Abstract The study explores the potential of utilizing particle use data to differentiate between seven Estonian registers: everyday conversation, institutional interaction, printed media (newspapers), prose fiction, academic prose, instant messaging, and internet comments. The objective is to develop a simple yet effective model that enables researchers to comprehend the internal logic behind register differentiation based on particle use. Particles are considered promising differentiators due to their independence from text content. The article outlines the chosen method, the model creation, and the testing process. A key finding reveals that hierarchical relationships between particles within registers prove more reliable indicators than general use frequencies. The method involves establishing correspondences between particle pairs and register pairs, facilitating the measurement of distances between registers. During testing, the model demonstrates high accuracy across registers, encountering some difficulties in categorizing fiction and institutional interaction. Overall, the study confirms the efficacy of the proposed method in distinguishing registers based on particle use, underscoring the significance of particles in linguistic analysis.

The Estonian polysemous words ehk, akki and jarsku have different meanings and uses, but all three have in common the function as an epistemic modal particle. Ehk, that is used also as a conjunction, has probably always functioned as a particle in Estonian. Based on the corpus data, akki ('suddenly', 'perhaps') has developed into a modal particle during the 20th century. Its synonym jarsku ('suddenly') also finds some uses as an epistemic particle, but its pragmaticalization is still in its early stages. As a developing particle, jarsku copies the functions that akki has developed step by step. The use of ehk is mostly subjective (expression of the speaker's assessment of the content of the sentence). In the case of particles akki and jarsku, inter subjectivity (mirativity, various interrogative and directive functions and their softening) is dominating.Different particles have different register preferences. The old and well established particle ehk appears more in written registers, in both web and printed texts. Developing particles akki and jarsku spread primarily through spoken and online communication. At the same time, some types of text (forums, internet commentaries, tabloid journalism) stand out for their distinctive uses of modal particles.

Abstract Estonian belongs to the southern branch of the Finnic languages. Standard Estonian, now the sole official state language of Estonia, was developed mainly on the basis of North Estonian dialects. Estonian has been in contact with many languages and has especially been influenced by German. It has several features that are spread in the Circum-Baltic area. Estonian phonetics and phonology are characterized by three quantity degrees, palatalization, and lack of vowel harmony. The morphology combines agglutinative features with fusional. Existential, possessive, experiential, and resultative sentences display non-canonical subjects. Differential subject and object marking are conditioned by various semantic and syntactic features of the sentence. In addition to inherited and borrowed stems, Estonian language planning has created many completely new word stems.

„Eesti grammatika“ on koguteos, mis kirjeldab enam kui tuhandel leheküljel eesti keele ehitust alates häälikutest kuni lausete ja dialoogideni. Raamatu viis osa annavad ülevaate eesti keele foneetikast ja fonoloogiast, sõnamuutmisest ja sõnamoodustusest, kirjalikust süntaksist ning esmakordselt ka suulise keele süntaksist ja dialoogi põhiehitusest. Sissejuhatus tutvustab keele tasandeid ja keelekirjelduse põhimõisteid. Grammatika koondab ennekõike selle sajandi eesti keele uurimise tulemusi, pakkudes kasutajale ühtede kaante vahel olulist teavet nüüdiseesti ühiskeele kõigi peamiste aspektide kohta. Käsitlus toetub tänapäevase keelekasutuse andmetele ning toob esile ka keelekasutuse varieerumise ja muutumise tendentsid. Raamatu lõpus on põhjalik eesti keele alaste uurimuste valikbibliograafia. „Eesti grammatika“ on vajalik infoallikas kõigile, kelle töö, õpingud või huvid seostuvad eesti keelega.

