JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ Lithuanian Language Institute ORCID iD: orcid.org/0000-0003-1542-2866

Research areas: the syntax, semantics, and pragmatics of Old and Modern Lithuanian, ethnolinguistics, and the history of Lithuanian culture and ecclesiastical texts.

DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all90-04

ON THE DUAL IN THE MANUSCRIPT SERMONS OF JURGŪS AMBROZIEJUS PABRĖŽA

On the Dual Number in the Manuscript Collection of Sermons by Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža

ABSTRACT

A bibliographical note in one of Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža’s sermons (1824) concerning teaching drawn from Karol Fabiani’s book Missya apostolska CZEŚĆ II (1783) revealed not only the secret of the origin of the 30 sermons written in the first part (p. 312) of Kiprijonas Lukauskas’s manuscript (1797) (see Pajėdienė 2022), but also made it possible to compare three presentations of the same text. Two sermons in the indicated Fabiani book concerning the Eighth Commandment of God have both a Lithuanian translation by Lukauskas and a Samogitian translation by Pabrėža. Comparing versions of a text written in different languages makes it possible to see rather subtle linguistic differences as well. The grammatical distinctiveness of the text of Fabiani’s sermons written in Samogitian by Pabrėža is related to the use of the dual. The article discusses the different models of dual usage that emerge when the Polish Fabiani text is compared with the Lithuanian (Lukauskas) and Samogitian (Pabrėža) translations. Consistent use of the dual is characteristic not only of the translation of K. Fabiani’s texts, but also of other sermons in J. A. Pabrėža’s manuscript collection PAMOKSLAI Woyringosy Materyjosy.

KEYWORDS: Karol Fabiani (1716 – after 1791 04 09), Kiprijonas Lukauskas (1757–1815), Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža (1771–1849), sermon as teaching, Samogitians, the dual.

Straipsniai / Articles

101

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

ANNOTATION

A bibliographic note about the teaching from Karol Fabiani’s book Missya apostolska CZĘŚĆ II (1783) found in one of the sermons of Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža (1824) not only revealed the mystery of the origin of the 30 sermons written in the first part (p. 312) of Kiprijonas Lukauskas’ manuscript (1797) (see Pajėdienė 2022) but also provided the opportunity of comparing three versions of the same text. Two sermons on the Eighth Commandment from the above book by Fabiani appear in both the Lithuanian version by Lukauskas and the Samogitian version by Pabrėža. Comparing versions of the text written in different languages allows us to see quite subtle linguistic peculiarities. The grammatical distinctiveness in Pabrėža’s Samogitian version of Fabiani’s sermons is related to the usage of the dual number. The article discusses the different models of using the dual number, which became apparent in comparing Fabiani’s Polish text, the Lithuanian (Lukauskas), and Samogitian (Pabrėža) translations.

The consistent use of the dual form is not only found in the translation of Fabiani’s texts by Pabrėža but also in other sermons from Pabrėža’s manuscript collection PAMOKSLAY Wayringosy Materyjosy.

KEYWORDS: Karol Fabiani (1716 – after 09 04 1791), Kiprijonas Lukauskas (1757–1815), Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža (1771–1849), sermon as teaching, Samogitians, the dual.

INTRODUCTION

In Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža’s collection PAMOKSLAY Wayringosy Materyjosy (hereafter PWM; for a transcription and facsimile of the manuscript, see Šepetytė, ed., 2020), a bibliographical note in the sermon Apey griekus lyžózwy written in 1824 concerning [material] from Karol Fabiani’s book Missya apostolska CZĘŚĆ II ^{(toliau – FMA2, 1783) pasitelktą mokymą} revealed the origin not only of the indicated PWM sermon, but also of the 30 sermons written in the first part (pp. I–II; 1–310) of Kiprijonas Lukauskas’s 1797 manuscript Pamokstas Isz Prasakimu Diewa Ape Pawinascias Giwenima Krikscioniszką [...]^² (see Pajėdienė 2022). Two Fabiani sermons on the Eighth Commandment of God – NAUKA XXVIII. z Przykazania Boskiego Osmego. Nie bedziełz mowił fałszywego świadectwa przeciwko bliźniemu twemu (FMA2 457–469) and NAUKA XXIX. o Obmowach i innych języcznych grzechach, do tego Przykazania Boskiego, Osmego

¹ Cf.: Wypisano prawie co do słowa z Missyi Apostolskiej Części 2 [...] Księdza Fabianiego PWM 228.

