Leksikologijos pradmenys Jokūbo Perkūno traktate „Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift“ (1706)

Ona Aleknavičienė

Preparing document pages…

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

Research areas: the history of the Lithuanian written language, and the history of the language, literature, and culture of Lithuania Minor.

THE BASICS OF LEXICOLOGY IN JOKŪBAS PERKŪNAS’S TRACTATE WOHLGEGRÜNDETES BEDENKEN ÜBER DIE INS LITAUISCHE ÜBERSETZTEN ZEHN FABELN AESOPI UND DERSELBEN PASSIONIERTE ZUSCHRIFT (1706)

The Basics of Lexicology in the Treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706) by Jokūbas Perkūnas

ABSTRACT

The article examines Jokūbas Perkūnas’s tractate Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706) as a source of linguistic thought in the field of lexicology. In analyzing the translator of Aesop’s Fables (1706) and his ability to apply in practice the principles of language use and standardization set out in Michaelis Mörlin’s tractate Principium primarium in lingua Lithvanica (1706), Perkūnas focused mainly on vocabulary. Perkūnas’s inquiry relied more on the practical (empirical) level—collecting, evaluating, and presenting language data—than on theoretical generalizations and the formulation of strict judgments. Although Perkūnas devoted less attention than Mörlin to the theoretical consideration of lexical norms, the words and word combinations from Aesop’s Fables that he corrected and commented on show how he understood the questions investigated by lexicology (polysemy, homographs, synonymy, lexical and grammatical collocability, loanwords,

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

phraseology). In proposing an alternative, Perkūnas relied on both a quantitative criterion—more widespread usage—and a qualitative one—the form of expression that best matched the concepts.

KEYWORDS: Jokūbas Perkūnas, Michaelis Mörlinas, Lithuania Minor, history of Lithuanian linguistics, lexicology.

ANNOTATION

The tractate of Jokūbas Perkūnas Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706) is analysed as a source of linguistic idea in lexicology in this article. While analysing the skills of the translator of the Aesop’s fables Die Fab uln Aesopi (1706) to practically apply the principles of language use and standardization declared in Die Fabeln Aesopi Michaeli Mörlin’s tractate Principium primarium in lingua Lithvanica (1706) Jokūbas Perkūnas paid great attention to lexis. The research of Perkūnas referred to practical (empirical) level, i.e. the collection of linguistic data, its evaluation and presentation as opposed to theoretical generalisations and rigid decision making. Even though Perkūnas paid less attention to theoretical consideration of lexis norms than Mörlin, however, the corrected and commented words and word junctions of Aesop’s fables demonstrate the way he perceived issues which are analysed by lexicology (polysemy, homographs, synonymy, lexical and grammatical valency, loan words and phraseology). By offering his variant Perkūnas referred to both: quantitative criterion i.e. more widely spread usage and qualitative criterion, i.e. best notional expression.

KEYWORDS: Jokūbas Perkūnas, Michaeli Mörlin, Minor Lithuania, history of Lithuanian linguistics, lexicology.

0. INTRODUCTION

The philological controversy over the Lithuanian language that arose in the early eighteenth century in Lithuania Minor left three interrelated sources: 1) the treatise Principium primarium in lingua Lithvanica (The Fundamental Principle of the Lithuanian Language)¹ by Michael Mörlin (1641–1708), pastor in Gumbinnen; 2) the booklet Die Fab uln Aesopi (Aesop’s

¹ Two copies are known: 1) in the Gdańsk Library of the Polish Academy of Sciences (Biblioteka Gdańska Polskiej Akademii Nauk: NI 86 5º adl. 15); 2) in the University and State Library of Saxony-Anhalt in Halle (Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen-Anhalt: AB 153123) (Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2002: 79–98); documentary edition: Drotvinas 2008, 1–166; online edition (transcription, index of Lithuanian words): www.lki.lt/seniejirastai (hereafter MP).

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Foundations of lexicology in Jacob Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

fables) with ten fables translated into Lithuanian²; 3) the treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (A Well-Founded Opinion on the Ten Fables of Aesop Translated into Lithuanian and the Letter That Inspired Them)³ by Jacob Perkūnas the Younger (Jacob Perkuhn, Perkhun, 1665–1711), pastor in Walterkehmen.

These books were prepared one after another: the first two were published in Königsberg in 1706, and the last in Leipzig and Frankfurt. As the discussions that began around 1702 gathered momentum, Mörlin published principles for standardizing the Lithuanian language and invited pastors to consider them. Schultz aimed to show how these principles could be put into practice: following the principles proposed by Mörlin, he translated ten fables. Having assessed Mörlin’s theoretical work and Schultz’s practical work, Perkūnas set out the results of his analysis in the treatise.

PB could be considered a review of EP, but its arguments are directed not only at EP. On the title page, Schultz clearly declared the translation’s connection with Mörlin’s treatise: “Zum Versuch Nach dem PRINCIPIO Lithvanicæ Lingvæ, Littauisch vertiret” (“in an attempt to translate into Lithuanian according to the Principle of the Lithuanian Language”), while on the title page of his treatise Perkūnas indicated a connection not with just one book, but with both: “Bedenken / Uber die / Ins Litthauſche / Uberſetzte zehen Fabeln Æſopi, Und derſelben paſſionirte Zuſchrifft” (“an opinion on the ten fables of Aesop translated into Lithuanian and the letter that inspired them”).

Perkūnas considered Mörlin, not Schultz, to be the translator of the fables and the author of EP’s preface, and discussed primarily the arguments set out in Mörlin’s treatise. Perkūnas sought first and foremost to influence and overcome Mörlin, who had criticized pastors born in Lithuania Minor and serving in Lithuanian parishes. The principal addressee of PB is never identified by his actual surname—he is referred to only by the sobriquet Gumbinner ‘man from Gumbinnen’ (12×), derived from the place name Gumbinnen: Gumbinner PB 3₁₈, 4_{5,16,23,26–27}, 6₁₄, 9_2–3, 21₁₇, 22_22–23, Gumbinners PB 3_12,14, Gumb. PB 23₁, additionally preceded by Herr ‘Mr.’ Mörlin’s treatise is mentioned three times in PB: Princip. Ling. Lith. p. 21 PB 3_18–19; in Principio Lingv. Lith. PB 6_1–2; In Princip. Ling. Litv. p. 1 PB 9₂₆, sometimes with page numbers also given. Schultz’s collaboration with Mörlin and the latter’s influence are unquestionable. It should be noted that Schultz began translating the fables

² Only one copy survives, in the Princes Czartoryski Library of the National Museum in Kraków (Muzeum Narodowe w Krakowie, Biblioteka Książąt Czartoryskich: 35174/I); documentary edition: Citavičiūtė 2008: 1–206; online edition (transcription, concordance of Lithuanian word forms, index): www.lki.lt/seniejirastai (hereafter EP).

³ Only one copy is known, discovered in 2002 at the Bavarian State Library in Munich (Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München: 4 A. gr. b. 80) (Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2003: 15–50); critical edition: Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2008: 1–186; online edition (transcription, concordance of Lithuanian word forms, index): www.lki.lt/seniejirastai (hereafter PB).

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

began at Mörlin’s urging. Schulz was assisted by the Lithuanians of Gumbinė; that is, he translated while staying with Mörlin in Gumbinė, and only Mörlin could have selected parishioners who knew Lithuanian well for him (on the question of authorship of the translation and the linguistic preconditions for co-authorship, see Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2008: 121–125)⁴.

Perkūnas’s treatise appeared last, and is therefore important for its statements that attest to the development of the polemic and summarize its content. In addition, it reveals the position of Mörlin’s opponents, which had previously been reconstructed only from secondary sources, chiefly from the linguistic works of Pilypas Ruigys (Philipp Ruhig, 1675–1749): the manuscript Meletema (1735, hereafter RgM) and the printed Betrachtung der litauischen Sprache in ihrem Ursprunge, Wesen und Eigenschaften (A Study of the Origin, Nature, and Characteristics of the Lithuanian Language, 1745, hereafter RgB). Until 2002, neither the title of the treatise nor its year of publication had been recorded in Lithuanian historiography or bibliography. The discovery of the treatise began to clarify Perkūnas’s and his supporters’ claims concerning language use, the interactions among the participants in the polemic, and their aims (Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2003: 15–50).

Both treatises were written in German, with passages in Latin and Lithuanian, and occasionally Greek. Almost half of the EP text is also in German: Schulz’s preface, Ruigys’s verse dedication to the translator, the fable commentaries, and the correction of errors. Unlike the treatises, passages in other languages are rare in the German text of EP, but EP contains the greatest number of Lithuanian word forms—about 1,770. PB contains about 760, and MP about 190 Lithuanian word forms. For researchers of Lithuanian vocabulary, Perkūnas’s treatise is of interest above all for the facts of living speech from the early eighteenth century that it records; for historians of linguistics, it is of interest because of the development of linguistic thought in the fields of language standardization and lexicology. Accordingly, scholarly study of the treatise is possible on two levels—empirical and theoretical—and its findings can be used in both research and applied work.

The task of lexicology is considered to be the study of words as units of the language system and of speech activity: the explanation of their meanings, mutual relations, origins, and development, and the determination of the relations between words and the needs and aims of the society that uses them (Jakaitienė ²2010: 8; Lutzeier 2002: 7–8; Römer, Matzke ²2005: 2–7). The earliest grammars of Lithuanian in fact devoted no attention either to vocabulary or to its standardization. A little information can be found only in the sections on syntax, which discuss word combinations and agreement, noting differences from Latin and German and providing illustrative examples. Of course, one should not expect a particularly coherent system in Perkūnas’s treatise either, but some of the terms he uses and statements he makes attest to the beginnings of linguistic thought

⁴ In 1706 Schulz had only just graduated from the University of Königsberg and was merely a candidate for the ministry. Mörlin was considerably older, had worked in Gumbinė for 34 years, had written at least a couple of treatises on the use of Lithuanian, and had encouraged discussion of linguistic questions.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

The Beginnings of Lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s Treatise Well-Founded Considerations on the Ten Fables of Aesop Translated into Lithuanian and the Passionate Dedication of the Same (1706)

and in the field of lexicology. The aim of this article is to determine how Perkūnas understood questions that are now studied by lexicology.