Polüseemsetel sõnadel ehk, äkki ja järsku on erinevaid tähendusi ja kasutusi, kuid kõigile kolmele ühine on toimimine episteemilise modaalsuse partiklina. Ehk on eesti keeles tõenäoliselt alati partiklina toiminud. Äkki on korpuseandmete põhjal hakanud toimima ka modaalpartiklina 20. sajandi jooksul. Äkki sünonüümil järsku leidub mõningaid kasutusi modaalpartiklina, kuid partiklistumine on veel üsna algusjärgus. Alles kujuneva partiklina kopeerib järsku neid funktsioone, mis samatähenduslikul sõnal äkki ilmselt sammhaaval on kujunenud. Partikli ehk kasutuses domineerib subjektiivsus (kõneleja hinnang lause sisule), äkki ja järsku puhul on valdav intersubjektiivne kasutus (miratiivsus, mitmesugused küsivad ja direktiivsed suhtlusfunktsioonid ja nende pehmendamine). Eri partiklitel on erinevad registrieelistused. Vana ja väljakujunenud partikkel ehk esineb enam kirjalikes registrites, nii netis kui trükitekstides. Uuemad partiklid äkki ja järsku levivad ennekõike suulises ja seejärel netisuhtluses. Seejuures paistavad mõned tekstiliigid (foorumid, netikommentaarid, tabloidajakirjandus) silma eripäraste kasutusviisidega. Abstract. Helle Metslang: The story of three (inter)subjectivity markers: ehk, äkki, järsku. The Estonian polysemous words ehk, äkki and järsku have different meanings and uses, but all three have in common the function as an epistemic modal particle. Ehk, that is used also as a conjunction, has probably always functioned as a particle in Estonian. Based on the corpus data, äkki (‘suddenly’, ‘perhaps’) has developed into a modal particle during the 20th century. Its synonym järsku (‘suddenly’) also finds some uses as an epistemic particle, but its pragmaticalization is still in its early stages. As a developing particle, järsku copies the functions that äkki has developed step by step. The use of ehk is mostly subjective (expression of the speaker’s assessment of the content of the sentence). In the case of particles äkki and järsku, intersubjectivity (mirativity, various interrogative and directive functions and their softening) is dominating. Different particles have different register preferences. The old and well-established particle ehk appears more in written registers, in both web and printed texts. Developing particles äkki and järsku spread primarily through spoken and online communication. At the same time, some types of text (forums, internet commentaries, tabloid journalism) stand out for their distinctive uses of modal particles.

The object has two variants in Estonian: partial object (in partitive, the functionally unmarked variant) and total object (in genitive or nominative). We examine the variation in object case in Estonian texts from the 17th to the 20th century, focusing on the 19th century and regarding this variation as an indicator in assessing the sociolinguistic variation of Estonian in texts. The texts of Old Literary Estonian were written by German scholars for whom Estonian was a collective interlanguage. In the 19th century the development of written Estonian came gradually into the hands of native speakers, who were surrounded by a predominantly German-language cultural space. In the Estonian of Germans the total object was overused. The 19th-century texts written by native Estonians represent an amalgam of native language and earlier interlanguage, they show fluctuations, and overuse of the partial object. By the turn of the 20th century, object case usage has stabilized.

Käesoleva numbri teemaks on diskursusemarkerite hulka kuuluvad pragmaatilised partiklid ja komplementlausega predikaadil põhinevad markerid (KP-markerid) ning nende kasutamine eesti, liivi, isuri, udmurdi, komi ja ersa keeles. Diskursusemarkeri mõiste varieerub: siinse teemanumbri kontseptsioon toetub käsitusele, mille kohaselt on diskursusemarker n-ö katustermin. See hõlmab nii üksikuid sõnu (nt küll, ju, ometi, nähtavasti) kui ka pikemaid kindla koosseisuga […]

The article begins by characterizing the possibilities of expressing evidentiality in Estonian.It will then provide an account of the various types of the quotative in South Estonian with a focus on the na-marked forms in the Tartu dialect.We will discuss the functions of the na-forms and their relation to the nu-marked past participle, which is also used in the same dialect to express the quotative.The final part of the article makes an attempt to solve the origin of the na-forms -did they develop from the potential mood, or do they represent a specific development based on the past participle.

In Estonian the prototypical non-verbal predicate is a noun or an adjective in the nominative case. The noun expresses class-inclusion, the adjective — a property. The prototypical predicative is non-marked in regard to time-stability. Time-stability can be marked by a non-prototypical form both in the case of class-inclusion as well as in the case of property. In the case of class-inclusion, temporary and random class-membership are marked by the translative, not by the essive. This feature makes Estonian similar to Russian and the Baltic languages and distinguishes it from Finnish. The essive is a relatively new case in Standard Estonian and its use is restricted. In copula sentences the essive can only be found as a marker of secondary predication. Temporariness of a property is marked by a non-prototypical clause pattern. The ways of marking the property depend on the semantic type of the property.