² For a transcription of the 409-page manuscript collection F1–D654 held at Vilnius University Library, see Karacie­jus, ed., 1996; hereafter LP.

102

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC

Dėl dviskaitos rankraštiniuose Jurgio Ambroziejaus Pabrėžos pamoksluose

naležęcych (FMA2 470–489) – has not only a Lithuanian translation by^³ Lukauskas (LP 281–301), but also a Samogitian translation by Pabrėža (PWM 203–228). Comparing the presentations of Fabiani’s text written in three languages reveals rather subtle linguistic differences as well. Pabrėža’s translation contains distinctive usage of dual forms and constructions. The aim of the article is, by comparing presentations of equivalent-content texts in three languages – Polish, Lithuanian, and Samogitian – to discuss Pabrėža’s chosen expression of the dual. The dual of pronouns written by Pabrėža, which does not correspond to the model of the Polish original, records a different grammatical marking of the two subjects or objects under discussion. The article also surveys models of dual usage in other PWM sermons (i.e. the declension of personal and demonstrative pronouns, extending into noun phrases and the verb) and the motivations for such usage.

The use of dual forms characteristic of Modern Lithuanian is commonly considered to be declining (cf. Zinkevičius 1980: 180–181; 2009; Rosinas 1994), while emphasizing the vitality of the dual preserved in some dialects (especially Northern Samogitian^⁴) (cf. Zinkevičius 1980: 181–182; Pabrėža 2017: 98–99). In examining the development of the dual of Lithuanian nouns and pronouns, old nineteenth-century Samogitian writings – the works of Simonas Daukantas and Simonas Stanevičius – were used as evidence of the consistent use of the dual characteristic of Samogitian (cf. Zinkevičius 1980: 182; Rosinas 1994: 113, 119). The dual constructions regularly used in Pabrėža’s manuscripts^⁵, even after the publication of the PWM sermon collection, have not yet been discussed in greater detail (apart from Rita Šepetytė’s list of representative dual forms in PWM – selected declined words (nominal words and participles) and conjugated words (verbs); see Šepetytė 2020: 50–51; 53).

^³ For the linguistic features of Lukauskas’s manuscript, see Zinkevičius 2001.

^⁴ For the twofold characterization of the Samogitian linguistic system, see Juozas Pabrėža’s (2017: 47) explanation of the distinction between the concepts denoted by the terms žemaičių kalba and žemaičių tarmė and of the use of the neutral term žemaičių kalba “when speaking or writing about a single linguistic system.” For the designation of the linguistic system recorded in the preacher Pabrėža’s manuscripts (with orthography continually improved over time – cf. Subačius 1996) as a “model or project of a standard Samogitian language,” possessing all the necessary Samogitian parameters – “based on the Samogitian dialect, intended solely for Samogitia, created in Samogitia, and by a Samogitian” – see Subačius 1998: 22.

^⁵ The dual is also used in Pabrėža’s manuscript containing a translation of a booklet on geography (see Šepetytė 2019: 47).

Straipsniai / Articles

103

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

1. PRESENTATIONS OF FABIANI’S TEXT IN THE MANUSCRIPTS OF LUKAUSKAS AND PABRĖŽA: DIFFERENT EXPRESSIONS OF THE DUAL

When the text of two sermons from the FMA2 book – Nauka XXVIII. z Przykazania Boskiego Osmego. Nie będziełż mówił fałszywego świadectwa przeciwko bliźniemu swemu (FMA2 457–469) and Nauka XXIX. o Obmowach i innych języcznych grzechach, do tego Przykazania Boskiego, Osmego należących (FMA2 470–489) – is compared with its Lithuanian and Samogitian presentations in the manuscripts of Lukauskas (LP 281–301) and Pabrėža (PWM 203–228), differences in the use of the dual emerge. The identity of the dual references characteristic of both translations is visible only when translating the dual pronouns of Fabiani’s text – the one-word oba and the compound obydwa (their use is determined by the descriptive lexical meaning, focusing on the first mention of the shared feature of both members⁶). The authors of both manuscripts – Lukauskas⁷ and Pabrėža – choose the same equivalent for the indicated dual pronouns. It is the compound pronoun abudu⁸, from which the dual may extend into an attributive construction (1b) or a verbal phrase (2a, 2b), cf.:

(1) If a lying witness should stand against a person, accusing him of perjury, both who have a case before the Lord stand […] FMA2 458

(1a) If a false witness should stand against a person, accusing him of some crime. They stand both, who have a case before the Lord […] LP 282

(1b) If lying witnesses stand against a person, accusing him of some wrongdoing. They stand both, who have a case before the Lord […] PWM 204

⁶ According to Albertas Rosinas, “when descriptions of the same kind (word combinations) move out of focus and are mentioned later in the text as known information, i.e. have the feature –Pp, their dual forms are usually replaced by plural forms” (Rosinas 1994: 114). According to the researcher, this statement is confirmed by all sixteenth–eighteenth-century texts (ibid.: 114–115), and consistent or regular is considered “not only the use of the dual in cases when the word marked by it has the feature +Pp, but also in cases when the word marked by it has the feature –Pp” (ibid.: 113).

⁷ For the dual used in Lukauskas’s manuscript, which “was known to him from his native Samogitian dialect,” see Zinkevičius (2001: 62–68; 72).

⁸ The one-word dual forms of pronouns abu, abi are considered inherited from Proto-Baltic, while the compound (collective) forms abudu, abidvi are later than the one-word forms (cf. Rosinas 2001: 103). In Rosinas’s view, the pronoun abu, abi or abudu, abidvi is used instead of the numeral du, dvi in order “to emphasize that all elements of the set consisting of two objects or persons have the feature mentioned in the sentence,” but only “in cases when the two objects or persons already have the feature –Pp (a non-first mention) or are known from the ‘presupposition of the common fund of knowledge’” (see Rosinas 1994: 111). For the assignment of abu, abi not to the numeral but to the class of pronouns, see ibid.: 109. Other researchers of language history call abu, abudu numerals (on the dual forms (gender) used with the numerals du, dvi, abu, abi, abudu, abidvi, see Palionis 1967: 143; Zinkevičius 1980: 179).

104

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC

On the dual in the manuscript sermons of Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža

(2) według prawa obydwa karani bydź powinni FMA2 475 (2a) yr pagal prawos abudu karotu buty turia LP 292 (2b) yr pagal prawos abódó pawinó buty karotó PWM 218

In Pabrėža’s text, the use of the dual, independent of the Polish original example, is also visible in cases where reference to two subjects (objects) is not foregrounded in Fabiani’s Polish text. For example, in recounting the story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5), only in Pabrėža’s text are both the relative pronoun kuris and the indirect demonstrative pronoun anas^{⁹ dviskaitos formos:} ktorzy FMA2 464 – kurie LP 286 – kórioúdó [...] anóudó [...] abódó PWM 208–209. Cf. a comparison in the different writings of the paragraphs containing these choices of pronouns:

(3) We have an example of this [...] We have another in the Acts of the Apostles, concerning Ananias and Sapphira, who for the field sold, when they brought the money to Saint Peter, and Saint Peter asked: did you receive only this much money for this field? They answered: this much; but it was falsehood, and immediately in that same place they were punished with sudden death for that lie. This lie, in its circumstances, seems light, because it harmed no one. Nor was there an obligation to hand over to the common treasury the money received for their own property. Consider how severely they were punished. FMA2 464

(3a) We have this example [...] We have another in the Apostolic History concerning Ananias and Sapphira, who for the field sold, when they brought the money to Saint Peter, and Saint Peter asked: how much money did you receive for that field of yours? They answered: this much, but it was untrue; immediately, in that same place, for that lie, they were left punished with sudden death. That lie, in its circumstances, seems light, because it harmed no one. There was no obligation to take the money received for their own property and hand it over to the common treasury. Consider how severely they were punished. LP 285–286

(3b) We find the same truth [...] We find it in the second Chapter, where the prophecy of God is fulfilled concerning the death of Ananias and Sapphira, as described in the Acts of the Apostles: who had sold their own land and brought the money to Saint Peter the Apostle. And Saint Peter asked them whether they had taken only that much for their land: they answered only that much; but it was untrue: for that lie, they were punished by God with sudden deathboth were left lying there. (Acts, Chapter 5.) Yet that lie seemed light to them, because it harmed no one; nor was there any necessary commandment that they should sell their own property and hand it over to the common treasury of the Holy Church. And yet see how severely God punished them only and for that lie. Consider, then, how severe the punishments before God are for both great and small lies. PWM 208–209

^⁹ For the relative and indirect demonstrative pronouns, see Rosinas 1996: 140, 94.

