Ambipersonal: a suitable category for the Baltic languages too?

Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjama, kaip lietuvių ir - tik trumpai - latvių kalbose ambipersonalo kategorija realizuojama konstrukcijomis su neveikiamosios rūšies dalyviais. Kadangi ambipersonalas net vienoje ir toje pačioje kalboje gali būti reiškiamas {vairiomis priemonėmis, čia susitelkiama į konstrukcijas su neveikiamaisiais dalyviais. Kaip tik ambipersonale, reiškiamame konstrukcijomis su neveikiamosios rūšies dalyviais, galima įžvelgti tam tikrą sugramatinimą. Aptariama ir šių kalbų pasyvo sąsaja su minėta kategorija.In this paper, the author discusses, if the category „ambipersonal" as postulated as a semantic- pragmatic category with grammaticalised realisation in Finnish and Estonian by Hannu Tommola (1993, 1998) has its counterpart in the neighbouring Baltic languages Lithuanian and - to a much lesser extent discussed - Latvian. The Lithuanian and Latvian - and the Baltic Finnic - passive share the feature that virtually any verb can be passivised. In both Baltic languages constructions with neuter participles (Lithuanian) or non-agreeing masculine participles can be identified as ambipersonal, the easiest to identify being constructions with intransitive verbs. In Latvian as in the neighbouring Finnic languages, the actor cannot be overtly named in constructions involving the auxiliary tikt, denoting actions not states. In Lithuanian, this is possible, also, as shown on the base of the electronic corpus of contemporary Lithuanian, quite rare with constructions involving participles in -ma. We therefore can make the conclusion that the ambipersonal meaning is basic in the Baltic languages and that the full three-argument passive is nearly not or weakly developed