This paper analyses strategies for forming polar questions and their historical sources in the two main varieties of Livonian – Courland Livonian and Salaca Livonian. The results reveal that the main means for marking polar questions in both varieties are sentence-initial particles. Their usage is compared to the means found in other varieties spoken in the Central Baltic area. This micro-areal comparison offers an in-depth analysis of the main patterns in the area, including their developmental paths. It appears that on several occasions, Livonian, Latvian, Latgalian, and Leivu South Estonian (spoken in Latvia) pattern together as opposed to the Estonian and South Estonian varieties (spoken in Estonia) and Lutsi and Kraasna South Estonian (spoken, respectively, in southeastern Latvia and the southern Pskov region in Russia). The data originate from various sources and different times, and were obtained by using both manual and automated methods; the analyses are qualitative. Kokkuvõte. Miina Norvik, Helle Metslang, Karl Pajusalu, Eva Saar: Liivi keele üldküsimused areaalsel taustal. Artiklis analüüsitakse üldküsimuse vormistamise strateegiaid ning nende kujunemise allikaid kahes liivi keele põhikujus – Kuramaa liivi keeles ja Salatsi liivi keeles. Tulemused näitavad, et mõlemas on üldküsimusi moodustatud peamiselt lausealguliste partiklitega. Liivi keele üldküsimuste struktuuri võrreldakse areaalselt lähedaste keelte ja murrete moodustusviisidega. Selline mikroareaalne võrdlus võimaldab sügavuti analüüsida Balti areaalis leiduvaid põhilisi üldküsimuste vormimalle ning nende arenguteid. Artiklist ilmneb, et mitmel juhul osutuvad sarnaseks liivi, läti, latgali ja lõunaeesti leivu keelesaare üldküsimuste moodustusviisid, erinedes eesti keele, lõunaeesti murdekujude ning lõunaeesti lutsi ja kraasna keelesaare üldküsimuse moodustusest. Andmestik on kogutud mitmesugustest eri aegade allikatest ning seda on analüüsitud kvalitatiivselt. Kubbõvõttõks. Miina Norvik, Helle Metslang, Karl Pajusalu, Eva Saar. Līvõ kīel iļammizt kizzimizt areāl kontekstõs. Kēras sōbõd vaņtõltõd amnämniz kizzimiz lūomiz stratēgijd ja nänt ovātõd kōds līvõ kīel vīțs – Kurmō līvõ kīels ja Salāts līvõ kīels. Tuņšlimi nägțõb, ku mȯlmis sōbõd kȭlbatõd partikõld, mis irdistiz ātõ lieudtõb kītõm īrgandõksõs. Kēra ītlõb līvõ kīel amnämnizt kizzimizt struktūrõ seļļizt īž struktūrõdõks munt ležgõlizt kēļši ja kīelmūrdis. Seļļi ītlimi äbțõb tuņšlõ amā sagdidi amnämnizt kizzimizt formõd modelidi ja nänt suggimizt Vāldamier areāls. Nei īž tuņšlimi nägțõb, ku amnämnizt kizzimizt struktūr pierrõ līvõ kēļ, lețkēļ, ladgal kēļ ja jedālēsti leivu kīelkōla ātõ jõvāgid ītizt – nēši kēļši struktūrõd ātõ mõitizt äbku ēsti kīels, jedālēsti kīelmūrdis, jedālēsti Lutsi ja kraasna kīelkōlis lieudtõb. Tieutõd tuņšlimiz pierāst ātõ kubbõ pandõd īžkižist ovātist ja tuņšlimiz pierāst sōbõd kȭlbatõd kvantitatīvizt metōdõd.

The article deals with the use of the imperative and the jussive and the expression of directivity in everyday Estonian.The imperative may also be used to express an indirect command (although the jussive or the conditional could be used) and a modalized statement.Some formulas and particles develop from the imperative forms via lexicalization and/or grammaticalization.Besides the imperative, there are other means of expressing various nuances of a command.As a general rule, commands are usually softened so as to take the form of proposals or requests, whereas stronger, more direct forms are rarely used.The main strategies for softening commands include avoidance of straightforward directivity (modalized statements, questions; the conditional mood) and direct reference to the addressee of the command (subjectless sentences, experiential sentences, ambiguous personal forms).