Straipsniai / Articles

105

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

When translating Fabiani’s reference pirmųjų z nich, neutral with respect to the expression of the dual, Pabrėža foregrounds the number (and at the same time the definiteness) of the reference to the subjects just mentioned – choosing for this purpose the dual of the indirect demonstrative pronoun in the compound pyrmasis ysz anůdůs ‘the first of the two’, cf.:

(4) This is the opinion of the Doctors of the Holy Church of God, Augustine and Bernard. Pierwſzy z nich says. Non accomodes aures ad Verba detractoris ne accipias mortem in Anima. Do not lend your ears to insulting words, lest death enter your soul. FMA2 475

(4a) This is the opinion of the Doctors of the Holy Church of God, Augustine and Bernard. The first of them says: Non accomodes aures ad Verba detractoris ne accipias mortem in Anima. Do not lend your ears to the words of the slanderer, lest death enter your soul. LP 292

(4b) Thus assert the Holy Fathers: Saint Augustine and Saint Bernard. – Pyrrnasis ysz anůdůs says. Non accordes aures ad verba detractoris, ne accipias mortem in Anima. Do not grant your ears to the words of the slanderer, lest death enter your soul. PWM 218

The relative construction described in Fabiani’s text by the indirect demonstrative pronoun and numeral du (owych dwoch ſtarcow, ktorzy) is translated correspondingly by Lukauskas (anus du senius, kurie); in Pabrėža’s translation it is additionally marked by the dual extending through the entire attributive phrase (anůdů Senió dó, kóriůdů ‘those two old men, the two of whom’), cf.:

(5) And owych dwóch ſtarcow, ktorzy, having falsely testified against innocent Susanna, the people gathered together and killed […] FMA2 459

(5a) And anus du senius, kurie, the people gathered together killed the two old men who had falsely testified against innocent Susanna […] LP 282

(5b) Anůdů Senió dó, kóriůdů who had falsely testified against innocent Susanna, the people gathered together killed them with stones […] PWM 204

The strong need to select dual forms (i.e. the foregrounding of the dual reference characteristic of Samogitian speech) is shown by Pabrėža’s translation, which supplements the Polish original sentence model with dual pronouns. For example, Fabiani’s comparative construction with demonstrative pronouns ten […] iako i ten […], which Lukauskas also chooses (tas […], kaippo yr tas), is rendered in Pabrėža’s translation by the compound dual pronoun abódó, after the dual has first been foregrounded by its initial mention in the opening statement [p]akalbůsis, yr kórs klausós pakalbėty, welni tor abódó ‘the slanderer and the one who listens to slander have the devil, both of them’, cf.:

(6) The slanderer and the listener to slander have the devil, with this sole difference: the one who slanders has it on his tongue, while the one who listens to the slanderer has it in his ears, that is: just as ten harms his own, so too ten. FMA2 476

106

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC

Dėl dviskaitos rankraštiniuose Jurgio Ambroziejaus Pabrėžos pamoksluose

(6a) The slanderer and the listener to slander have the devil, with this sole difference: the one who slanders has it on his tongue, while the one who listens to the slanderer has it in his ears; that is: just as this one harms his own, so too does that one. LP 292

(6b) According to the body, and what the body hears according to the body, the devil has both: only that it is particularly necessary that the one who speaks should have the devil on the tongue, while the one who listens to the speech should have the devil in the ears: that is, that both should harm their own souls. PWM 218

The different tendency visible in Pabrėža’s presentation of Fabiani’s text – the consistent use of dual constructions, not corresponding to the equivalent presentations in the FMA2 and LP texts – may be associated with Samogitian thought and perfected translation skills¹⁰. Consistent use of the dual characteristic of Samogitian speech is also found in other sermons in the PWM collection.

2. VARIETY OF DUAL FORMS AND CONSISTENCY OF USAGE IN OTHER SERMONS BY PABRĖŽA

The variety and frequency of dual forms found in PWM may be linked to Pabrėža’s characteristic popular speech¹¹, the variety of topics and illustrations selected for the sermons, and a rather distinctive manner of argumentation that contradicts the traditional understanding of the normally assumed specificity of sermon content and argumentation¹². While familiarizing sermon listeners with the Catholic faith and teaching (values), Pabrėža based his statements on consistently enumerated

¹⁰ The content, structure, and language of the PWM sermons show that the author of the texts was concerned with conveying the translated texts to listeners as clearly and comprehensibly as possible, using them to substantiate the arguments raised in the introduction to the sermon.

