is more frequent than in East Aukštaitian; in Lithuanian dialects of Belarus -dav- is almost absent. We argue against the assumption that -(d)inėforms have extended into the domain of the past habitual at the expense of ‑dav‑ forms; a slightly higher token frequency of -(d)inė‑ in South Aukštaitian seems to apply irrespective of any particular tense. We also argue that only token-based analyses can substantiate claims concerning areal distribution of certain grammatical forms and constructions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30274,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kalbotyra\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"7-31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kalbotyra\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15388/kalbotyra.2019.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kalbotyra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/kalbotyra.2019.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文研究了立陶宛方言中单词后缀-(d)在É-和‑dav-中的使用。这两个后缀都表示复数性,尽管类型不同,在立陶宛方言中的分布也不同。使用语料库数据,我们发现在南奥克什泰天,dav‑更罕见,而-(d)inï‑比东奥克什泰天更频繁;在白俄罗斯的立陶宛方言中,dav几乎不存在。我们反对这样的假设,即-(d)inï形式已经扩展到过去习惯的领域,而牺牲了-dav形式;在Aukštaitian南部,一个略高的-(d)inï‑的标记频率似乎适用于任何特定时态。我们还认为,只有基于表征的分析才能证实关于某些语法形式和结构的区域分布的说法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A token-based investigation of verbal plurality in Lithuanian dialects
This paper examines the use of the verbal suffixes -(d)inė- and ‑dav‑ in Lithuanian dialects. Both suffixes express pluractionality, although of different types, and their distribution in Lithuanian dialects differs as well. Using corpus data, we find that in South Aukštaitian ‑dav‑ is rarer and -(d)inė‑ is more frequent than in East Aukštaitian; in Lithuanian dialects of Belarus -dav- is almost absent. We argue against the assumption that -(d)inėforms have extended into the domain of the past habitual at the expense of ‑dav‑ forms; a slightly higher token frequency of -(d)inė‑ in South Aukštaitian seems to apply irrespective of any particular tense. We also argue that only token-based analyses can substantiate claims concerning areal distribution of certain grammatical forms and constructions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信