12th International Congress of Balticists, Vilnius University, 28–31 October 2015 THE GRAMMATICAL PROFILE OF THE LATVIAN VAJADZĒT VS THE DEBITIVE Anna Daugavet Saint Petersburg State University anna.daugavet@gmail.com 0. Introduction The two main means of expressing necessity in Latvian are provided by the debitive form and the verb vajadzēt. The paper looks for the difference in their grammatical profiles, that is, a relative frequency distribution of their forms in a corpus. The first part reproduces the general characteristics of the debitive and the verb vajadzēt from Holvoet (2001), (2007), Kalnača (2013) and Kalnača & Lokmane (2014). The second part analyses the corpus data. 1. General characteristics of vajadzēt vs. debitive In Latvian necessity is commonly expressed by either of the two main constructions based on the verb vajadzēt (1) and the analytic debitive form (2). (1) Skol-ām tagad vajag pārrakstī-t vis-us dokument-us. school-DAT.PL now vajadzēt.PRS.3 rewrite-INF all-ACC.PL document-ACC.PL ‘Schools now have to rewrite all documents.’ (2) Tagad skol-ā mums ir jā-pārraksta now school-LOC.SG we.DAT.PL be.PRS.3 DEB-rewrite vis-i dokument-i. all-NOM.PL document-NOM.PL ‘We have to rewrite all documents at school now.’ The most outstanding formal feature of the debitive is that it takes an object in the nominative while with vajadzēt an object is used in the accusative. Both constructions have in common that they are impersonal and have a subject in the dative. The verb vajadzēt may be used without another verb in the infinitive, taking its own object (3). Historically, it was borrowed from Finnic as a non-verbal predicator combined with ‘be’, e.g. bija vajaga, and only later reinterpreted as a verb. (3) Man steidzami vajag naud-u. I.DAT.SG urgently vajadzēt.PRS.3 money-ACC.SG ‘I urgently need money.’ Anna Daugavet THE GRAMMATICAL PROFILE OF THE LATVIAN VAJADZĒT VS THE DEBITIVE 2 As distinct from vajadzēt, the debitive is an analytic verb form consisting of the verb būt ‘be’ and a special uninflected form with the prefix jā- which is only used in this form. The origins of the debitive lie in an infinitival relative clause where the prefix jā- was a relative pronoun (Holvoet 2001: 9–27). Synchronically, Holvoet (2007: 184–185; 2001: 41–43) treats the debitive as an incorporated modal verb. 1.1. Types of modality As a modal meaning, necessity may be epistemic and non-epistemic. Non-epistemic (event or root) modality is further divided into deontic and dynamic, see Holvoet (2007: 17) based on Palmer (1986, 2001). The following classification is a summary of the discussion in Holvoet (2007: 16–22). Epistemic necessity conveys the speaker’s certainty about the truth of a proposition (4). (4) It must be raining outside. Deontic necessity involves obligation (5) but also may reflect what is regarded as sensible behaviour in given circumstances (6). (5) You should help your parents. (6) You should sell your car. (if you want to pay debts) Dynamic necessity is concerned with external or internal circumstances that restrict the subject’s free will. (7) You have to sell your car. (there is no other choice) (8) You must have seven hours of sleep. (or there will be damage to your health) 1.2. Meanings of vajadzēt vs. debitive Endzelīns (1951: 972) assign what we would now call deontic meaning to the verb vajadzēt (9) and dynamic meaning to the debitive (10). But nowadays both constructions are known to express more or less the same meaning, and their difference is viewed as stylistic (Kalnača 2013). Skujiņa (1999: 64) recommends using the debitive rather than vajadzēt in official documents. (9) deontic Tev vajag dzer-t tēj-u bez cukur-a. 2.DAT.SG vajadzēt.PRS.3 drink-INF tea-ACC.SG without sugar-GEN.SG ‘You should drink tea without sugar.’