Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

The general contrastive description of the Lithuanian and Polish language. Selected issues

100%
Roszko R.
Acta Baltico-Slavica
|
2005
|
vol. 29
47-67
EN
The article constitutes the contrastive description of the formal units of the Lithuanian and Polish languages. The elements of the Lithuanian language which have no formal equivalents in the Polish language are the object of our research. Due to the fact that the article is not addressed to the Polish readers, the formal peculiarities which are only common for the Polish language have been omitted, because they are out of use in the Lithuanian language. On the one hand, the selection of Lithuanian formal characteristics stresses the archaic nature of (1) the phonetically - prozodic level of the language (the Lithuanian language is at issue here) and (2) the Lithuanian nominal forms; on the other hand, it demonstrates the innovative nature of the (Lithuanian) verbal forms. Besides, the article also comprises the author's own thoughts and considerations concerning, inter alia, (1) the functional ranges of Lithuanian indefinite pronouns with particles kaz-, kai-, nors, bet; (2) the quantitative use of unitary and general forms of the attribute / the attributive participle / the numeral with the attributive conjugation (geras-is, pirmas-is); and (3) temporal and quantitative functions of selected Lithuanian verbal forms.
2
Content available remote

The Polish and Lithuanian Pronouns - Means of (Scope) Quantification

100%
Roszko R.
Acta Baltico-Slavica
|
2006
|
vol. 30
251-259
EN
The author discusses issues related to the study of precision/vagueness in natural languages. He also presents the benefits of applying contemporary theoretical confrontative research on precision/vagueness and identifies the obvious limitations of the traditional approach to precision/vagueness based on morphological categories. The article emphasises the advantages of theoretical contrastive studies which use the interlanguage as a common semantic platform of meanings for languages under comparison. The author briefly outlines the semantic category of precision/vagueness then continues with a discussion of selected Lithuanian pronouns which express vagueness: existentiality and generality. The pronouns are given an unambiguous quantifying interpretation and then juxtaposed with their Polish equivalents. The clearly visible difference between the Lithuanian and Polish expressions of vagueness is stressed. Namely, the Lithuanian forms ensure unequivocal expression of various quantifying meanings (existentiality presupposing oneness, existentiality proper, customary generality, and generality proper) while the Polish equivalents allow a quantifying understatement. For example, the Polish series of pronouns with the affix -s may express existentiality proper, for instance in this sentence: (a) Cos lezy na stole, zdejmij to. (There is something on the table, take it off). However, it may also express customary generality, as in this sentence: (b) Kup cos na obiad. (Go and buy something/anything for lunch). In the Lithuanian language the meanings discussed in (a) are delivered by a series of pronouns with the affix kaz- (Lithuanian: Kazkas yra ant stalo, nuimk.), while the meaning (b) is delivered by particle nors (Lithuanian Nupirk ka nors pietums.). In the author's opinion, the absence of simple Polish-Lithuanian equivalents is the cause of language mistakes (calques) in the speech of Poles who learn Lithuanian. This is illustrated with several sample sentences which may not only disrupt communication but are likely to lead to grotesque situations as well. .
3
Content available remote

Lithuanian pronouns of tas 'this' type and their Polish counterparts

100%
Roszko R.
Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej
|
2004
|
vol. 39
89-98
EN
.Lithuanian demonstrative pronouns create a structure that differs from the state known from the Polish language. Lithuanian pronouns sis, si 'his here'; sitas, sita 'his here' normally find their correspondents in Polish ten, ta 'this here'. Lithuanian pronouns anas, ana 'this there' most often are projected onto Polish tamten, ów, owa 'this there'. Defining Polish equivalents for Lithuanian tas, ta 'this', however, is more problematic. By default, Polish ten, ta 'this', which are formally identical with ten, ta 'this here', are used. But it is not always the case that Lithuanian tas, ta is fully represented by Polish ten, ta. Especially, when Lithuanian tas, ta is used as a part of a composite expression, e.g. tas vakaras, then an incompletely articulated lingual/quantificational expression is possible in Polish, e.g. wieczór. Some ways of Lithuanian tas use, identical with the use of neutral pronouns, like tai, tatai, sitai, sitatai, as well as to the use of masculine pronouns sitas, sis, correspond to the use of Polish to (neutr. sg) 'this', which differs from to 'this here'. Unambiguity of Lithuanian tas, ta 'this' usage in relation to the polysemantic Polish ten: 'this here' and 'this' is conducive to the evolution leading to the development of the regular article.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.