TS does not have any basis in terms of articulation; 2) if such "metathesis" had happened, other problems of verb derivation and chronology would have emerged: a) metathesis does not explain other verbs having ST-finals; b) verbs with suffix -sėti, that underwent transformation after metathesis, should have disappeared, nevertheless they survived (e.g. vikséti, tuksėti, tvaksėti); c) verbs with the suffix -sėti are derived from onomatopoeic interjections (sometimes verbs) and are relatively new, whereas tekėti, teka type verbs are not derivatives, some of them are inherited from Indo-European." name="dc.description" /> TS does not have any basis in terms of articulation; 2) if such "metathesis" had happened, other problems of verb derivation and chronology would have emerged: a) metathesis does not explain other verbs having ST-finals; b) verbs with suffix -sėti, that underwent transformation after metathesis, should have disappeared, nevertheless they survived (e.g. vikséti, tuksėti, tvaksėti); c) verbs with the suffix -sėti are derived from onomatopoeic interjections (sometimes verbs) and are relatively new, whereas tekėti, teka type verbs are not derivatives, some of them are inherited from Indo-European." name="dc.subject" /> TS does not have any basis in terms of articulation; 2) if such "metathesis" had happened, other problems of verb derivation and chronology would have emerged: a) metathesis does not explain other verbs having ST-finals; b) verbs with suffix -sėti, that underwent transformation after metathesis, should have disappeared, nevertheless they survived (e.g. vikséti, tuksėti, tvaksėti); c) verbs with the suffix -sėti are derived from onomatopoeic interjections (sometimes verbs) and are relatively new, whereas tekėti, teka type verbs are not derivatives, some of them are inherited from Indo-European." name="description" /> Lituanistika | Dėl veiksmažodžių su formantais -sk-, -šk- / Erdvilas Jakulis TS does not have any basis in terms of articulation; 2) if such "metathesis" had happened, other problems of verb derivation and chronology would have emerged: a) metathesis does not explain other verbs having ST-finals; b) verbs with suffix -sėti, that underwent transformation after metathesis, should have disappeared, nevertheless they survived (e.g. vikséti, tuksėti, tvaksėti); c) verbs with the suffix -sėti are derived from onomatopoeic interjections (sometimes verbs) and are relatively new, whereas tekėti, teka type verbs are not derivatives, some of them are inherited from Indo-European."> TS does not have any basis in terms of articulation; 2) if such "metathesis" had happened, other problems of verb derivation and chronology would have emerged: a) metathesis does not explain other verbs having ST-finals; b) verbs with suffix -sėti, that underwent transformation after metathesis, should have disappeared, nevertheless they survived (e.g. vikséti, tuksėti, tvaksėti); c) verbs with the suffix -sėti are derived from onomatopoeic interjections (sometimes verbs) and are relatively new, whereas tekėti, teka type verbs are not derivatives, some of them are inherited from Indo-European.">

Dėl veiksmažodžių su formantais -sk-, -šk-

Direct Link:
Collection:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Language:
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Title:
Dėl veiksmažodžių su formantais -sk-, -šk-
Alternative Title:
On the Lithuanian verbs with root-final formatives -sk-, -šk-
In the Journal:
Baltistica . 2005, t. 40, Nr. 2, p. 171-175
Notes:
LDB Open.
Keywords:
LT
Veiksmažodis; Formatas; Metatezė; Morfologinė struktūra
Summary / Abstract:

LTLietuvių kalboje yra keletas priebalsių pakitimų, atsirandančių dėl kitų morfemų įtakos. Šie reiškiniai gerai ištirti ir aprašyti. Vienas iš tokių pakitimų yra priebalsių sukeitimas vietomis - metatezė. Lietuvių kalboje metatezę būtinai patiria šaknies galo priebalsių grupės sk, šk, zg, žg - atsidūrusios prieš bet kokį formanto ar priesagos priebalsį jos virsta ks, kš, gz, gž, t. y. SK- +-C —>KSC\ pvz.: mezg-+-ti -» megzti, reišk-+-ti —>reikšti; tryšk-+-sta —>trykšta; mezg-+-si —>mègsi, reišk- + -si —>reikši. Priebalsiai sukeičiami vietomis tam, kad palengvėtųjų artikuliacija: tariant samplaikas kšt, kst, kšl (pvz., čiurkšlė), kšm (pvz., reikšmė), gzd, gžd ir pan., liežuvis juda viena kryptimi - nuo liežuvio užpakalinių priebalsių k, g prie liežuvio priešakinių s, z, š, ž, t, d, 1 arba abilūpinio m . Jei po junginio Ж yra balsis, artikuliacinio pagrindo vykti metatezei nėra. Straipsnyje polemizuojama su N. Ostrowskiu, kuris, autoriaus teigimu, daro klaidingą prielaidą (t.y. suponuoja "metatezę" TS+V —>STV: megzti —>mezga) straipsnyje "Keli šaknies -sk-, -šk- veiksmažodžiai". Ostrowskis teigia, kad priesagos -sėti veiksmažodžių lie. mirksėti, džiugsėtis finalėje neva turėjusi įvykti "metatezė" (resp. *mirskėti, *džiuzgėli), o jos nebuvimas rodąs šių veiksmažodžių naujumą. Toliau autorius nurodo veiksmažodžius viskéti, tuskèti,tvaskėti, kurių šaknyse tokia "metatezė" neva įvykusi.

ENThe article presents the analysis of the etymology of the verbs Lith. viskéti, tuskéti and tvaskėti. The attempt of N. Ostrowski to derive these verbs from the verbs with the suffix -sėti using the method of metathesis is proven false for the following reasons: 1 ) the so called "metathesis" ST+V - >TS does not have any basis in terms of articulation; 2) if such "metathesis" had happened, other problems of verb derivation and chronology would have emerged: a) metathesis does not explain other verbs having ST-finals; b) verbs with suffix -sėti, that underwent transformation after metathesis, should have disappeared, nevertheless they survived (e.g. vikséti, tuksėti, tvaksėti); c) verbs with the suffix -sėti are derived from onomatopoeic interjections (sometimes verbs) and are relatively new, whereas tekėti, teka type verbs are not derivatives, some of them are inherited from Indo-European. [From the publication]

ISSN:
0132-6503, 2345-0045
Related Publications:
Permalink:
https://www.lituanistika.lt/content/1636
Updated:
2018-12-20 23:04:57
Metrics:
Views: 6