1. LEXICAL SEMANTICS

Perkūnas raised the idea that Lithuanian words are polysemous, or display polysemy, as a regular phenomenon of the language system. This is the subject of study of contemporary lexical semantics, one of the branches of lexicology. Criticizing the translation of the moral of EP’s fable “The Wolf and the Lamb,” which reproaches anyone who fails to thank the person who saved them (cf. Fig. 1), Perkūnas proposes another way of naming the rescuer—savior instead of sustainer—and offers an explanation for why the translator did not choose it, cf.:

EP 11_13–15 Tas žodis tawę bára: jey War= ‖ gůfe išlaikyt’s ſawo Išlaikytojui ne ‖ dekuj ne ſakyſi.

PB 16_3–17 l. 14. Iſlaikyts ſawo Iſzlaikytojui. Vulgus ſagt allemahl: ‖ iſžganyts ſawo Iſžganytojui, und wundert mich ēber die ‖ unverſchämte Gottloſigkeit des jenigen / der geſprochen: ‖ Iſžganytojis, wäre ein Graßteuffel / aus Urſachen / weil ‖ iſžganam Piewas, ein conjugatum von jenem iſt. Allein ‖ wenn alle Aequivoca, der Simplicius verſtēnde / möchte er ‖ anders ſprechen? Wo iſt eine Sprache / da nicht ein ‖ Wort variè gebraucht wird. Inzwiſchen habe noch nie ‖ gehēret / das Wort Iſžganytojis, im letzten Verſtand ‖ brauchen / vielmehr aber / nennen alle Litthauer / ſo wohl ‖ GOtt den HErrn / als auch einen Menſchen / der ſie er= ‖ rettet / aus Noht geholffen / Iſžganytojis. v. c. Ak Diwe ma= ‖ nas Iſžganytojau! Ach GOtt / du mein Erretter / Hey= ‖ land! Diaw’s mane iſž tu Bedü iſžgane. GOtt hat mich ‖ aus der Noht errettet / geholffen.

In his commentary, Perkūnas included what he considered to be an untenable derivation of išganytojas from išganyti, which he had heard from an unnamed person. As indicated by the connection that this unnamed person drew between it and iſžganam Piewas, he understood the word išganyti only as ‘to let grazing animals out, to trample (crops, a meadow)’ (cf. LKŽe s. v. išganýti tr. 4). These two words—the derivative išganytojis and the base word išganyti—are indeed linked in two ways (formally and semantically) and form a derivational opposition (for the terms, see Jakaitienė 1988: 86–94). However, that person explained the derivative’s meaning on the basis of only one meaning of the base word, ‘to let grazing animals out, to trample (crops, a meadow),’ thereby disregarding the polysemy of the verb išganyti. Perkūnas regarded such motivation as “shamelessly impious”—he had never heard

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

1 FIG. EP 11⁴: he said, ‘the fable’s moral: one who has been sustained by his Sustainer’;

Muzeum Narodowe w Krakowie, Biblioteka Książąt Czartoryskich: 35174/I

using the word išganytojis in this sense, that is, understanding it as some kind of meadow imp. According to Perkūnas, Lithuanians use išganytoju to refer both to God and to a person who has saved them (cf. Fig. 2).

Although the derivational meaning of the noun išganytojis is the same—‘one who saves’—it has three lexical meanings: in the first case, ‘a herdsman who grazes animals and lets them eat the meadow’; in the second, ‘a savior, deliverer (a person)’ and ‘a savior, deliverer (God)’. These are accordingly three lexemes. The unnamed person and Perkūnas did not regard the same meaning as the primary meaning of the base word: for the former, the literal (historically older, agrarian) sense ‘to let grazing animals eat away, to consume (crops, a meadow)’ was more important, whereas for the latter it was the figurative (secondary, spiritual) sense ‘to save, deliver’ (cf. LKŽe s. v. išganyti tr.: 2. fig.). It is precisely the latter that should be regarded as secondary, having developed from the primary meaning.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological Foundations in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

FIG. 2. PB 16₃–₁₇: Perkūnas’s comment on the use of išganytojo in living speech; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München: 4 A. gr. b. 80

As mentioned, EP uses not išganytojis but išlaikytojis: išlaiky’s fawo Išlaikytojui EP 11₁₄. Its base word is išlaikyti, whose meaning might be associated

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

with sense 4 given in LKŽe: ‘to preserve something in a certain condition, to leave it intact, alive, undamaged’. In the moral of the Latin fable “Lupus et Crus,” the original of the translation—“Fabula in eos dicitur, qui servati de malis, erga salutis suae / autores ingrati reperiuntur” (Citavičiūtė 2008: 187)—the participle servati gave the translator the opportunity to choose among several alternatives: saved, sustained, preserved, while the construction erga salutis suae autores could be rendered by the phrase to his own savior (cf.: servo, -āre, -āvi, -ātum vt 5. fig. ‘to sustain, preserve’; ‘to save’; salūs, -ūtis f 2. ‘well-being, welfare’; ‘salvation’ [Kuzavinis 1996: 789–790, 765]).

In the oldest German–Lithuanian dictionary Lex and the first printed dictionary H, išlaikytojis is not included, while in C it is associated with sustaining—feeding, caring for, protecting, and defending. Išlaikytojis occurs in C only in the dictionary entry Erhalter (2x); compare also its base word išlaikyti in three entries: erhalten, behaupten and zubebhalten:

C I 589₃₀–₃₂ Erhalter. Išlaikytojis, jįó. M. ‖ Er war ein Erhalter seinen Leute: Buwo Išlaikytojis ſa= ‖ wo Źmonù, Syr. 49.17.

C I 589₂₃–₃₁ Erhalten. Išlaikau, jau, ſu, ti. Apturreti. ‖ Pramaitinnu, Ißprowíu. ‖ Die Speiße, der Trunck und die Ruhe erhal= ‖ ten des Menschen Leben: Walgis, Gerims bėj ‖ Atilfis pramaitin Źmogaus Gywatą. ‖ Der Herr erhhält meine Seele: Wießpats išlaiko mana Dubią Ψ 54.6.

C I 259₉–₁₁ Behaupten. Apģinnu, gynau giſu, ginti. ‖ Ißlaikau, kiau kyſu, kyti ‖ Ißluddiu, diau, dyſu, ti.

C II 1058₂₉–1059₆ Zubebalten. Ißlaikau, kiau kyſu. ‖ Fülle ein Gomor davon, zubebalten auff ‖ eure Nachkom[m]en [...] Pripilk Setuwaite to, ‖ išlaikytu ant Potamku juſu [...] Exod. 16.32.

In later dictionaries, too, išlaikytojis is associated, as in C, with sustaining—feeding, caring for, protecting, and defending; cf.: Erhalter, Išlaikytojis, ojo, m. Rvl 124 II₇; Erhalter Išlaikytojis Syr 49,17. vid. Ernehrer, Belčhirmer B 423₅₂; Ernehrer. Papennėtojis, Išlaikytojis B 427₄₄, and so on.

Did the word išganytojis raise doubts only for the fable’s translator and that unnamed person, or also for other members of the speech community? The meaning of any word as a conventional sign cannot arise without an awareness of the real-world object and its mental counterpart in people’s consciousness. When an existing object needs to be named, its essential features are registered in consciousness, and a certain mental counterpart (reflection) of it is formed. The other members of that society must form the same counterpart: meaning is determined by the way that thing is perceived in the society’s consciousness, by general agreement (Jakaitienė 2010: 18, 46–48). Was the connection in the society’s consciousness between the signifier (expression) of the word išganytojis and its signified (meaning) not firm?

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological beginnings in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegrün- detes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

The answer must be sought in other sources from Lithuania Minor dating to the late seventeenth and first half of the eighteenth century.

In one of the chronologically oldest lexicographic sources—the manuscript Lex—išganytojis (2x) is given as the equivalent of two German words: 1) Heiland (1x); 2) Seeligmacher (1x). A similar use of išganytojo (6x) is also found in C: 1) the equivalent of Heiland is Ißganytojis (5x); 2) Seeligmacher – Ißganytojis (1x); compare the equivalents and derivational families:

Lex 49₂₆–₂₉ Saviour Ißganitojis Salvation Ißganimas Salvific Ißganitingas, a

Lex 79₈–₁₁ Saviour Ißganitojis To save Ißganyti Saved Ißganytas, Ißganitingas, a Salvation Ißganimas

C I 924₁₆–925₇ Saviour. Ißganytojis, ô. M. Salvation. Ißgánimas, ô. M. Holy. Sȝwentas, ô. M. ta, ôs. F. tay. Adverb: Holy. Sȝwencȝu, au, fu, ti Salvific Ißganitingas, ô. M. ga, ôs. F. gay.

C I 877₁₈–₂₀ Heiland. Ißganytojis, ô. M. || Apart from me there is no savior: Be mane nera Ißgany= || tojo, Efz. 44,11.

C II 1131₁₉–₂₀ To make blessed. Ißganau, niau, nyfu, nyti. Seeligmacher. Ißganytojis, jô, M.

C II 532₁₂–₁₃ Blessed Ißganitingas, ô. M. ga, ôs. F. gay. Blessedness Ißganimas, ô. M.