¹¹ For Pabrėža’s texts intended for the common people and his focus on the native spoken language, see Subačius 1996: 44. Somewhat earlier, Jonas Palionis (1979: 162) mentioned Pabrėža among those “who had for a longer time been distant from the common people,” attempting to substantiate this claim by reference to ecclesiastical style and the abundance of loanwords (especially Polonisms).

¹² The decline of the dual is commonly associated with the rare need to use it, both in written sources (cf. the connection drawn by Palionis (1967: 142–143) between the rarity of dual verb forms and “the specificity of the content of the writings of that period: in various collections of religious dogmas and sermons, as well as in documents of a chancellery nature (orders, oaths), one generally speaks not about the actions of two persons, but of many persons; likewise, one usually addresses many people”) and in living speech (cf. Zigmas Zinkevičius’s (1980: 180) observation: “Indeed, people rarely need to speak specifically about two living beings, two things, or two phenomena. Usually one speaks about one or about several, i.e. many (three, four...); thus, singular and plural forms must be used most often.”).

Straipsniai / Articles

107

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

arguments. Quite often, this involved not several kinds of arguments, but only paired arguments or enumerations of an alternative choice between two possibilities (also found when presenting biblical passages), which encouraged the selection of dual constructions, cf.:

(7) Then it is necessary to know what everyone must do. One: how to honor God especially: The second, what one must guard against, so as not to sin against this Commandment. – Concerning tóudó dayktó two things, two parts of this Commandment shall be spoken. PWM 12

(8) Q. What then does Necessity do to a person? – A. It draws Dó stróssniô dayktó two harsher things […] one: […] – the second. […] PWM 146

(9) what is close to slander proceeds from the fifth, dó griekó two sins are thereby fulfilled, one slander, and the other condemnation PWM 239

(10) God […] commands dó dayktó two things: one: that […] – the second: that […] PWM 13

(11) every sin dó dayktó draws two things toward itself: guilt and punishment PWM 729

(12) That punishment is escaped dóm spasabóm PWM 729

(13) Fourth, it is also explained that perhaps that thing dóm prisakimóm is commanded to be forbidden […] PWM 438

(14) (: Matt. 6. 24.:) No one can dóm ponóm serve two masters: one cannot serve God and wealth. PWM 324

(15) But I do not know whether all can be explained about tyidwy dwy tysis PWM 745

(16) Concerning tóudó wyinódó griekó the whole of these sins. PWM 87

(17) it is necessary […] so that you do not become uncertain that, briefly and only barely, it is explained about tóudó teyp stróssniô griekó two such harsher sins: for it is a very brief time. PWM 379

The natural use of the dual was encouraged by Pabrėža’s fondness for relying on authorities (cf. in example 18 the dual phrases kóriuodó Apasztołó, tóudó Apasztołó selected for the first and repeated mention of the commonality of the two indicated authorities) or, when recounting biblical or saints’ stories and discussing models of everyday behavior, for presenting examples of appropriate and inappropriate (warning) behavior. Such illustrations also include mentions of the two subjects (objects) acting in the stories being recounted, e.g.:

(18) […] The Holy Church gives these two things as the thought of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul: kóriuodó that Apasztołó, having listened to them, which women are, advised them to observe this time of waiting for the Mother; they only did this with permission, one the other: and on account of that these tóudó Apasztołó also advised that the faithful might more fully complete their prayers at that time. PWM 314

(19) He returned home and, seeing dó nabastykó, he seized the devil by the hair and threw him down and trod on him. PWM 118

(20) Abódo tóudó razbaynikó sinned: but among anóudóus one was different from the other PWM 132

PWM also contains dual forms that are unlikely for the speaking style of a sermon. When Pabrėža used (recounting them vividly) dialogues, the insertions of direct speech

