Cover not available
Part of
Voice and Argument Structure in Baltic
Edited by Axel Holvoet and Nicole Nau
[Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic 2] 2015
► pp. 39–98

Lithuanian morphological causatives

A corpus-based study

ORCID logo | Vilnius University
| Vilnius University

We analyse morphological causative verbs in Lithuanian on the basis of an annotated corpus, studying the distribution of different causative suffixes across the valency types of base verbs, as well as the argument structure of the causatives themselves. We show that different causative suffixes are unevenly distributed with respect to the transitivity and agentivity of the base verbs and that morphological causatives in Lithuanian, being no longer productive, tend to pattern in their argument structure and interpretation together with ordinary transitive verbs. The not very numerous causatives based on transitive verbs are investigated, and it is shown that causatives based on “ingestive” verbs like ‘eat’ or ‘drink’ behave differently from causatives formed from other semantic types of bases, in particular in that they allow the expression of both participants of the caused event. The non-ingestive transitive verbs derive so called “curative” causatives which are peculiar in that they never allow regular overt expression of the agent of the caused situation and are therefore not valency-increasing in the strict sense of the term. Such causatives are also shown to undergo meaning shifts rendering them partly synonymous with their base verbs, the original causative semantics being lost.

Published online: 5 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/vargreb.2.01ark
References
DLKT – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos tekstynas
Corpus of Contemporary Lithuanian], [URL].
DŽ6e – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas
[Dictionary of Modern Lithuanian], 6th ed. (3rd electronic ed) ed. by Stasys Keinys (editor in chief), Laimutis Bilkis, Jonas Paulauskas, Vytautas Vitkauskas. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas 2011, [URL].Google Scholar
LKŽe – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas
[Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language], vols. 1–20 1941–2002), electronic edition, ed. by Gertrūda Naktinienė (editor in chief), Jonas Paulauskas, Ritutė Petrokienė, Vytautas Vitkauskas, Jolanta Zabarskaitė. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas 2005–2008, [URL].Google Scholar
PRPC – Polish-Russian Parallel Corpus, part of the Russian National Corpus
[URL]
Ackerman, Farrell & Moore, John
1999 Syntagmatic and paradigmatic dimensions of causee encodings. Linguistics and Philosophy 22(1): 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Yu
2011 Causatives which do not cause: Non-valency-increasing effects of a valency-increasing derivation. In Language at Large. Essays on Syntax and Semantics [Empirical Approaches to Linguistic Theory 2], Alexandra Yu. Aikhenvald & Robert M.W. Dixon (eds), 86–142. Leiden/Boston: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amberber, Mengistu
2002 Quirky alternations of transitivity: The case of ingestive predicates. In Language Universals and Variation, Mengistu Amberber & Peter Collins (eds), 1–20. Westport, CT: Prager.Google Scholar
Ambrazas, Vytautas
(ed.) 1985 Grammatika litovskogo jazyka [Grammar of Lithuanian]. Vilnius: Mokslas.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1997 Lithuanian Grammar. Vilnius: Baltos lankos.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2006 Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika [Grammar of Modern Lihuanian]. 4th edn. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter M
2011 Aspect and actionality in Lithuanian on a typological background. In Langues baltiques, langues slaves, Daniel Petit, Claire Le Feuvre & Henry Menantaud (eds), 57–86. Paris: Éditions CNRS.Google Scholar
2012 Stems in Lithuanian verbal inflection (with remarks on derivation). Word Structure 5(1): 7–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 From transitivity to aspect: Causative-inchoative alternation and its extensions in Lithuanian. Baltic Linguistics 4: 39–77.Google Scholar
2014 Review of Leonard H. Babby. The Syntax of Argument Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 22(2): 259–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald
1993 On frequency, transparency, and productivity. In Yearbook of Morphology 1992, Geert E. Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 181–208. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Corpus linguistics in morphology: morphological productivity. In Corpus Linguistics. An international handbook, Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kyto (eds), vol. 2, 899–919. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
2001 Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1976 The syntax of causative constructions: Cross-language similarities and differences. In Syntax and Semantics 6. The Grammar of Causative Constructions, Masayoshi Shibatani (ed), 261–312. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1978 Ergativity. In Syntactic Typology. Studies in the Phenomenology of Language, Winfried P. Lehmann (ed), 329–394. Austin/London: The University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1989 Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Croft, William C
1991 Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations. The Cognitive Organization of Information. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2012 Verbs. Aspect and Causal Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daugavet, Anna D
2015. The lengthening of the first component of Lithuanian diphthongs in an areal perspective. In Contemporary Approaches to Baltic Linguistics, Peter Arkadiev, Axel Holvoet & Björn Wiemer (eds) 139–201. Berlin/New York Mouton de Gruyter DOI logo
Derksen, Rick