H išganytojis (3x) is likewise the equivalent of the same two German words: 1) Heiland (2x); 2) Seeligmacher; compare: 1) Ißganytojis, jô der Heyland, Seeligmacher I dec. gen. masc. H 40 I₃₄–₃₆; Heyland Ißganytojis H 185 I₃₃; 2) Seeligmacher Ißganytojis H 206 II₁₈; compare also the base word išganyti: Ißganyti feelig machen, pf. nau. praet. niau. futur. nyfu H 40 I₂₇–₂₉; Seelig machen ißganyti H 206 II₁₇.

B išganytojis (3x) is likewise the equivalent of two German words, but one of them differs from those in the earlier dictionaries: 1) Heiland (2x); 2) Erlöjer (1x); compare: 1) Heiland Salvator vid Heyland. Ißgélbētojis Judic 3,9. [etc.] Ißganytojis Luc 1,47. C 2,11 B 654₁₁–₁₂; Heyland Ißganytojis vid Heiland B 695₄₄; 2) Erlöfer Ißgelbētojis Job 19,25. Ißganytojis. ψ 19,15 Atpirktojis Ißwaddātojis B 426₅₇. The base word išganyti occurs in the following dictionary entries: 1) Machen feelig ißganyti B 890₅₈; 2) Erlölen. Atpirkti. Ebr 2,15. Ißganyti. Ißgelbēti Gen 48,16. Exod 15,13 ißbwalnyti Judic 6,36

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

Ißwaddūti. Exod 6,6. Atwaddūti. ψ 14,7 B 890_53–56. The participle išganytas occurs twice in illustrative examples (B 743₂₁ and B 985₃₃).

R išganytojis (6x) is already the equivalent of three German words: 1) Heiland (3x); 2) Erlöfer (2x); 3) Seeligmacher (1x), cf.: 1) Ißgánytojis, ojo, m. der Heyland Rlv 35 II₃₆; 2) Erlöfer, Ißgelbėtojis, ojo, m. Ißganytojis, jo, m. Atpirktojis, jo, m. Ißwadótojis jo, m. Ißwadótojis, jo, m. Rvl 126 I_14–16; 3) Seligmacher, Ißganytojis, jo, m. Rvl 324 II_26–27.

None of the aforementioned lexicographical sources contains the word išganytojis, which is derived from išganyti ‘to let grazing animals eat up or trample (crops, a meadow)’. The verb išganyti in this sense is first found in B, where it occurs in two dictionary entries: 1) Ausfretzen Ißganyti, nuganyti vid abfretzen hat das gantze Feld ausfretzen laßen Wiʃʃa Lauka iß- nugáne B 163_1–2; 2) [Ausweiden] abfretzen Nu- Ißgannÿti B 177₄₅. Compare also R: 1) abäßen, abfretzen, nuganàu, ißganàu Rvl 3 I_30–31; 2) ausweiden, Ißganàu Rvl 49 II₁₉. In the Lithuanian–German section, R distinguishes two meanings of išganyti in one place and three in another; in both cases, however, the derivative išganytojis in the dictionary entry on the following line has an equivalent associated not with the aforementioned literal meaning but with the figurative meaning ‘to preserve; to save, deliver’, cf.:

Rlv 49 II_4–6 Ißganàu, 1. I pasture, 2. I redeem.

Ißgánytojis, jo, m. a redeemer.

Rlv 35 II_32–37 Ißganàu, 1. I pasture the meadows, etc. ans, 2. I redeem, make blessed, 3. I pasture to the end, ṅiau, ißu, iti.

Ißgánytojis, ojo, m. the Savior.

In light of the data in the dictionaries of Lithuania Minor, it may be assumed that associating išganytojas with grazing was a meaning understood differently by only one or a few individuals, and that this equivalent took shape only in their minds. The words išganytojis and išlaikytojis may have been synonymous, but not across their entire semantic range—only in one sense. Perkūnas poses a rhetorical question: where is there a language in which no word is used in several different ways? Thus, he regarded polysemy as a regular feature of the Lithuanian language system.

Differences in understanding are usually caused by differences in experience, education, and imagination. The unnamed person was very probably Mörlin. Perkūnas most likely heard this rationale for the work from him in oral discussions. It is almost certain that the non-use of išganytojo in EP is indeed connected with Mörlin’s participation in translating the fables. Unlike most other clergymen who served in Lithuanian parishes, Mörlin began learning Lithuanian as an adult, and therefore reflected more on language, analyzed it, and sought structural and semantic relationships among words. This constant reflection enabled him, better than local clergymen,

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

The rudiments of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

to sense, too, the shortcomings of ecclesiastical language, above all the gap between spoken and written language. In his treatise, Mörlin declared the principle of speaking to Lithuanians with little education (unable either to read or write) in words they could understand, and proposed not only eliminating all non-Lithuanian words, but also avoiding neologisms, archaisms, and ambiguous words (MP 4–16). Ambiguous words must be “freed from ambiguity” so that they do not cause confusion (MP 15). Yet, with the rhetorical question mentioned above, Perkūnas showed that the relationship between expression and content cannot be understood simplistically: one expression does not necessarily correspond to one lexical meaning.

Perkūnas, too, considered possibilities for language standardization and sought ways to regulate and organize language, but he saw language problems elsewhere than Mörlin did. Perkūnas regarded pronunciation and accentuation as important objects of spoken-language standardization, and orthography as the object for written language. It was here that he first identified violations of the rule of identity (adequacy): some EP forms do not convey information with the precision language users need (on identity [adequacy] as one of the criteria of language planning, see Haugen 1994: 23), thereby causing communication difficulties.

Perkūnas drew attention to the fact that Lithuanian has words spelled alike but pronounced differently according to the position of the stress or the pitch accent, and having different meanings—that is, homographs. For example, the unaccented phrase Malkas kertant misled the reader of EP (PB 5₂₀). For malkas means ‘a gulp, a swallow’. For the word in the phrase cited to be understood not as a gulp but as sticks for fuel, the first a must be lengthened and the plural accusative pronounced Málkas. In seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Lithuania Minor, both lexemes were used: malkas masculine ‘a gulp, a swallow’ and málka feminine ‘a stick for fuel’; cf. Lex: Trunck Malkas Lex 89a and Holtz Malka Lex 50a; C: Trunck. Malkas, ô. M. C II 603 and Holtz. Medis, džio. M. Málka, os. F. Medégas, ô. M. C I 969; H: Trunck Malkas H 212 II₆; R: Trunk, Schluck, Malkas, ko, m. Rvl 357 I₃₂ and Brennholz, Málka, ôs, f. Rvl 84 I₄₀; B: Bitter Trunck Kartus malk’s gérimo Jer 8,14 B 265 and Holtz Malka B 723, and so on.

In Perkūnas’s view, a similar ambiguity also arises in the utterance Gaidys kâsdam’s Meſzlufe (PB 10₁₄). The word kâsdam’s, if it has the longest â, means “mordens, beißende” [biting, mordant], and derives from kándu: kâsdam’s or kánsdām’s. Here, the circumflex (the roof-shaped mark) cannot be written (PB 10). Thus, he considered duration of pronunciation to be the principal feature of Lithuanian pitch accent. In his view, the circumflex should mark the very longest vowel, but by no means a short one⁵. Another example is the conjunction jei, which should be stressed on é so that

⁵ In Perkūnas’s examples, the circumflex is most often written where modern standard Lithuanian has an acute rather than a circumflex pitch accent, cf.: iſžbêgo PB 5₁₆, nutwêres PB 5₁₉, iſžwartót, kawôt PB 11₁₆, ijžmôkſi PB 11₂₀, apfidéjes PB 12₁₄, pradėjo PB 12₁₄, rūſčiey PB 12₂₀, turret’s PB 13_3–4, ſugrêbes PB 13₁₁, Mûsû PB 18₈, and so on.

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

to differ from the feminine dative jei ‘to her’ PB 11_4–6. The translator’s errors show that Perkūnas understood that both stress position and pitch accent serve a distinctive function in Lithuanian. His proposal to mark stress would indeed have helped distinguish homographs.

Perkūnas not only reproached the translator for disregarding orthography and accentuation, but also proposed solutions: to avoid ambiguities, all Lithuanian words should be accented, as is done in Greek (PB 23). The coincidence or similarity of word forms, which creates obstacles in communication, seemed to Perkūnas as much of a problem as the use of incomprehensible words. Moreover, incorrect spelling also adversely affects style (Stylum)—making it unattractive and therefore unpersuasive and ineffective.

A distinctive feature of PB is its reflection of an understanding of the lexical-semantic system of language. Syntagmatic relations are the first to be noted. The corrections show that Perkūnas sensed that the translation contained faulty word combinations, formed without regard for the lexical combinability (lexical valency) customary in living speech, and thus violating the principle of semantic compatibility (on this, see Jakaitienė 1988: 70–74; Jakaitienė ²2010: 62–63), cf.:

PB 12_26–13₂ l. 2. Wandenelį įpurwini. Der Vulgus redt: ſadrumſti. || Denn ſie ſtanden am fließenden Waſſer / jei gyw’s || oder tekkas wandenėlis buwo, kaipogi galejo jį ſapur- || winti.

PB 12_24–25 p. 5. l. 1. With vigorous words. Vulgus: With painful words. Smarkus || is used of the deed.

PB 14_1–2 l. 14. y paczę Gillybe iedama. Vulgus ſagt: i pacė Gyle || nunerdama.

PB 21_3–4 p. 20. l. 4 The Gallic rooster climbed to the highest airs of Heaven. Every= || time the Vulgus says: to the very sky.

Perkūnas also corrected those word combinations in which he considered grammatical combinability to have been violated, cf.:

PB 13_19–21 l. 12. Legs Vulgus: Kojós with the genitive. For I say || instead: pri Kojós prifirifzti dumies; prifirifzdinu Kojós, and || not: Kojai.

PB 15₂₁ l. 7. tai jžtráukt. Vulgus: ta jžtráukt’ namely: Kàula.

PB 17_7–8 l. 12. The sow met the donkey. Vulgus says: Kiaule with the accusative. V. C. Jurgis met Ansa, Petras met Paula

PB 17₁₃ p. 13. l. 2. Are you providing for yourself? Vulgus: for you.

