Daiktavardžio ir įvardžio genityvo vieta senojoje Lietuvių kalboje

LT1.2. Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos nederinamasis pažyminys, reiškiamas daiktavardžio ar įvardžio kilmininku, paprastai eina prieš pažymimąjį žodį (GenN), tokia jo pozicija yra neutrali, nežymėta. Išimtį sudaro tik kiekybės santykius nusakantis kilmininkas — bendrinės kalbos norma yra jo postpozicija (Ambrazas 1986: 96-97; Kniūikšta 1979: 73-74; Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1976: 420; Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1994: 655-656; Durys 1927: 82). Postpoziciškai vartojamas daiktavardžio kilmininkas (NGen) yra smarkiai pabrėžiamas, o įvardžio kilmininko postpozicijos atveju paprastai pabrėžiamas pažymimasis daiktavardis. Dabartinėje kalboje įsitvirtinusi genityvo prepozicija pastebimai skiriasi nuo pirmuosiuose rašytiniuose šaltiniuose užfiksuoto polinkio dažniau vartoti jį postpoziciskai, pvz.: źwirźdai mariu PS 344, śirdis iusu PS 304; giesmes Angelu BrP 87; motinos sawa BrP 31. Spėjama, kad dažnoka genityvo postpozicija yra atsiradusi dėl slavų ar kitų kalbų įtakos, matyt, nemaža lėmęs ir verstinis senųjų raštš pobūdis. [Iš teksto, p. 104].

EN1. In most cases a preposed Gen, is unstressed. In the case of postposed Gen, different constituents can be stressed: in certain cases the genitive noun and in other cases the head noun. However, sometimes no constituent seems to have stress in noun phrases with a postposed Genn. In such cases the function of the postposed Gen, in Old Lithuanian is unclear. We conclude, however, that influence of other languages cannot be the only possible explanation of the so frequent postposition of Gen, in Old Lithuanian. For such alternation of placement of Gen, to be possible at all, the language must be, in a sense, prepared for it. We therefore assume that the position of the attribute was less strictly determined in Old Lithuanian than is the case in Modern Lithuanian, and that this made it easy for the authors of the period to take over the Latin or Polish form of the noun phrase. 2. The position of the genitive pronouns is more clearly determined than that of genitive nouns, and we can explain almost all deviations from the predominant word order. The facts are as follows: (a) preposed Gen, is unmarked; (b) when Gen is postposed, its head noun is stressed; (c) in PS postposed Gen predominates, because of the influence of Latin and Polish; (d) in BrP and BrB preposed Gen predominates; (e) even though the latter works are based on German, we find not a few examples of postposition in these sources, which partly could be due to the influence of Latin, but in other cases reflect a characteristic feature of Old Lithuanian, that of allowing some freedom of word order in the noun phrase. 3. We would expect Modern Lithuanian to have predominantly postposed genitive attributes, since it has prepositions, not postpositions (Universal 2; Greenberg 1966:78). According to several researchers Lithuanian has undergone a change from SOV to SVO.Preposition of the genitive attribute could thus be a remnant of an earlier grammar with SOV order and postposi- tions. It is odd, however, that preposition of the genitive attributes is more predominant now than was the case in Old Lithuanian. We would expect postposition of genitive attributes to increase over time, at the expance of prepositions, not the other way around. So Modern Lithuanian remains a counterexample.