Die statischen Lokalkasus bei Bretke und in anderen altlitauischen Texten des 16. und 17. Jhdt.

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXI (2009), 41 -59 The static Local case study at Boards and other old in Lithuanian Texts of the and 16. 17. Jhdt. * GINA KAVALIUNAITE Lietuviy kalbos institutas The article deals with the stative locatives in 16th and 17th century Lithuanian texts (DaukSa, Chylinski, Bretkiinas). The distribution of the inessive and adessive shown is to be determined by the animacy hierarchy: nominals that are higher animacy have only in adessives, inanimates have only inessives. The complementary distribution of these two cases revealingly shown such is non-homogeneous noun phrases by as Zmogup reborn (DP). Bretkiinas’ language seems differ this to respect from in that his contemporaries: the only one use inessive of he is to 1sg. pronouns like in me (alongside the adessive manipi). He hesitates between musui and musip(V), jusui and jusip(i), saveie and savip(i), and corrections are frequent. Alongside the regular inessive jame, he has also jamije (on the analogy tavyje, of savyje?). It is suggested here that such inessives manyje, as Dieveie (instead of Dievipi) etc. were created ad hoc by Bretkunas, and that the living language had only adessives. This seems also to be the case with the 3rd person inessive jamije, used as an animate counterpart to jame. 1. DIE STATISTICS LOCAL ACCOUNTS IM LITHUANIAN: STAND DER RESEARCH Der Question of Use of static Local case (Inessiv and Adhesive) im Lithuanian as well as the alleged Confusion of these Case is the in Technical literature already quite a lot Attention has been devoted. In ers- “The present essay is the extended and improved Version of a Work, the in 2003. 1m international Competition of the Forums PRO BALTICA for the best Investigation zu Bretkes Creation was awarded. Da on the originally planned publication of the Competition contribution was obviously waived, the Author for other Use of the Textes entschieden. GINA KAVALIONAITE In this context, it is worth mentioning Laigonaite's essay on the use of local cases in the Lithuanian language islands outside Lithuania (1957:27). As the most important cause of the confusion of the two cases she mentions the phonological abbreviation of the postposition. Laigonaité celebrates examples not only from the dialects of the present, but also from the ancient Lithuanian writings (§monefe bediewitifemp ir neyftikimuifemp DP 44,,..). In his book Lietuviy literatiiriné kalba XVI-XXVII amiiuje (1967: 120), Palionis writes that the adjective and the inessive were closely linked from the beginning, both in terms of their meaning and their syntactic use, and celebrates such examples of mixing of both cases as: Zmdgup atgimditame DP 255,., kdkfai ne wiename gmégup ne bii DP 477,,. Rosinas (1995: 65) celebrates examples of the synonymous use of inessive and adessive in the Neo-Lithuanian dialects, repeating Laigonaites’ example from DaukSa’s Postilla. He also mentions the phonological abbreviation of the ending as the presumed cause of the extinction of the adessives as self-ending cases. In his latest book, Rosinas (2001: 140-143) deals in detail with the neutralization of the contradiction between inessive and adhesive. He proves that neutralization must have occurred in certain precisely defined contexts, and that it must have been done with static verbs such as biti, gyventi, rasti. According to Rosinas (2001: 142), the adverb has retained its characteristic meaning only where a process is described in human consciousness; As the cause of the neutralization of the opposition between inessives and adesives, the coincidence of inessives and adesives as a result of the shortening of the postposition is again mentioned. Gelumbeckaité cites examples from Bretke’s Bible for the use of both local cases as well as for the replacement of the inessivus by the adessiv and cautiously suggests that the reason for the replacement of the inessivus by the adessiv in verbs denoting events in human consciousness might be that the adessiv, in contrast to the inessivus, can assume the meaning of an adessivus sympathethicus or an adessivus possessivus (Gelumbeckaité 1997: 189-190). Maskulitinas (2000: 205-206) celebrates from DaukSa’s Postill and Szyrwid’s Punktai sakimu not a few places where both inessives and adessives appear in the same possessive meaning. The above-mentioned researchers are of the opinion that the functional difference between inessive and adessive has disappeared in the language system itself. 