PB 17_23–24 p. 16. l. 2. I will not wait for that time. Vulgus says: for that time. For example: || we will not wait for rain, fair weather, summer.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Fundamentals of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Well-Founded Considerations on the Ten Fables of Aesop Translated into Lithuanian and the Passionate Dedication of the Same (1706)

Another type of systematic semantic relations recognized by Perkūnas that should be distinguished is synonymic relations. This is a type of paradigmatic relation (on lexical-semantic paradigms, see Jakaitienė 1988: 84–86; Jakaitienė ²2010: 71–80). Perkūnas used the term synonym (2x; Synonyma PB 13₂₃, Synonyma PB 21₇), and provided both pairs and series of synonyms, cf.:

PB 13₂₂–₂₈ l. 13. and of the edge of the swamp, and going along the bank. Pur- ‖ wynas means a swampy place / where there is no water. Synonyms ‖ are: Klampyne, Lekmėne, Makône, Lutynas &.

PB 18₁₂–₁₄ l. 17. a grey pea. Vulgus says: a dappled pea, a grey ‖ pea / a grey-haired man «err. grey-haired», a grey hair / a grey ‖ coat / a grey horse.

PB 21₇ l. 8. Tiežė. Vulgus: Dežė, Synonyma: Kurkulaj, Geldelės.

In the first example, with the noun purvynas, he gave a series of four synonyms: klampynė, lekmenė, makonė, liūtynas, where purvynas is regarded as the dominant term, and klampynė, lekmenė, makonė, liūtynas as members of the synonym series. In the second example, the adjective pilkas is regarded as the dominant term; the synonym series consists of three members: rainas, žilas, šir̃mas; in the third, the dominant term is dėžė ‘shell’, and the members of the synonym series are two nouns: kurkulai, geldelės.

In the first case, the dominant term and all the members can be substituted for one another, while in the second case this is limited: the relations between the dominant term and members of the synonym series are hierarchical and close to those between hyperonyms and hyponyms. In terms of semantic similarity, the former are considered absolute synonyms, the latter differential ideographic synonyms. This is probably why Perkūnas did not identify the latter as synonyms, although in all three cases he understood the words as sharing a semantic feature.

Later, in his manuscript Meletema (1735), Ruigys gave similar examples to demonstrate the richness of the Lithuanian language: Germans use the same word grau to describe a man, a horse, a homespun coat, and peas, whereas Lithuanians express these differently: žillas wÿr’s, βirmas arba βÿwas arklys, pilka sermėgà, raini arba būri žirnei (RgM 82). These examples were especially popularized by his printed treatise Consideration of the Lithuanian Language in Its Origin, Nature, and Characteristics, which presented the same idea and the same examples: Wyrs žillas, Arklys βirmas, Sermėga pilkà, Žirnei raini arba būri (RgB 70). Nevertheless, it was Perkūnas, not Ruigys, who first formulated and published this synonym series (cf. Fig. 3).

Perkūnas’s criticisms of the translator most often concern, in his view, the choice of an unsuitable word. In correcting it, he usually proposes another differential ideographic synonym, sometimes two or more, cf.:

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

3 FIG. PB 18_12–14: a series of synonyms: rainas, žilas, pilkas, širnas;

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München: 4 A. gr. b. 80

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

The beginnings of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

PB 13₁₁ l. 22. nutweres. Vulgus: ſugrebēs.

PB 14_1–2 l. 14. and entering the pit. Vulgus says: and falling into the same pit.

PB 14_7–8 l. 19. del tokio ſmerczio ſaw newerto taw negallu atdut. || Vulgus ſagt hier: Gálo v. c. baiſie Gála turrėjo.

PB 15_7–9 p. 10. l. 1. y wiena draugyſtę ſuſſiejo. Vulgus: i wiena || Dái̇kta ſuſ’ego, likewise also sometimes: i wiena drauge or || draugen’.

PB 15_11–12 l. 4. y kėturis dalykus iſždallijus. Vulgus: i Dalykus pėrda-|| lyjus, or paſkyrus.

PB 15_18–19 p. 11. l. 3. duwoſtojáſi (err. buwo ſtojáſi. kâulas kakle. Vulgus ſagt beſſer: || i remes or: ſpringſójo, likewise: rymôjo kakle.

PB 19_20–21 p. 18. l. 10. Maiſztui palówus. Vulgus: Nukirmui palowus || or plainly: nutilus.

PB 20₃ l. 15. blogo penukſzlo. Vulgus: práſto Maiſto.

Seeing such corrections, it seems that Perkūnas did not acknowledge that the same content can have several modes of expression, that the same thing can be named by several words, in one case highlighting one feature of the thing named, and in another, a different one (on the relationship between synonymy and polysemy, see Jakaitienė ²2010: 130–131). Yet he gives synonyms not only when making corrections, but also in the illustrative examples he provides himself, that is, in examples from living speech. Although in many cases he does not explicitly identify them as synonyms, the connecting words oder, das ist, imgleichen, zuweilen auch or simply a dash between words attest to the synonymic relations between the words he gives, cf.:

PB 10_28–29 Meſzluſe or Mežinij’ || gul’. It lies in the manure.

PB 14_20–24 Penukſzlas, however, means among the Vulgo: a fattening=pig / they especially say this of pigs. Penukſzlas, that is, kawôjem’s, pé- || nim’s Meitelis. V. C. Neſzkit’, dukit’ Penukſzliui ſówalo. ||Give feed to the fattening=pig.

PB 19_22–201 l. 11. krutancze ſžirdže. Vulgus: drébancze, or: ſžirdis || lekėtûj, krûpčoj’, &c. for as long as a person lives, the heart must move

PB 18₂₅ l. 2. Smertij’ neſuláuſki. Vulgus: padwėſuſi, numirruſi

PB 23_16–17 A fable is an invented, imagined thing, || although it has never existed.

Thus Perkūnas highlighted the resources of Lithuanian synonymy and, at the same time, demonstrated the variation in how certain concepts are expressed. In writing the treatise, he carried out a comparative analysis of the variation in how particular concepts are expressed. In writing the treatise, he carried out a comparative

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

analysis: he assessed those variants and proposed the best one. The results also demonstrate his own ability to name things in reality in different ways, taking account of the variety of their attributes.

Systemic relations between words with opposite meanings, that is, between antonyms, are reflected in PB only once. One notable antonym pair is domestic – wild (of flowers). It shares a common comparative basis—the attribute of where they grow. Another pair based on a similar attribute of location could be domestic – woodland (of animals), but in this case the first member is not specified, while the second is offered instead of wild, since, according to Perkūnas, this word is not used of animals in popular speech; that is, wild (non-domestic) beasts and birds are called woodland, rather than wild, cf.:

PB 17_1–6 l. 11. A Wild Sow. The common people never speak thus, but= || rather: Medinne kiaule, and likewise: medinne žaſis, ántis; || but of flowers they say: Laukinne, e.g. laukinnes || Rožes, woſilkos &c. to distinguish them from those that grow in || gardens and are called namminnes.

Among the social aspects of the lexicon, the correction of the conjunction jeib—its replacement by jei or kad—is worth noting. It may be assumed that Perkūnas regarded the conjunction jeib as obsolete and receding from active use, that is, as an archaism. This conjunction may have appeared in the fable translation under the influence of religious texts, in which it was still used in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It is recorded in the grammars of Kleinas and Sapūnas and Šulcas—jeib, together with jei, jog, idant, is often added in conjugation paradigms to verbs in the subjunctive mood; cf.: jev / jeib / idant wadin̄namas bučia KlG 104₂; Jeib / jog / idant fakýčia KlG 113₅; (Jeib / idant) mylėčia KlC 74₉; jeib iškada nebūtu KlG 167₆; Jeib daugiaus nėſluſitum̄bim Griekui ŠŠG 79₆. jeib was also included in dictionaries (Lex, C, H, B, R), but, according to Perkūnas, the conjunction jeib is hardly ever heard in popular speech, especially in causal clauses. In its place, people say jei, but most often kad. Mörlin used the conjunction jeib when teaching the catechism, as attested by the example of Mörlin’s language cited by Perkūnas in PB 7_2–3; cf.:

PB 11_4–9 l. 10. jeib butu Kwieczu Grudas. The common people say: jėi’, they drop || the b and place the accent on é to distinguish it from || the Dative feminine, jei, ‘her’. But here they use || kad; for the word jeib, as a causal conjunction, is scarcely heard among them; rather, they say: Sakyk kad || parneſztu, liep̄k kad ateitu &c.

PB 15₂₀ l. 5. jeib Snápa ikijžufi. The common people say: kad Snápa &c.

PB 7_2–3 Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live well on earth.

Perkūnas’s remark about the conjunction jeib was intended to show that Mörlin and his follower Šulcas failed to observe yet another of their declared principles: using only the most common,

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Fundamentals of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

the best-known words, understood throughout the region. As an example of a word understood within a limited area and therefore unsuitable for use, Mörlin had given the verb būti praet. 3 bit MP 15–16.

Perkūnas’s treatise also provides data on lexical pragmatics or, more broadly, linguistic pragmatics, which examines how linguistic units reveal the relationships among what is said, the communication situation, and its participants—the speaker and the addressee (on lexical pragmatics, see Jakaitienė ²2010: 143–167). By dividing the text of PB into separate speech acts, or discourses (for their conception, see also Karaliūnas 2008: 211), and analyzing their components—locution (the utterance itself), illocution (the communicative intention expressed by the speaker through the utterance), and perlocution (the effect of the utterance on the addressee)—as well as the pragmatic context, one can assess both communicative purposes and the social and psychological relationships between the participants in communication. This treatise is an interesting source for the study of social interaction and language as the principal means of communication; however, researchers of German would be better placed to undertake this study.