108

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC

Dėl dviskaitos rankraštiniuose Jurgio Ambroziejaus Pabrėžos pamoksluose

also include the selection of the dual of personal pronouns¹³, cf. the collective reference to the first and second persons by the pronoun wedō ‘the two of us’ or the collective reference to the second-person addressee by the pronoun jodō ‘the two of you’ (see examples 21 and 22). A collective reference to the addressee can also be conveyed without a personal-pronoun reference, using only dual forms of finite or non-finite verbs (see in example 23 the warning that failure to observe the instructions of the Sacrament of Marriage leads to not only married life but also the afterlife being likened to the quarrels of two mated dogs – in it, the commonality of the collective addressee is indicated by the conditional forms nōumyrsytau ‘you two will die’, rys ytaus ‘you two will quarrel’ and the participle budamō ‘being, you two’), cf.:

(21) But the two of you, living even more poorly, will go begging, says the Son, saying that you would have to live to eternity to be saved, but you will perish. PWM 291–292

(22) he says, stay the two of you, poor sons! PWM 292

(23) Then, not wanting to receive the grace of God, you begin to hate your neighbor, to gnaw at him, to quarrel and contend with him, and according to the ears and mouth: in such hatred while being you will die, both your tongues will speak having become instruments of hell, through the endless ages. PWM 314

The evidence for consistent use of the dual in Pabrėža’s sermons is provided not only by the translation of Fabiani’s sermon text discussed somewhat earlier, but also by stories transcribed from other sources. Some of them may be characterized as full of morphologically diverse uses of dual forms¹⁴, cf.:

(24) Saint Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence, brought a terrible warning to the sinful. – He sees that such a rich man, about whom we are speaking here, is already approaching death. Therefore, pitying those who were in mortal sin, he exhorts the King not to leave their souls unredeemed, lest they receive from whom they depart: he stands with a sword in one hand, and holds a stone in the other, saying nothing, neither asking nor threatening. He has one to the Son, approaches and that, which to his own father, he raises his voice, and the King: but he answers his sons:

¹³In typological descriptions (cf. Bhat 2004: 111), grammaticalized appositive constructions formed in Lithuanian with the numeral du ‘two’, in which the sex or grammatical gender of the acting subject is also reflected (cf.: muud–mudvi, judu–judvi, jiedu–jiedvi), are described as irregular in expression—in the case of first- and second-person personal pronouns, this distinction is expressed only in the dual (cf.: aš ir mudu, mudvi ‘I and the two of us [masculine, feminine]’; tu ir judu, judvi ‘you and the two of you [masculine, feminine]’). The Samogitian forms of personal pronouns likewise mark the speaker’s sex (gender) in an equivalent way. It should be noted that the Samogitian first-person collective dual is designated by the forms wedō, wedvē ‘mudu, mudvi’ (for the declensional paradigm of Samogitian personal pronouns, see Pabrėža 2017: 98). PWM uses only masculine forms of personal dual pronouns, cf.: wedō 291; jodō 291, jódō 291; the masculine form jódōus is also selected in the case of generalization—when referring to both sexes, cf.: Daleys Dyiwas ōž tawa atkakliby pri jėmyma Sluba ōzgintō laykō, daleys ne pawadzio ōnt jódōus givenyma 313.

¹⁴Cf. the excerpt from a tale recorded by Daukantas, rich in dual forms, presented by Rosinas (1994: 113).

Straipsniai / Articles

109

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

I cannot avoid your son, nor can I bring him back: for if I bring him back from exile, you must go, poor man; and if I take him away, then you must beg. – But wedó remain poor and go begging, says the Son, although they had been innocent in the world and without transgression. – The sinner, hearing these words of God and raising his eyes toward His face, says, let me remain the son of those two! Or would I not know what kind of mercy of God this is? For although I am a sinner, I am worthy of no mercy from God: and those two, who had remained poor , would have been left, when they would have gone away? And from this, his wretched soul draws eternal benefit. – I will not recount further the story of that son: these words kill the father. Because the two of them, in their mutual affection, had become reconciled, their part, joined to that of the Father, is full of true sweetness and remains so forever: but the other, proceeding toward the Father, does not return. But what happens? The godless one, that son, dies shortly thereafter as well: and the innocent son stands in the Holy Gospel of Saint Francis. This Gospel, when he was once praying fervently at night, God showed him hell, and there, among countless clouds of smoke, amid fiery rivers and bundles of flames, he saw the father and his brother, wretched and accursed. Finally, that wretched one’s fate, to the son who had been nearby, appeared so painfully: now he tore his hair from his head, now he tore his own face; and the other, lying nearby, cried: Alas for you, said the father, alas for you, what misery you suffer: – and I, because of you, answered the son, father, am accursed! – It would have been better not to be, said the father, than for your life to have been born through me: and the son answered in turn: it would have been better that a bear had given birth to me. – Then the Father: O godless child, why are you tormenting me? And the Son answered: and you are burning me most cruelly. – And in this quarrel the other, lying nearby, was screaming; it would have been better for him to have been in that same place among the most dreadful torments. (: Segneri Sermone 13. Nro. 8. Quadrag. wern.) PWM 291–292