1996 Metatony in Baltic [Leiden Studies in Indo-European, 6]. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W
2000 A typology of causatives: form, syntax and meaning. In Changing Valency. Case Studies in Transitivity, Robert M.W. Dixon & Aleksandra Yu. Aikhenvald (eds), 30–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David R
1991 Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DŽ2. 1972 Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas [The Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian], 2nd edn, ed. by Jonas Kruopas. Vilnius: Mintis.Google Scholar
Endzelīns, Jānis
1951 Latviešu valodas gramatika [Latvian Grammar]. Rīga: Latvijas valsts izdevniecība.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J
1986 Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora. In: Berkeley Linguistic Society 12: 95–107.Google Scholar
Galnaitytė, Elzė [Galnajtite È.A.]
1980 Tipologija kauzativnyx glagolov kak sposoba dejstvija (na materiale russkogo i litovskogo jazykov) [Typology of causative verbs as an Aktionsart (based on Russian and Lithuanian data)]. In Aspektual’nost’ i sredstva eё vyraženija. Voprosy russkoj aspektologii V [Aspectuality and Its Expression. Issues in Russian Aspectology V][Učenye zapiski Tartuskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 537]. Tartu: Tartu University, 100–114.Google Scholar
Geniušienė, Emma
1974 Diatezy i zalogi v sovremennom litovskom jazyke [Diathesis and voice in modern Lithuanian]. In Tipologija passivnyx konstrukcij. Diatezy i zalogi [Typology of Passive Constructions. Diathesis and Voice], Aleksandr A. Xolodovič (ed.), 203–231. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
1983 Refleksivnye glagoly v baltijskix jazykax i tipologija refleksivov [Reflexive Verbs in Baltic and the Typology of Reflexives]. Vilnius.
1987 The Typology of Reflexives. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Passives in Lithuanian (in comparison with Russian). In Passivization and Typology. Form and Function, Werner Abraham & Larisa Leisiö (eds), 29–61. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Reciprocal and reflexive constructions in Lithuanian (with references to Latvian). In Typology of reciprocal constructions, vol. 2, Vladimir P. Nedjalkov (ed), 633–672. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1993 More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Causatives and Transitivity, Bernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky (eds), 86–120. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A
1994 A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, 73]. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A
1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2): 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kittilä, Seppo
2009 Causative morphemes as non-valency increasing devices. Folia Linguistica 43(1): 67–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kozhanov, Kirill
forthcoming. Prefixation and argument structure in Lithuanian: transitivization. In Argument Realization in Baltic, Axel Holvoet & Nicole Nau (eds) Amsterdam–Philadelphia John Benjamins
Kulikov, Leonid
2001 Causatives. In Language Typology and Language Universals. An International Handbook, Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds), vol. 2, 886–898. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter,Google Scholar
Kumakhov, Mukhadin & Vamling, Karina
2009 Circassian Clause Structure. Malmö: Malmö University.Google Scholar
Letuchiy, Alexander [Letučij, Aleksandr B.]
2009a Towards a typology of labile verbs: Lability vs. derivation. In New Challenges in Typology: Transcending the Borders and Refining the Distinctions [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs, 271], Patience Epps & Alexandre Arkhipov (eds), 247–268. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Letučij, Aleksandr B
2009b Kauzativ, dekauzativ i labil’nost’ [Causative, anticausative, and lability]. In: Aspekty polisintetizma: Očerki po grammatike adygejskogo jazyka [Aspects of Polysynthesis: Studies in Adyghe Grammar], Jakov G. Testelec (ed.), 372–428. Moscow: Russian State University for the Humanities.Google Scholar
2013 Tipologija labil’nyx glagolov [Typology of Labile Verbs]. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskix kul’tur.Google Scholar
Maldonado, Ricardo & Nava, Fernando E
2002 Tarascan causatives and event complexity. In The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation, Masayoshi Shibatani (ed), 157–196. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Masica, Colin
1976 Defining a Linguistic Area: South Asia. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Yo
2000 On the crosslinguistic parameterization of causative predicates: Implications from Japanese and other languages. In Argument Realization, Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds), 135–169. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Naktinienė, Gertrūda
2011 Parūpinamieji veiksmažodžiai Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodyne [Curative verbs in the Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian]. Kalbos kultūra 84: 150–164.Google Scholar
Næss, Åshild
2007 Prototypical Transitivity [Typological Studies in Language, 72]. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 The grammar of eating and drinking verbs. Language and Linguistics Compass 5(6): 413–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nedjalkov Vladimir P. & Georgij G. Sil’nickij
1969 Tipologija morfologičeskogo i leksičeskogo kauzativov [Typology of morphological and lexical causatives]. In Tipologija kauzativnyx konstrukcij. Morfologičeskij kauzativ [Typology of Causative Constructions. Morphological Causative], Aleksandr A. Xolodovič (ed), 20–50. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Ostrowski, Norbert
2006 Studia z historii czasownika litewskiego. Iteratiwa. Denominatiwa. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar
Ožegov, Sergej I. s.d