2. ETYMOLOGY: LOANWORDS

As the history of standard languages shows, language planners generally select among variants according to several criteria: 1) effectiveness (efficiency)—an effective variant is one that users can easily understand and use; 2) identity (adequacy)—the variant, or its form, must convey information with the degree of precision users require; 3) acceptability—the variant, or its form, must conform to customary language norms (established usage) and be acceptable to leaders (Haugenas 1994, 22–25). Mörlin particularly emphasized one more criterion—that of purity: a variant must be genetically pure, indigenous. He proposed eliminating all words of foreign origin, that is, loanwords, regardless of the language from which they came. Even if they are in widespread use and understood by many, they remain foreign. In the absence of an equivalent Lithuanian word, it is supposedly better to use a periphrasis or description (MP 6–8). Mörlin drew on Rudolph Goclenius’s Latin grammar Observationum linguae Latinae⁶, which discusses an improper yet universal practice: the error of the majority, or a public and widespread error, does not create a rule of language; a multitude of those who err cannot justify an error (MP 17). Nevertheless, Mörlin was inconsistent—in another part of the treatise, he demanded that those ecclesiastical words (which he calls Ecclesiastica, mostly Polonisms) that have not become established in public and

⁶ Rudolphas Goklenijus (vok. Rudolph Gockel [Göckel] d.Ä., 1547–1628) – Marburgo universiteto filosofijos, metafizikos ir etikos profesorius. Jo gramatika Mörlinui buvo priimtina dėl to, kad joje daug dėmesio skirta praktinei lotynų kalbos vartosenai, graikų, hebrajų, vokiečių ir lotynų kalbų interferencijai (plg. MP 7–8, 10–11, 14, 16–24; žr. taip pat Drotvinas 2008: 142–145).

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

private usage be removed from books, as they are said not to be used prie Nammû (MP 6–7). It should be understood that if they have already become established, they may be left in.

Perkūnas noticed this inconsistency and reproached the translator of the fables for using so many loanwords. Although Šulcas himself said in the preface to EP that he had wanted to try whether it was possible to render the fables “in pure, genuine, and good Lithuanian words that even an ordinary Lithuanian would understand” (“mit puren / echten / und guten Litauſchen Worten / die auch ein gemeiner Littau verſtehet” EP 3v), the translation contains many Slavicisms and some Germanisms. This reproach by Perkūnas is among the most serious, pointing above all to theoretical contradictions in Mörlin’s treatise. Perkūnas notes that MP inveighs against words borrowed long ago from Polish and other languages, although they are still used and understood. The opposition native – foreign testifies to Mörlin’s effort to draw clear boundaries and create barriers preventing a foreign word from becoming native. Perkūnas ironically remarked that views on loanwords had apparently already changed, since the translation contains many words whose relationship to, and origin in, other languages had already been demonstrated:

PB 5_29–6₁₃ Dann ſo finde ich auch eine Contradiction in dieſen || Fabeln. Es ſoll dieſe Überſetzung eine Probe und Exem= || pel ſeyn / wie im Rubrô ſteht / nachdem in Principio Lingu. || Lith. gethanem Vorſchlage / allwo der Autor ſehr erhitzt || iſt / über die aus der Polniſchen und andern Sprachen / || vor alten Zeiten hergeleitete und numehro bräuchliche / || verſtändliche Wörter / wenn er unter andern ſagt: Und || geſetzt / daß ſie auch uſu recepta, ſo ſolte man doch kein || Sammelſurium oder Potage aus frembden Sprachen ma= || chen / [et]c. allein hier bemercke ich / daß dieſe ungegrun= || dete Meinung ſey geändert und unterſchiedene frembde || Wörter gebraucht worden / als: Skárbas, Geſas ‹err. Čeſas, Liût’s, || Stukis, Slúžma, Pons, Gazpadinne, Mieftas, Naktis, [et]c. || welche Verwandſchafft und Herleitung aus andern || Sprachen / anderwerts iſt erwiesen worden.

Among the loanwords Perkūnas lists here, most are Slavicisms (skarbas, čėsas, slūžma, liūtas, miestas, gaspadinė, ponas), and only one is a Germanism (stukis). Among the loanwords is also naktis, inherited from Proto-Indo-European. EP uses lexical loans that entered Lithuanian at various times; most had become established not only in religious writings but also in spoken language. EP contains few rare loanwords (e.g., Elwantû ‘elephant’ EP 17₄, Prabajus ‘door latches’ EP 18₂), because attempts were made to translate the names of objects from foreign cultures descriptively. Perkūnas criticized this approach too (for example, he considered the first sentence of the very first fable incomprehensible: GAidys kásdam’s Mėſzlufę / brangû baltû Akmenelû vieną Mėžinį’ rado EP 1₆–₈—which did he find, a diamond or a pearl? PB 9₂₃–₂₆), but he did not propose changing it and did not seek substitutes himself.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological foundations in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

It is, of course, worth asking why Mėrlinas tolerated so many loanwords in his translation of the fables, although one of the most important principles of language standardization was indeed the pursuit of linguistic purity. Most likely, he did not distinguish them from words of Lithuanian origin and did not consider them foreignisms. This is suggested, for instance, by the examples with which he illustrates how he himself replaces foreignisms with supposedly Lithuanian words gromata and prova: “Ich lage von der Epiftel auff Littauiſch Gromata” MP 9_6–7; “An ſtatt des Gerichts / bey den Iuden / von 3 Män̄ern / ſage: Maǯauſa Źydû Prowa” MP 9_23–24.

Perkūnas replaced some of the Slavicisms used by EP, as well as hybrids derived from them, with words used by the people, but did not explicitly state his reason for making these changes. His sole and principal argument for proposing an alternative was popular usage (“Vulgus”); cf.:

PB 17_10–12 l. 14. to persuade amicably. Vulgus: to speak kindly.

PB 14_25–26 l. 9. [...] ku ſzęfu. ‖ Vulgus: at some time.

PB 15₁ l. 15. not thinking of anything else. Vulgus: being unaware.

PB 16₁₉ p. 12. l. ult. winter’s Geſe‹err. Céle›. Vulgus rather: winter.

PB 16₂₈ l. 6. A mortal wound was inflicted. Vulgus: was irreparably wounded.

PB 14_7–8 l. 19. for such a death I cannot repay you for your kindness. ‖ Vulgus says here: He had the strength, e.g., the strength of a bear.

PB 18₂₅ l. 2. You will not escape death. Vulgus: having passed away, having died

There are several cases in which, when making corrections, Perkūnas himself offered a similar loanword or hybrid—either in place of a Lithuanian word (less often) or in place of another loanword or hybrid (more often); cf.:

PB 13₁₆ l. 19. it seemed to be worth saying thank you; Vulgus: it seemed, or be.

PB 13₁₇ p. 7. l. 6. Opponent. Vulgus. Adversary.

PB 15₂ l. 20. not dishonored. Vulgus rather: without dishonor

PB 18₁₅ l. ult. Much wine. Vulgus: sour wine.

PB 18₂₃ p. 16. l. 2. you will not escape that time. Vulgus says: of that time.

PB 20₄ l. 16. afz I wish. Vulgus: b{ę}ſwėliju.

Numerous loanwords (mostly Slavicisms) occur in PB sentences and phrases with which Perkūnas, commenting on a word or phrase being corrected, additionally illustrated colloquial usage; cf.:

PB 10₂₅ Walking along the road, along the river

PB 12_13–15 A boy, having put on a hare’s disguise, began to frighten the geese; but they got scared, took to flight, ran, shrieked, and hid

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Fundamentals of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise A Well-Founded Consideration of the Ten Fables of Aesop Translated into Lithuanian and Their Passionate Dedication (1706)

⁴ FIG. Quandt 4 34v: entry about the manuscript of Perkūnas’s Lithuanian dictionary and collection of Lithuanian proverbs; GStA PK: XX. HA Hist. StA Königsberg, Hs. 2

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

PB 14_17–18 The wolves, seeking food, drove the children into the forest and down to the river

PB 14₂₂ A little boy, that is / a shepherd boy, a little boy.

PB 19_6–7 The house is kept for guests, || or for a wedding

PB 23_16–17 A fairy tale is an invented, imagined thing, || although it never existed

Perkūnas also used the term Germanism, but applied it not to a word, but to a phrase:

PB 14_4–6 I. 19. And seeing his own downfall before his eyes. A || fine Germanism. Vulgus: And seeing the horse, she said it had run away.

When assessing the lexicon recorded in PB by origin and age—that is, from the perspective of genetic differentiation of the lexicon—the words can be analyzed as inherited words and neologisms used in the early eighteenth century (for these concepts, see Urbutis 2008: 308–310). PB contains many words belonging to the oldest layer of Lithuanian vocabulary, considered Indo-European inherited words, as well as Baltic and Slavic commonalities and words characteristic of Baltic and Lithuanian alone. Most of the loanwords used in these sources—Slavicisms and Germanisms—also arose during a distinct period in the history of the Lithuanian language (for an overview of loanwords, see Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2008: 154–159). The fairly extensive presentation of loanwords in PB can be interpreted in two ways: either they were not recognized as loanwords, or the intention was to show that they were a normal feature of the Lithuanian language. In summary, Perkūnas did not impose such strict requirements on the origin of words as Mörlin did. Although he understood that some words had come from other languages, he did not draw a strict line between native and foreign words, did not restrict their domains of use, and did not insist that they be replaced with Lithuanian ones. He would probably not have devoted so much attention to loanwords had he not noticed inconsistencies in Mörlin’s theory and Šulc’s practice.

