In:Passivization and Typology: Form and function
Edited by Werner Abraham and Larisa Leisiö
[Typological Studies in Language 68] 2006
► pp. 29–61
Passives in Lithuanian (in comparison with Russian)
Published online: 20 September 2006
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.68.05gen
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.68.05gen
This paper is concerned with passives and related phenomena in Lithuanian, namely, actional, statal, and evidential passives (all of these marked with the help of passive participles), and quasi-passives (with reflexive marking). The purpose is to show the features they share and the distinctions between them in the formation, tense paradigms, and functions. Comparisons with Russian are drawn to bring into relief the specific nature of Lithuanian passives and quasi-passives.
The passive form of the verb serves the functions of marking (a) syntactic changes, viz. patient promotion and/or agent demotion/deletion, (b) the pragmatic function of highlighting the action denoted by the verb, and (c) semantic functions, i.e. expression of a meaning absent in the active forms, viz. stativization (the meaning of the state resultaing from a prior action) and evidentiality – in the case of statal and evidential passives. The syntactic changes named are not the ultimate goal of passive marking. They in their turn have the pragmatic functions of foregrounding and/or backgrounding of the arguments (cf. Kazenin 2001:907–908). Passive forms are assigned to the class of actional, statal or evidential passives by force of their function.
This paper is based on my previous research on passives, reflexive verbs and resultatives (Geniušiene 1973, 1974, 1987; Geniušiene & Nedjalkov 1988).
Cited by (14)
Cited by 14 other publications
SIGURÐSSON, EINAR FREYR & MILENA ŠEREIKAITĖ
Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia
Hofherr, Patricia Cabredo
Šereikaitė, Milena
Šereikaitė, Milena
Šereikaitė, Milena
Arkadiev, Peter & Björn Wiemer
2020. Perfects in Baltic and Slavic. In Perfects in Indo-European languages and beyond [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 352], ► pp. 123 ff.
Gaeta, Livio
2017. Valency alternations between inflection and derivation. In Contrastive Studies in Verbal Valency [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 237], ► pp. 328 ff.
Usonienė, Aurelija & Jolanta Šinkūnienė
2017. Potential vs Use. In Evidentiality Revisited [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 271], ► pp. 171 ff.
Anderson, Cori
2015. Passivization and argument structure in Lithuanian. In Voice and Argument Structure in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 2], ► pp. 289 ff.
Arkadiev, Peter M. & Jurgis Pakerys
2015. Lithuanian morphological causatives. In Voice and Argument Structure in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 2], ► pp. 39 ff.
Nau, Nicole & Axel Holvoet
2015. Voice in Baltic. In Voice and Argument Structure in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 2], ► pp. 1 ff.
Spraunienė, Birutė, Auksė Razanovaitė & Erika Jasionytė
2015. Solving the puzzle of the Lithuanian passive. In Voice and Argument Structure in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 2], ► pp. 323 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. 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.