CONCLUSIONS

Comparison of the versions of the sermon on the Eighth Commandment of God from Fabiani’s book Missya apostolska CZĘŚĆ II (1783), in the translations written by Lukauskas (1797) and Pabrėža (1824), revealed a grammatical distinctiveness of the Samogitian text associated with the use of the dual. Lukauskas’s translation repeats the model of dual expression provided by the Polish original, associated only with the use of dual pronouns characteristic of the first mention. In Pabrėža’s texts, the dual is selected more frequently and used rather consistently—its choices are associated not only with the first mention but also with repetitions of dual constructions found throughout the narrative of a given story. The use of the dual is characteristic not only of the translation of Fabiani’s sermon but also of the other sermons in Pabrėža’s manuscript collection

110

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC

On the dual in the manuscript sermons of Jurgis Ambroz ej aus Pabrėža

PAMOKŠLAY W ayringosy Materyiosy sermons. Some passages of these sermons’ text may be called stories narrated in the dual (cf. the passage PWM 291–292). The abundance of dual constructions in PWM, determined by Pabrėža’s vernacular Samogitian speech and the content of his sermons (in them, the dual may be employed to link two persons through an address, to characterize them as acting in a particular story, or to identify them as the source of a particular statement or opinion), as well as by the enumerative nature of the argumentation (binary arguments are especially frequent), also indicates motivations for using the dual broader than those customarily specified in linguistic descriptions (cf. Palionis 1967: 142–143; Zinkevičius 1980: 180).

ŠALTINIAI

F M A 2 – [Fabiani eKarol 1783] MISSYI APOSTOLSKIEY CZĘŚĆI II. w ktorey się przekładaią NAUKI z przykazan boskich o powinnościach z ycia chrześciańskiego. przez x. karola fabianiego kanonika kaliskiego, Szkół Wydziałowych Łęczyckich Kaznodzieię NAPISANE, po rożnych Missyach MOWIONE, i do druku PODANE. Za dozwoleniem Zwierzchności. w KALISZU, 1783. w Drukarni J. O. Xcia Jmci Prymasa, Arcy-Biskupa Gnieźnieńskiego. Prieiga internete: https://polona.pl/item/missyi-apostolskiey-czesc-ii-w-ktorey-sie-przekladaia-nauki-z-przykazan-boskich-o,MTM5MjMwNjY5.

LP – [Lukauskas Kiprijonas 1797] Vilniaus universiteto bibliotekoje saugomo F1–D654 rankraščio PAMOKSLAS Iš Prisąkimu Diewa Ape Pawinasčias Giwenima Kriksčioniszkа. Per Kuniga Cypriona Łukawski Plebona Traszkunų Surasitas. Metusy Chrystusa 1797 perrašas. – Kiprijonas Lukauskas Pamokslai, par. J. Karaciėjus, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 1996.

PWM – [Pabrėža Ambroziejus, rašyta 1799–1831] PAMOKSLAY Wayringosy Materyiosy Ał rožniu wyitu, iwairiusy taykusy Sakity par Kónyga Ambroziejo Pabrėža Tercyjoriǫ Zokana Szwęta Tiewa Prąčyszkaus, faksimilė ir perrašas. – Pamokslai vairin-gose materijose, sakyti Ambroziejaus Pabrėžos, par. R. Šepetytė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2020.

LITERATŪRA

Bhat Darbhe Narayana Shankara 2004: Pronouns, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Karaciėjus Juozas 1996: Kelios pastabos dėl K. Lukausko „Pamokslų“ kalbos. – Kiprijonas Lukauskas Pamokslai, par. J. Karaciėjus, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 18–20.