3. PHRASEOLOGY

Both Mörlin and Perkūnas acknowledged the existence of specific word combinations that provide information about realities perceived by people in distinctive ways and name them not directly, but figuratively; thus they distinguished a specific stratum of the lexicon, known in lexicology as phraseological units. Mörlin was the first to note that Lithuanian contains expressions that cannot be translated literally into German and other languages. He took the idea that metaphors, allegories, proverbs, maxims, and expressions are untranslatable in a qualified sense from Goclenius’s grammar, and also drew on a similar view expressed by the Italian humanist, philologist, and poet Julius Caesar Scaliger (1484–1558) (MP 21–23).

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological Foundations in Jakob Perkūnas’s Treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

Both Mörlin and Perkūnas used the Latin term idiotismus. In PB, two examples are described by this term, and it is used once more in summarizing the translation of the fables as contrary to Lithuanian speech:

PB 11₁₇–₂₇ That an Idio- || tifmus be: Jáúcies gywet is considered acceptable / but it does not fit here. The Vulgus says: Nežinnójei Jáúcíeis gywet, || that is / ár’t, įžmókſi gywet’ Arkleis. They use this word = || propriè in reference to farming. Ne tur ne Plàuko (Gal- || wijù) ku gywes? He has no cattle with hooves / with what will he work the field?

PB 15₅–₆ l. 12. Nafrus atweres. Vulgus, according to its Idiotifmo, says: || įſſizójes įžmete.

PB 21₉–₁₃ As is now evident from all this, the ten || little fables, which would scarcely fill one sheet, || run entirely counter to Lithuanian = || idiotifmum and thus || contra Vulgus, about which needless words are made / || headlong.

Neither of the two word combinations cited here (Jáúcies gywet PB 11₁₈, įſſizójes įžmete PB 15₆) can be classified as idioms according to the contemporary understanding of idiom (see Burger ⁴2⁰10: 85–105, Jakaitienė ²2010: 286–288), that is, as phraseological units that are wholly unmotivated semantically and whose components, considered individually, have been desemanticized. They are rather free word combinations of living speech. Only Jáúcies gywet PB 11₁₈ may be regarded as a stable combination, a so-called collocation (for the concept, see Marcinkevičienė 2001: 83–85; Burger ⁴2⁰10: 52–55; Jakaitienė ²2010: 281), or as a tropic phraseological unit, but not as an idiom. Perkūnas’s use of idiotismus should be understood in two ways: as ‘a distinctive expression’ and as ‘customary usage’. A similar understanding of the term is found in MP and EP as well (see MP 3₂–₆, MP 16₂₇–₃₁, MP 21₁₁–₂₃, EP [2]₁₄–₂₁, EP 3₁–₃); compare MP:

MP 3₂–₆ Some of these have become so pertinaces that they will let nothing pass = || without paffiren if it is even slightly suspect to them = || and does not accord with their Idiotifmo.

MP 16₂₇–₁₇₁ Und denſelben muß man fleißig || examiniren ex Idiotifmis hujus linguæ: und alle Reden || und Redens=Arten / die mit dem Deutſchen überein || kommen / müſſen vor ſuſpect gehalten und angeſehen wer= || den / und ſind daher nicht ſicher zu gebrauchen / ſondern || vielmehr zu meiden / und zu verwerffen

MP 21₁₁–₂₃ To this category belong first and foremost the = || Idiotifmi Lithvanici, huic || lingæ proprii ac ſingulares loquendi modi. And these are not found in the grammar. And even if there are any, they are at least few [...] One will then be able to see and recognize the difference, quod aliud ſit Grammaticè, || & aliud Idioticè & Lithvanicè loqui.

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

Mörlin argued that idioms could be used to distinguish native words from loanwords, and that all words and expressions coinciding with German ones should be regarded as suspect. Such coinciding forms should be avoided and excluded from collections of Lithuanian words and proverbs (MP 16, 22–23). PB contains numerous fixed expressions—both motivated and unmotivated—as well as sentences resembling proverbs; compare:

PB 14₁₂ Krauje fawo atgaut ‘to avenge oneself, to settle accounts’

PB 14₉ Gala faw pafidaryfu ‘I will kill myself’

PB 14₈ baijie Gála turrėjo ‘died a terrible death’

PB 15₃ Pedas įdut ‘to teach, advise, offer an idea’

PB 15_7–8 i viena || Dáikta fuſ’ego ‘into a pile, together, in one place’

PB 16₁₆ Diaw’s ‹err. Diew’s› mane įſž tu Bedū įſžgane ‘saved me’

PB 18_7–8 Pade’ || Die’s! ‘said as a greeting to someone at work’

PB 5₁₆ He had already caught a hare, but it only escaped

PB 11_19–20 Nežinnojei Jaučieis gywet, || that is, ‘it is appropriate’, įžmóhſi gywet’ Arkleis

PB 11_15–16 Buwo Diew’s dáwes, || but did not know how to use or handle them

PB 11_21–22 Doesn’t he have even a tuft of hair (of a horse’s mane) to live on?

PB 11₂₇ Having outlived me, where will you find another?

PB 12₃ I have lived out my days with my own cattle

PB 13₁₄ fearing neither God nor the devil

It is known that Perkūnas himself also recorded Lithuanian sayings, proverbs, and expressions. Mörlin mentioned his collection as large and valuable, and wished it to be circulated and expanded—not with German forms, but with “pure” Lithuanian ones—and supplemented with explanations, as Erasmus of Rotterdam had done in his collection of proverbs⁷:

MP 22_24–23 §. 33. Drum iſt die Arbeit des Tit. Herrn Pfar= || rern von Walterkehm / Perkuhnii, ein vieles werth / || der einen ziemlichen Vorrath von Sprüch=Wörtern zufam= || men getragen hat. Nur das eine verlange ich dabey / daß ſie || dilatiret / und propter copiam vocabularum (wenn ja || Tit. Herr Walterkehmer ſelbſt ſo eine groſſe Arbeit nicht über || ſich nehmen wolte [etc.]) nicht mit Germanifmis angefüllet / || ſondern von einem puren Littauen ampliciret / und mit an= || dern Worten gegeben werden. Erafmus hat ſeine Proverbia weitläufig genug gemachet.

⁷ Erasmus of Rotterdam (Erasmus [Desiderius] von Rotterdam, 1469–1536) published a collection of 818 proverbs and sayings by classical authors in Paris in 1500Adagia, and in 1536 a commented collection of 3,260 items was issued. Reprinted many times, it remained popular in the eighteenth century.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological beginnings in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

Perkūnas also wrote a German–Lithuanian dictionary. Ruigys had seen it, but knew nothing of the dictionary’s subsequent fate (R 2v–3r)⁸. Jonas Jokūbas Kvantas (Johann Jacob Quandt, 1686–1772) also mentions Perkūnas’s dictionary and a collection of several hundred proverbs when describing the pastors of the parish of Valtarkiemis (cf. Fig. 4):

Quandt 4 34r 1690. Jacob Perkuhn, pastor of Ißdagga. [...] He has a handwritten Lithuanian dictionary and also some centuries of Lithuanian proverbs in manuscript^to [reilaße[n]

Neither the dictionary nor the collection of proverbs has survived⁹, but their mention in two eighteenth-century sources leaves no doubt that in the early eighteenth century people began recording expressions and specific word combinations with a unified meaning, distinguished by their fixedness and vividness, and conveying information about a distinctive perception of reality and the expression of thoughts and feelings. Mörlin himself, moreover, intended to compile a collection of old Lithuanian proverbs and sayings; he urged others to share what they had and thus build up a substantial store of them (MP 21). Unlike Mörlin, Perkūnas did not raise the question of the origins of phraseological expressions, nor did he classify them as native, borrowed, or translated.

4. CONCLUSIONS

In his treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706, PB), Jokūbas Perkūnas devoted much less attention to theoretical consideration of lexical norms than Michaelis Mörlin did in his treatise Principium primarium in lingua Lithuanica (1706, MP). Perkūnas’s linguistic activity was based more on the practical (empirical) level—on language

⁸ Perkūnas’s predecessor as pastor of the Valtarkiemis parish, Ernestus Dicelijus (Ernestas Dietzelius, Ditzel, 1629–1692), also compiled a dictionary. Perkūnas was his assistant from 1690 to 1692 and later became pastor of the parish. Ruigys arrived in the parish in 1708. He says he relied on Dicelijus’s manuscript (“die locos des fel. Herrn Ernesti Dizelii” R 4r–4v) when preparing the Lithuanian dictionary’s word list. It is likely that Perkūnas took his manuscripts with him to Įsrutis.

⁹ Jurgis Lebedys (1956: 14–16) darė prielaidą, kad LMAVB saugomas priežodžių, patarlių ir mįslių rinkinys Litauische Sprichwörter und Rätsel galbūt galėtų būti priskiriamas Perkūnui, tačiau 2011 m. nustatyta, jog šis rinkinys – Trempų kunigo Jokūbo Brodovskio (Jacob Brodowski, 1692–1744) autografas (Aleknavičienė 2011: 39–72), išskyrus keliolika vėlesnių Gotfrydo Ostermejerio (Gottfried Ostermeier, 1716–1800) prierašų (Aleknavičienė 2012: 23–51). Tad nebelieka pagrindo tiesiogiai sieti jį su Perkūno vardu, juo labiau kad nematyti bent kiek aiškesnio ryšio tarp minėto rinkinio ir PB.

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

the collection, comparison, and presentation of data, but not theoretical generalizations or the making of firm judgments.

Perkūno taisyti Ezopo pasakėčių (1706, EP) žodžiai ir žodžių junginiai rodo, kaip jis suvokė klausimus, kuriuos dabar tiria leksikologija. Perkūnas iškėlė mintį apie lietuvių kalbos žodžių daugiareikšmiškumą, laikydamas jį dėsningu lietuvių kalbos sistemos reiškiniu. Jis parodė, kad raiškos ir turinio santykis negali būti suprantamas supaprastintai: vieną raišką nebūtinai turi atitikti viena leksinė reikšmė.