Slovar’ russkogo jazyka [The Dictionary of Russian]. Moscow: Sovetskaja ènciklopedija.
Pakerys, Antanas
2002 Akcentologija [Accentology], vol. 2. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Google Scholar
Pakerys, Jurgis
2011 On derivational suffixes and inflectional classes of verbs in Modern Lithuanian, Lietuvių kalba 5 ([URL]).Google Scholar
2013 Naujųjų skolinių duomenų bazės veiksmažodžių morfologija [Verbal morphology in the Database of New Borrowings into Lithuanian]. Taikomoji kalbotyra 3 ([URL]).Google Scholar
Rackevičienė, Sigita
2002 Morfologiniai lietuvių, norvegų ir suomių kalbų kauzatyvai [Morphological causatives in Lithuanian, Norwegian and Finnish]. Kalbotyra 51(1): 135–146.Google Scholar
2005 Typology of morphological causatives in Lithuanian, Finnish and Norwegian. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 23(1): 55–74.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian C
2011 Licensing of instrumental case in Hindi/Urdu causatives. Nordlyd 38: 49–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saksena, Anuradha
1980 The affected agent. Language 56(4): 812–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Savičiūtė, Gertrūda
1985 Parūpinamųjų veiksmažodžių semantika [Semantics of curative verbs]. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 24: 236–251.Google Scholar
1986 Dėl lietuvių kalbos kauzatyvinių konstrukcijų semantikos [On the semantics of the causative constructions in Lithuanian]. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 25: 157–167.Google Scholar
Senn, Alfred
1966 Handbuch der Litauischen Sprache. Bd. I. Grammatik. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi
(ed.). 1976 Syntax and Semantics 6. The Grammar of Causative Constructions. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2001 The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation [Typological Studies in Language, 48]. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Introduction. Some basic issues in the grammar of causation. In The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation [Typological Studies in Language, 48], Masayoshi Shibatani (ed.), 1–22. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smoczyński, Wojciech
1987 On the Balto-Slavic present stems in -dō. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 48: 197–212 (reprinted in: Wojciech Smoczyński, Studia Bałto-Słowiańskie 2, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 2003, 42–51).Google Scholar
2005 Lexikon der altpreussischen Verben [Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft, 117]. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
Song, Jae Jung
1996 Causatives and Causation: A Universal-Typological Perspective. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Srishti, Richa
2014 Not so high. The case of causee in South Asian Languages (Hindi, Kashmiri, Punjabi & Manipuri). In The Lexicon-Syntax Interface: Perspectives from South Asian languages, Pritha Chandra & Richa Srishti (eds), 197–216. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stang, Christian S
1942 Das slavische und baltische Verbum. Skrifter utgitt av det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo. II. Hist.-Filol. Klasse. No. 1. Oslo, 1–280.Google Scholar
1966 Vergleichende Grammatik der Baltischen Sprachen. Oslo/Bergen/Tromsø: Universitetsvorlaget.Google Scholar
Svantesson, Jan Olof
1983 Kammu Phonology and Morphology. Travaux de l’Institut de Linguistique de Lund 18.Google Scholar
Timberlake, Alan
1982 The impersonal passive in Lithuanian. Berkeley Linguistics Society 8: 508–524.Google Scholar
Toops, Gary H
1989 The syntax and semantics of Lithuanian curative constructions. In The Non-Slavic Languages of the USSR, Howard Aronson (ed.), vol. 5, 249–282. Columbus, OH: Slavica Publishers.Google Scholar
Ulvydas, Kazys
(ed.) 1971 Lietuvių kalbos gramatika [Grammar of Lithuanian], vol. 2. Vilnius: Mintis.Google Scholar
Wiemer, Björn
2006 Relations between Actor-demoting devices in Lithuanian. In Passivization and Typology. Form and Function, Werner Abraham & Larisa Leisiö (eds), 274–309. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xolodovič, Aleksandr A
(ed) 1969 Tipologija kauzativnyx konstrukcij. Morfologičeskij kauzativ [Typology of Causative Constructions. The Morphological Causative]. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Young, Steven R
1991 The Prosodic Structure of Lithuanian. Lanham/New York/London: The University Press of America.Google Scholar
Žeimantienė, Vaiva
2011 Zur Verwendung und Bedeutung ausgewählter litauischer kurativer Verben mit Ausblick auf das Deutsche. Moderne Sprachen 55(2): 123–133.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

Holvoet, Axel & Nicole Nau
2016. Introduction. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Korostenskiene, Julija
2022. Baltic topmost superlexical prefixes as the left periphery of the verb: the permissive, the restrictive, the negative, and the debitive. Journal of Baltic Studies 53:3 ► pp. 325 ff. DOI logo
Kozhanov, Kirill
2016. Verbal prefixation and argument structure in Lithuanian. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 363 ff. DOI logo
Nau, Nicole & Jurgis Pakerys
2016. Transitivity pairs in Baltic: between Finnic and Slavic. Lingua Posnaniensis 58:2 ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Pakerys, Jurgis
2016. On periphrastic causative constructions in Lithuanian and Latvian. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 427 ff. DOI logo
Riaubienė, Benita
2016. Resultative secondary predicates in the Baltic languages. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 403 ff. DOI logo
Wiemer, Björn & Vaiva Žeimantienė
2016. Contexts for the choice of genitive vs. instrumental in contemporary Lithuanian. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. The Middle Voice in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 5], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.