Lower Sorbian to Lithuanian: shared case names conceal different constructions
Going to do something can change the object’s case
Arkadiev’s study directly compares Lower Sorbian and Lithuanian purpose constructions associated with movement. His Lower Sorbian example describes going to look for Lenka and marks Lenka as accusative with a supine. The Lithuanian construction he contrasts uses a genitive object with an infinitive. A source accusative is therefore not a command to keep an accusative when the target builds this particular purpose relationship.
The practical question is whether a person moves in order to perform the second action. That relationship differs from a simple report of performing the action, even when both mention the same individual. Preserve the purpose of the movement before assessing the target case. The comparison does not license changing every Lithuanian infinitive’s object to genitive: the study explicitly distinguishes different nonfinite environments, and the genitive pattern discussed here has a movement-and-purpose condition.
Two participants remain two without a matching standard dual
The Lower Sorbian dual is active in the Sorbian Institute’s description. Lithuanian grammatical documentation instead gives singular and plural as the main number categories, while noting that dual forms survive in some dialects. A source pair does not consequently authorize inserting a dialectal Lithuanian form into otherwise standard target prose merely because its category name matches.
For a Lower Sorbian plan involving two people going somewhere together, preserve their real number in the Lithuanian wording. At the same time, identify whether both people perform the intended second action or one goes to find the other. A pair of people appearing in a source sentence is not necessarily a dual subject. This distinction matters especially in the movement-and-purpose construction: the traveller and the person sought can be separate participants.
A genitive-looking object need not express ownership in the source either
Stone gives Lower Sorbian mam dweju konjowu for having two horses and mam dweju wucabnikowu for having two teachers. He explains that masculine animate dual objects share their form with the genitive dual. The examples assert quantities of horses or teachers, not an owner introduced by a separate of relationship. The source itself therefore already requires interpretation beyond the name of a case form.
This complements the Lithuanian purpose contrast without making the two rules identical. In the Lower Sorbian count, animate dual object morphology is relevant; in the Lithuanian construction, the type of nonfinite purpose clause matters. Copying a visible ending or a case label would miss what licenses the form in each language.
The Lithuanian grammatical overview also recognizes objects in accusative, dative, genitive and instrumental constructions. There is no single target object ending that can replace every Lower Sorbian object. Establish the source participant, its quantity and its relationship to the action, then read the Lithuanian phrase within the target construction. That preserves the intended people and things while allowing similar grammatical labels to perform different work.
Language references