The singular and plural 2nd person forms are central and stable in the paradigm of the Estonian imperative. The other forms are characterized by variation in use and forms, which points to certain function shifts. The shifts are caused by pragmatic and semantic factors; they have an important role in the situation structure and communicative function. The indicative form is mostly used instead of the 1st person plural imperative. Both forms, however, have their own usage area and nuances. The ku-/gu- marked the original optative form and the permissive construction with the particle las show similar developments into: 1) the third person imperative form, 2) evidential imperative, and 3) concessive. The grammaticalization of the shifts under discussion is still underway — the indicative form acting as the imperative form has not acquired the object government as yet, and the source meaning of the las-construction is still affecting its behaviour ruling out the use of the 2nd person forms.

Miina Norvik, Yingqi Jing, Michael Dunn, Robert Forkel, Terhi Honkola, Gerson Klumpp, Richard Kowalik, Helle Metslang, Karl Pajusalu, Minerva Piha, Eva Saar, Sirkka Saarinen and Outi Vesakoski (ms. 2021) Uralic typology in the light of new comprehensive data sets (submitted to Journal of Uralic Linguistics)The status of the manuscript will be updated here and at https://bedlan.net/.

The object has two variants in Estonian: partial object (in partitive, the functionally unmarked variant) and total object (in genitive or nominative). We examine the variation in object case in Estonian texts from the 17th to the 20th century, focusing on the 19th century and regarding this variation as an indicator in assessing the sociolinguistic variation of Estonian in texts. The texts of Old Literary Estonian were written by German scholars for whom Estonian was a collective interlanguage. In the 19th century the development of written Estonian came gradually into the hands of native speakers, who were surrounded by a predominantly German-language cultural space. In the Estonian of Germans the total object was overused. The 19th-century texts written by native Estonians represent an amalgam of native language and earlier interlanguage, they show fluctuations, and overuse of the partial object. By the turn of the 20th century, object case usage has stabilized.

Estonian clauses can be divided into two basic patterns: unmarked basic clauses and marked basic clauses, depending on whether the clause-initial topic is the subject or not.The main clausal topic of the unmarked basic clause has the typical coding and behavioural properties of the subject.The main clausal topic of the marked basic clauses is less grammaticalized than in the case of the unmarked basic clause.It may be realized not as a prototypical grammatical subject but as an adverbial (or an oblique or a direct object).If the sentence has the subject, it is a non-prototypical subject and its neutral position is after the verb (basic word order XVS).The main types of marked basic clauses include existential, possessive, source-marking resultative, and experiential clauses.The marked possessive, resultative and experiential clauses have their counterparts among unmarked clauses.Current trends in language use show expanding use of unmarked possessive and experiential basic clauses at the expense of marked clauses.This could be seen both as a language contactinduced shift from the Finno-Ugric clause patterns towards Standard Average European (SAE) patterns and as (just) simplification of the internal structure of the language.Resultative constructions show a tendency to use the focussed clause-final subject in both clause patterns.

Uralic TAM categories, although their markers are often etymologically related, display a wild diversity. Tense systems can be quite simple with just two values (e.g. past and non-past in Northern Mansi) or include also analytic forms with specific temporal or aspectual nuances (in e.g. Finnish). In some languages evidential oppositions are built in only in the past-tense indicative (e.g. direct vs indirect perception in Udmurt), in others they build a separate subsystem (e.g. evidential tenses in Northern Mansi, coded by the finite use of non-finite forms) or interact in a specific way with separate forms of epistemic modality (in e.g. Nenets). Aspect as a systematic morpholexical category is typically not present in Uralic, but morphological means (either suffixes traditionally described as part of word formation, or prefixes/preverbs as an innovation in some Uralic languages) are used to express actionality, in ways which have not yet been systematically described.

Aga mis oht ähvardab seda, kes ütleb: Kardan, et olete valesti aru saanud või Ma kardan, et meie õnned on üksteisest eemal?Nendes näidetes on kartma-verbi leksikaalne tähendus tuhmunud ning vorm kardan väljendab kõneleja suhtumist et-lause sisusse (subjektiivsust) ja vestluskaaslasesse (intersubjektiivsust) (vt nt Narrog 2017).Sellistes liitlausetes on esiplaanil et-lause, vormiline pealause sisuliselt tagaplaanil.Järjendi ma kardan, et funktsioonis on toimunud nihe: see toimib diskursusemarkerina, nagu näiteks laialt levinud (ma) arvan (

KP-markerite täpsemaid seoseid erinevate registritega on vaadeldud statistilistes registrianalüüsides.Siin on meile olulised