Perkūnas’s correction of EP word combinations formed without regard for the lexical and grammatical combinability usual in living speech, and in violation of the principle of semantic cohesion, attests to an understanding of the lexical-semantic system—of syntagmatic relations. An understanding of paradigmatic relations is evidenced by the grouping of words into synonym series (the formation of synonymic paradigms). Perkūnas highlighted the resources of Lithuanian synonymy (he used the term Synonyma) and at the same time demonstrated the variability of expression for certain concepts. Although in some cases he tended to narrow the possibilities of expression, the examples he himself provided attest to an ability to name things in reality with due regard for the diversity of their features.

In assessing the language of EP, Perkūnas identified violations of the rule of identity (adequacy) in the lexical domain: the translator made improper use of the resources of the language, found no means of conveying concepts from a distant and unfamiliar culture, and failed to observe the rules of spelling and accentuation. Perkūnas regarded the coincidence or similarity of word forms (homographs), which creates obstacles in the communication process, as just as much a problem as the use of incomprehensible words. In deciding which equivalent would be best, he himself relied both on a quantitative criterion—choosing the more widespread usage—and a qualitative one—seeking forms of expression that best corresponded to the concepts.

Perkūnas’s position on borrowings was not as categorical as Mörlin’s. He took a much more moderate view of their use, holding that non-Lithuanian words that had become established in the language and were in general use should also be retained in written language. His reproaches to the fable translator for the extensive use of borrowings were based on an observed discrepancy between Mörlin’s theoretical requirements and their realization in language Ezopo pasakėčių translation.

Like Mörlin, Perkūnas distinguished the most stable word combinations, which provide information about realities perceived distinctively by people; the term they used, idiotismus, should be understood in two ways: as ‘distinctive expression’ and as ‘customary usage.’ Unlike Mörlin, Perkūnas did not demand a strict distinction between borrowed phraseologisms and native ones.

The terms and claims used by Perkūnas reveal the beginnings of lexicology and allow us to conclude that, quite early on, philological discussion also stimulated the development of linguistic thought in this branch of language science.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

The beginnings of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

SOURCES AND LITERATURE

Aleknavičienė Ona, Schiller Christiane 2002: Rastas antras Michaelio Mörlino Principium primarium in lingua Lithuanica (1706) egzempliorius. – Archivum Lithuanicum 4, 79–98.

Aleknavičienė Ona, Schiller Christiane 2003: Jokūbas Perkuhnas prieš Michąęlį Mö̈rliną, Johanną Schultz̨ą ir Philippą Ruhigą traktate Wolgegründetes Bedenken Über die Ins Litthauſche Überſeßte zehen Fabeln Æſopi, Und derſelben paſſionirte Zuſchrifft (1706). – Archivum Lithuanicum 5, 15–50.

Aleknavičienė Ona, Schiller Christiane, par., 2008: Jokūbo Perkūno traktatas Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift. Kritinis komentuotas leidimas ir studija. Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas.

Aleknavičienė Ona 2011: Rankraštinio šaltinio Litauische Sprichwörter und Rätsel atribucija. – Archivum Lithuanicum 13, 39–72.

Aleknavičienė Ona 2012: Gotfrydo Ostermejerio prierašai Jokūbo Brodovskio rankraščiuose: Litauische Sprichwörter und Rätsel ir Lexicon Germanico-Lithvanicum et Lithvanico-Germanicum. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 67, 23–51.

B – [Brodovskis Jokūbas] LEXICON GERMANICO=LITHVANICVM ET LĪ-THVANĪCO=GERMANĪCVM Darinnen ſo wohl die Vocabula Biblica Veteris et Novi Teſtamenti, als auch Vocabula Domeſtica item ūber zwey Tauſend Proverbia und ūber ein Hundert Aenigmata Lithvanica und viele Phraſes anzutreffen und alſo wo nicht gantz völllig doch ziemlich Complet iſt. Welches alles GOTT allein zu Ehren und denen Liebhabern der Lithauiſchen Sprache zum Beſten mit großer Mühe und Fleiß zuſammen getragen. von Jacobo Brodowsky Praecentor Trempenſi, [printed 1744]; LMAVB RS: f. 137 – 15; documentary edition: Jokūbas Brodovskis, Lexicon Germanico=Lithvanicum et Lithvanico=Germanicum. A manuscript dictionary of the eighteenth century. Documentary edition with facsimile, transcription, and word index 1–3, prepared by Vincentas Drotvinas. Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language, 2009.

[Brodovskis Jokūbas] Littauiſche Sprichwörter und Räſel, [after 1716], LMAVB RS: f. 137 – 1; online edition: transcription, concordance of Lithuanian word forms, index: Jokūbas Brodovskis, Litauische Sprichwörter und Rätsel, after 1716, prepared by Ona Aleknavičienė and Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2011, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

Burger Harald 42010: Phraseologie. Eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.

C – Clavis Germanico-Lithvana [after 1680]; LMAVB RS: f. 137 13 – 14; facsimile edition: Clavis Germanico-Lithvana. A seventeenth-century German–Lithuanian manuscript dictionary

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

dictionary 1–2, edited by Vincentas Drotvinas. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 1995–1997; 3–4, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 1997.

Citavičiūtė Liucija, par., 2008: Jono Šulco Ezopo pasakėčios. Dokumentinis leidimas ir straipsniai. Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas.

Dilytė Dalia 2008: Jono Šulco Ezopo pasakėčių vertimo klausimai. – Citavičiūtė 2008, 167–184.

Drotvinas Vincentas, par., 2008: Michaelio Mörlino traktatas Principium primarium in lingva Litvanica. Dokumentinis leidimas ir studija. Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas.

EP – [Šulcas Jonas] Die Fabuln ÆSOPI, Zum Versuch Nach dem PRINCIPIO Lithvanicæ Lingvæ, Littauisch vertiret von Johann Schultzen / S. Minist. Cand. Königsberg / gedruckt in der / von S. K. M. privilegirten / Georgischen Buchdruckerey / 1706; documentary edition: Citavičiūtė 2008; online edition: transcription, concordances of Lithuanian word forms, index: Jonas Šulcas, Ezopo pasakėčios, 1706, edited by Liucija Citavičiūtė, Ona Aleknavičienė, Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2007, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

H – [Hakas Frydrichas Vilhelmas] VOCABVLARIVM LITTHVANICO-GERMANICVM, ET GERMANICO-LITHVANICVM [...] Nebst Einem Anhang einer kurtzgefaßten Litthauischen Grammatic. Ausgefertiget von Friederich Wilhelm Haack [...] HALLE, Druckts Stephanus Orban, Univers. Buchar. [1730]; critical edition: Vilma Zubaitienė (ed.), Frydrichas Vilhelmas Hakas, Vocabularium Litthvanico-Germanicum, et Germanico-Litthvanicum... Nebst einem Anhang einer kurtzgefassten Litthauischen Grammatic (1730) 1–2. Vilnius: Vilnius University Press, 2012.

Haugenas Einaras 1994: Kalbotyra ir kalbos planavimas. – Sociolingvistika ir kalbos kultūra, sud. Laima Grumadienė, Rūta Marcinkevičienė. Vilnius: Gimtoji kalba, 14–27.

Jakaitienė Evalda 1988: Leksinė semantika. Monografija. Vilnius: Mokslas.

Jakaitienė Evalda ²2010: Lexicology. A study book. Vilnius: Vilnius University Press.

Karaliūnas Simas 2008: Kalbos vartojimas ir socialinis kontekstas. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.

K1G – [Kleinas Danielius] GRAMMATICA Litvanica Mandato & Autoritate SERENISSIMI ELECTORIS BRANDENBURGICI adornata, & præviâ Censurâ primùm in lucem edita à M. DANIELE Klein / Pastore Tils. Litv. Præmiffa eſt ad Lectorem Præfatio non minùs utilis, quàm neceſſaria. Cic. de Clar. Orat. Nihil ſimùl eſt & inventum & perfectum. REGIOMONTI, Typis & ſumptibus JOHANNIS REUSNERI, Anno χρισογονίας cIƆ IƆc. LIII; facsimile, translation into Lithuanian: The first Lithuanian grammar. The year 1653, editor-in-chief Jonas Kruopas. Vilnius: State Publishing House for Political and Scientific Literature

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological fundamentals in Jacob Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

literatūros leidykla, 1957, 65–272; Kazimiero Eigmino vertimas: 395–528; internetinis leidinys: perrašas, lietuviškų žodžių formų konkordancijos: Danielius Kleinas, Grammatica Litvanica, 1653, parengė Mindaugas Šinkūnas, Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2011, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

K1C – [Kleinas Danielius] M. DANIELIS KLEINII COMPENDIUM LITVANICO-GERMANICUM, Oder Kurtze und gantz deutliche Anführung zur Littauſchen Sprache / wie man recht Littauſch lesen / ſchreiben und reden sol. Cum Privilegio S.R.M. Pol. & Seren. Elect. Brandenb. Königsberg / Gedruckt und verleget durch Iohann Reuſnern / M. DC.LIV; facsimile, translation into Lithuanian: The first Lithuanian grammar. The year 1653, editor-in-chief [Jonas] Kruopas. Vilnius: State Publishing House for Political and Scientific Literature, 1957, 275–394; Emilijus Kraštinaitis’s translation: 529–610; online edition: transcription, concordances of Lithuanian word forms: Danielius Kleinas, Compendium Lituanico-Germanicum, 1654, edited by Mindaugas Šinkūnas, Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2011, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

Kuzavinis Kazimieras 1996: Lotynų–lietuvių kalbų žodynas. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla.

Lebedys Jurgis 1956: Pirmieji smulkiosios lietuvių tautosakos rinkiniai. – Smulkioji lietuvių tautosaka XVII–XVIII a. Priežodžiai, patarlės, mįslės, parengė Jurgis Lebedys. Vilnius: Valstybinė grožinės literatūros leidykla, 5–40.

