Adjectival definiteness marking in Lithuanian – one more puzzle piece: Qualitative adjectives that could but do not take definite forms
Straipsniai
Ringailė Trakymaitė
Vilniaus universitetas image/svg+xml
Publikuota 2026-01-28
https://doi.org/10.15388/Baltistica.56.1.2438
PDF

Kaip cituoti

Trakymaitė, R. (vert.) (2026) „Adjectival definiteness marking in Lithuanian – one more puzzle piece: Qualitative adjectives that could but do not take definite forms“, Baltistica, 56(1), p. 19—79. doi:10.15388/Baltistica.56.1.2438.

Santrauka

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 sub-groups, 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.

PDF
Kūrybinių bendrijų licencija

Šis kūrinys yra platinamas pagal Kūrybinių bendrijų Priskyrimas 4.0 tarptautinę licenciją.

Atsisiuntimai

Nėra atsisiuntimų.