Straipsniai / Articles

111

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

Pabrėža Juozas 2017: Žemaičių kalba ir rašyba, ser. Bibliotheca actorum humanita-ricorum universitatis Saulensis, 17, Šiauliai: Šiaulių universiteto bibliotekos Leidybos skyrius.

Pajėdienė Jūratė 2022: Apie Kiprijono Lukausko surašyto Pamokslo Isz Prisakimu Diewa [...] (1797) atitikti Karolio Fabiani Missyi Apostolsk iey Część II (1783) tekstams. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 86, 68–88.

Palionis Jonas 1967: Lietuvių literatūrinė kalba XVI–XVII a., Vilnius: Mintis.

Palionis Jonas 1979: Lietuvių literatūrinės kalbos istorija, Vilnius: Mokslas.

Rosinas Albertas 1994: Lietuvių kalbos daiktavardžių ir įvardžių dviskaitos raida. – Baltistica, priedas 4, 109–122.

Rosinas Albertas 1996: Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos įvardžiai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Rosinas Albertas 2001: Mikaloj aus Daukšos tekstų įvardžių semantinė ir morfologinė sistema, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.

Subačius Giedrius 1996: Jurgio Ambraziejaus Pabrėžos žemaičių kalba. – Asmuo: tarp tautos ir valstybės, sud. E. Motieka ir kt., ser. Lietuvių atgimimo istorijos studijos, 8, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 10–113.

Subačius Giedrius 1998: Žemaičių bendrinės kalbos idėjos, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Šepetytė Rita 2019: Rankraščio kalbos ypatybės. – Jurgio Ambraziejaus Pabrėžos geografija, par. R. Šepetytė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 37–55.

Šepetytė Rita 2020: „Pamokslų vairingose materijose“ kalbos ypatybės. – Pamokslai vairingose materijose, sakyti Ambroziejaus Pabrėžos, par. R. Šepetytė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 36–61.

Zinkevičius Zigmas 1980: Lietuvių kalbos istorinė gramatika 1, Vilnius: Mokslas.

Zinkevičius Zigmas 2001: Kiprijono Lukausko „Pamokslų“ kalba. – Baltistica 36(1), 61–75.

Zinkevičius Zigmas 2009: Pastabos apie dviskaitos nykimą baltų kalbose. – Baltistica 44(2), 321–324.

112

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC

Dėl dviskaitos rankraštiniuose Jurgio Ambroziejaus Pabrėžos pamoksluose

On the Dual Number in the Manuscript Collection of Sermons by Jurgis Ambroziejus Pabrėža

SUMMARY

A bibliographic note about the teaching from Karol Fabiani’s book Missya apostolska CZĘŚĆ II (1783) found in one of the sermons of J. A. Pabrėža (1824) not only revealed the mystery of the origin of the 30 sermons written in the first part (p. 312) of Kiprijonas Lukauskas’ manuscript (1797) (see Pajėdienė 2022) but also provided the opportunity of comparing three versions of the same text. Two sermons on the Eighth Commandment from the above book by Fabiani appear in the Lithuanian version by Lukauskas and the Samogitian version by Pabrėža. Comparing versions of the text written in different languages allows us to see quite subtle linguistic peculiarities. The grammatical distinctiveness in Pabrėža’s Samogitian version of Fabiani’s sermons is related to the usage of the dual number. The article discusses the different models of using the dual number, which became apparent in comparing Fabiani’s Polish text, the Lithuanian (Lukauskas), and Samogitian (Pabrėža) translations.

The expression of the dual number resembling the Polish original, which is repeated in Lukauskas’ translation, is associated solely with the selection of dual pronouns typically used for the first mention. Meanwhile, in Pabrėža’s text, the dual form is used not only for the initial mention of the two acting subjects (objects) as a means of drawing attention but also for repeating the relevance of such binary membership throughout the narration of a particular story. The consistent use of the dual form is not only found in the translation of Fabiani’s texts by Pabrėža but also in other sermons from Pabrėža’s manuscript collection PAMOKSŁAW Wawringosy Materyjosy. Such use of the dual number is associated with Pabrėža’s natural Samogitian speech patterns, his characteristic enumerative argumentation (where dual arguments are prevalent), and the selection of illustrative didactic stories (often involving only two characters) to convey different arguments.

Įteikta 2023 m. gruodžio 19 d.

JŪRATĖ PAJĖDIENĖ

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT–10308 Vilnius, Lietuva

[email protected]

Straipsniai / Articles

113