Lex – Lexicon Lithuanicum [mid-seventeenth century]; LMAVB RS: f. 137 – 10; documentary edition: Lexicon Lithuanicum. A seventeenth-century German–Lithuanian manuscript dictionary, edited by Vincentas Drotvinas. Vilnius: Mokslas, 1987.

LKŽe – Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language 1–20, 1941–2002. Electronic version, editorial board: Gertrūda Naktinienė (editor-in-chief), Jonas Paulauskas, Ritutė Petrokienė, Vytautas Vitkauskas, Jolanta Zabarskaitė. Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language, 2005, www.lkz.lt.

Lutzeier Peter Rolf 2002: Der Status der Lexikologie als linguistische Disziplin. – Lexikologie. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Natur und Struktur von Wörtern und Wortschätzen 1, hrsg. von D. Alan Cruse. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2002, 1–14.

Marcinkevičienė Rūta 2001: Tradicinė frazeologija ir kiti sustabarėję kalbos vienetai. – Lituanistica 4(48), 81–98.

MP – [Mörlinas Michaelis] Zur wollmeinenden Vereinigung Und Einmüthigen Bedenken über das Principium primarium In Lingva Lithvanica, In den Worten: LOQVEN-DUM CUM VULGO, enthalten [...] M. Mörlin. P. Gumb. Königsberg / gedruckt In der / von Sr. Königl. Majest. privilegirten / Georgischen Buchdruckerey. Anno 1706; documentary edition: Drotvinas 2008; online edition: transcription, index of Lithuanian words:

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

Michaelis Mörlinas, Principium primarium in lingua Lithuanica, 1706, parengė Vincentas Drotvinas, 2008, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

PB – [Perkūnas Jokūbas] Wolgegründetes Bedenken / Über die / Ins Litthauſche / Überſetzte zehen Fabeln Æſopi, Und derſelben paſſionirte Zuſchrifft / Auf Begehren eines Liebhabers der Litthauſchen Sprachen / Aufgeſetzt von Iacob Perkhun / Pfarrern zu Walterkehmen. Leipzig und Franckfurt / Anno 1706; critical edition: Aleknavičienė, Schiller 2008; online edition: transcription, concordances of Lithuanian word forms, index: Jokūbas Perkūnas, Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift, 1706, prepared by Ona Aleknavičienė, Christiane Schiller, Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2008, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

Quandt 4 – [Kvantas Jonas Jokūbas] Preuss[iſche] Presbyterologie 4 [before 1772]; GStA PK: XX. HA Hist. StA Königsberg, Hs. 2.

R, Rlv, Rvl – [Ruigys Pilypas] Littauiſch=Deutſches und Deutſch=Littauiſches Lexicon, Worinnen ein hinlänglicher Vorrath an Wörtern und Redensarten, welche ſowol in der H. Schrift, als in allerley Handlungen und Verkehr der menſchlichen Geſellſchaften vorkommen, befindlich iſt: [...] von Philipp Ruhig, Pfarrern und Seniore zu Walterkehmen, Inſterburgiſchen Hauptamtes. Königsberg, druckts und verlegts I. H. Hartung, 1747; transcription, concordances of Lithuanian word forms, prepared by Vilma Zubaitienė, Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2011, Lithuanian Language Institute Old Writings Database, Inv. No. T-44, K-1-44; Rlv – Lithuanian–German section, Rvl – German–Lithuanian section.

RgB – [Ruigys Pilypas] Betrachtung der Littauiſchen Sprache, in ihrem Urſprunge, Weſen und Eigenſchaften [...] von Philipp Ruhig, Pfarrern und Seniore zu Walterkehmen, im Hauptamt Inſterburg. Königsberg, druckts und verlegts Johann Heinrich Hartung, 1745; facsimile, translation into Lithuanian: Ruigys 1986, 20–164.

RgM – [Ruigys Pilypas] MELETEMA, è re ipſa, Autoribus variis, atq[ue] experientia, ſiſtens LINGVAM Lithuanicam [...] à Philippo Ruhigio, Inſterb. Pruſſo, Eccleſiæ Walterkemenſis in Diſtrictu Inſterburgenſi Paſtore Germanico-Lituanico [...] [1735]; facsimile, translation into Lithuanian: Ruigys 1986, 167–396.

Römer Christine, Matzke Brigitte² 2005: Lexikologie des Deutschen. Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Ruigys Pilypas 1986: Lietuvių kalbos kilmės, būdo ir savybių tyrinėjimas, parengė Vytautas Jurgutis, Valerija Vilnon y tė. Vilnius: Vaga.

SŠG – [Sapūnas Kristupas, Šulcas Teofilis] COMPENDIUM GRAMĀTI-CAE LITHVANICAE Theophili Schultzens Past: Cattenov, REGIOMONTI: Typis Friderici Reußneri, [...] Āō: 1673; facsimile, translation into Lithuanian, index of Lithuanian words: Sapūno ir Šulco gramatika, prepared by Kazimieras Eigminas, Bonifacas Stundžia. Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing, 1997; online edition: transcription,

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

Lexicological Foundations in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s Treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

concordances of Lithuanian word forms: Kristupas Sapūnas, Teofilis Šulcas, Compendium grammaticae Lithuanicae, 1673, prepared by Mindaugas Šinkūnas, Vytautas Zinkevičius, 2010, www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.

Urbutis Vincas ²2008: Genetic Differentiation of the Lexicon. – Encyclopedia of the Lithuanian Language, second revised and expanded edition, compiled by Kazys Morkūnas, edited by Vytautas Ambrazas. Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopaedia Publishing, 308–310.

The Basics of Lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s Treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

S U M M A R Y

This article analyses Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706; hereinafter PB) as a source of linguistic ideas in lexicology.

While analysing the skills of the translator of the Aesop’s fables Die Fabuln Aesopi (1706, hereinafter referred to as EP) to practically apply the principles declared in Michaeli Mörlin’s tractate Principium primarium in lingua Lithuanica (1706, hereinafter referred to as MP) Perkūnas concentrated on lexis, however he paid much less attention to consideration of lexical norms than Mörlin did. The linguistic activity of Perkūnas was based on more practical (empirical) level, i.e. linguistic data collection, evaluation and presentation as opposed to theoretical generalisations and rigid decision making.

Perkūnas considered Mörlin as the translator of fables instead of Jonas Šulcas, thus he discussed the principles of language use and standardisation with him in the tractate. The statements of Perkūnas and corrected words of the Aesop’s fables demonstrate the way he perceived the issues which are now analysed by lexicology. Perkūnas raised the idea of the polysemy of Lithuanian words by considering it a consistent phenomenon of Lithuanian language system. He emphasised that the relation between the expression and content cannot be conceived in a simplified way: one expression unit does not have to correspond to one lexical meaning.

The correction of word junctions which were composed without observing the common lexical and grammatical valency and violating the principles of semantic accordance in Aesop’s fables witness the awareness of lexical semantic system, i.e. syntagmatic relations. The perception of paradigmatic relations is demonstrated by the joining of words in

Straipsniai / Articles

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

synonymic rows (designing synonymic paradigms). Perkūnas raised the resources of synonymy of Lithuanian language (he used the term Synonyma) and demonstrated the variability of certain notional expressions. Although, he was inclined to constrict expressional potential himself, however, his own provided examples witness the ability to name real objects in various ways regarding their feature variety.

Perkūnas envisioned the violations of identity (adequacy) rule in the area of lexis while evaluating the language of the fables: the translator misused the resources of language, could not find means to convey the concepts of distant and unknown culture, and did not keep to the rules of spelling and accentuation. According to Perkūnas, the congruence or similarity of word expression due to which the barriers appear in communication were considered to be the problem of the same extent as the use of incomprehensible words. He was looking for the best equivalent and referred to both: quantitative criterion i.e. he was choosing the most widely spread usage as well as qualitative criterion i.e. he was looking for the best form of expressing the concept.

Perkūnas was less categorical than Mörlin regarding the loanwords. He was more temperate in regards to usage of loanwords – he had his views to leave the non-Lithuanian words which are accepted and commonly used in the spoken language should be kept in written language as well. The reproaches to the translator regarding the abundant use of loanwords are based on the discrepancy between the theoretical requirements of Mörlin and language realisation in the translation of the fables.

Perkūnas, as well as Mörlin, distinguished the stable collocations which carry information about unique human understanding of reality objects; the term they used idiotismus can have dual meaning: it can mean “distinctive phrase” or “conventional usage”. Perkūnas, opposite to Mörlin, did not require strict distinction between borrowed phraseologisms and native words.

The terminology and statements used by Perkūnas predict the rudiments of lexicology and lead to a conclusion that the philological discussion induced the development of linguistic thought at a rather early stage in this area of linguistic science.

Submitted on 3 April 2014.

ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

Petro Vile išio St. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lithuania

[email protected]

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXII

THE BASICS OF LEXICOLOGY IN JOKŪBAS PERKŪNAS’S TRACTATE WOHLGEGRÜNDETES BEDENKEN ÜBER DIE INS LITAUISCHE ÜBERSETZTEN ZEHN FABELN AESOPI UND DERSELBEN PASSIONIERTE ZUSCHRIFT (1706)

The Basics of Lexicology in the Treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706) by Jokūbas Perkūnas

ABSTRACT

ANNOTATION

0. INTRODUCTION

1. LEXICAL SEMANTICS

2. ETYMOLOGY: LOANWORDS

Fundamentals of lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s treatise A Well-Founded Consideration of the Ten Fables of Aesop Translated into Lithuanian and Their Passionate Dedication (1706)

3. PHRASEOLOGY

4. CONCLUSIONS

SOURCES AND LITERATURE

The Basics of Lexicology in Jokūbas Perkūnas’s Treatise Wohlgegründetes Bedenken über die ins Litauische übersetzten zehn Fabeln Aesopi und derselben passionierte Zuschrift (1706)

S U M M A R Y

Document details