42 Die statischen Lokalkasus bei Bretke und in anderen altlitauischen Texten Range (1995: 99-101) raises this question in a different way. Based on an investigation of the use of the inessives and the adessives in Bretke, the latter concludes that the cause of the interchange of these cases is to be sought in the influence of the translation templates. He cites relevant examples of the neutralization of the contradiction between inessive and adessive from Moswid's writings as well as from DaukSa's postilla. In her doctoral thesis, Gelumbeckaité (1999: 241) agrees with the idea of Range that the German construction with bey may have contributed to the replacement of the inessive by the adessive. According to the research results of Eglé Zilinskaité (2007: 408-409), the use of the adessives in Dauk%as Postille may have been influenced by the constructions u + gen. and przed + instr. that appear in the Polish template: these are found in the translation templates of verbs such as pulti, stotis, etc. both for the designation of the rest of the place in the vicinity of an object as well as for the indication of the direction towards an object. Such traps, where both inessives and adjectives are formed from one and the same word, are quite isolated: degs andie tigniie ant’ Am3iy be gato DP 607,; Ritdes’ dgnip [Petras] DP 158,; pats Chriftus perfonoie fawoié /krik&tity 357,,; no geyde pakaiaus perfonayp norint didgiaufeip’ 42,, (cf. Zilinskaité 2007: 419). 2. ON THE INTERACTION OF STATIC LOCAL CASES An examination of the use of the adessives in Chylinski’s translation of the New Testament has shown that the translation templates have no significance in the choice of the local case (Kavaliiinaité 2001: 93-111). Celebrate the choice of the adhesive or For inessives, it is not the prepositions used in the template that are decisive, but the categorical characteristics of the nominal phrases. The use of the adesive is associated with liveliness, while the use of the inessive is associated with inanimateness. The animation is not to be understood as a reference, but in the sense of the Silverstein hierarchy of animation. Certain word classes are as such for liveliness or. Stillness marked. Expectations are the personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person. person marked as animated, since they normally always refer to humans. But also the pronoun of the 3. Persons are higher than nouns, but among the latter the proper names are higher than the genus names, etc. If a grammatical rule, e.g. a rule of case marking, is sensitive to animation, then its scope of action will primarily include those categories that are ranked higher in the 43 GINA KAVALIONAITE animation hierarchy. A schematic representation of the Silverstein hierarchy of animation is quoted here from Anderson (1985: 183): Schema 1. The Silverstein hierarchy of animation animates > inanimates Personal-Personal-Demon-—Eigenna-Personale —Nichtper-_Unanimate pronomipronomistrativa men Genus-_sonale Genusnader1. Come closer. und Namen belebte Namen Person Person Personal-Generic Pronouns na der 3. People Chylinski- ’s use of the adesive reflects this hierarchy of animation quite accurately. Most commonly, the adjectives of the personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person are Person as well as the reflexive pronoun (206x). This is followed by the proper names (177x), the demonstrative, the personal pronouns of the 3. Person and the relative pronoun (113x). The rarest are the adjectives of personal nouns (8x) and adjectives (3x). No adhesives are formed from non-personal animata as well as from inanimata. It should be noted that the words dievas, tévas and sinus, which refer to the Christian God and his persons, were here assigned to the proper names, which may well be explained with regard to the specific nature of the text. The independence of the case choice from the preposition used in the template is illustrated by the following examples: Diewiep nes wifi dayktey ira padabni chnt (because all things 3ijn mogelick by Godt StB) Mk 10,27; 44 The static Local cash bet Bretke and other ancient in Lithuanian texts 6 (tasks) 30dis buwo Diewiep ChNT (and the Word was by Good StB) Jn 1,1; Jr twofia my linxminas diewiep Jzganitojep my ChNT (End of mine gives rejoiced him in Godt / mine Salighmaker StB) Lk 1,47; Tape (is to) fu kurfey ruthless [...] eft Diewiep ChNT (Alfoo As for ’t him who is self-suf- [...] ficient, en is in Gode StB) Lk 12,21. Sowohl in Good as well by Godt gets with the Adessively reproduced, apparently because a comparable es Contrast in Chylinskis’ language system did not exist. Hatte es fiir Animata einen Inessiv given, so hiitte on es the hand laid, this Case of als counterpart of the Dutch Use in zu preposition because a Ensprechung “niederl. in = lit. Inessiv” at the Inanimata is available. You can find them about the following an Places: Balfas girdetas ira Ramoy ChNT (Een {theme is in Rama heard StB) Mt 2,18. Daf & der Contrast between ndl. in and by in Chylinskis’ language system can be reproduced in principle, is in the Inanimata easily identified. Although not by a corresponding er Contrast “Inessiv : Adessiv” is reproduced, but by is im Case of Inanimata mit Prapositions, mostly with pas, iibersetzt: Petras [...] &Yldies by the fire ChNT (End Peter was [...] warming him [...] the vyer StB) by Mk 14,54. Before we one zu Discussion of the Peculiarities of the Use of the Adessivs bei Brett! iipass, shall next be the uses of the wichtigsten Adessivs bei Bretke and other authors (Chylinskis, Daukéa) will be briefly presented. Der Adhesively designated: 1) the Localization im of spiritual Space of the people, often perceived as Area of the gettical Effect: faugok per dwafia Rweta kuriy giwena mufimp ChNT (preserv- [...] ed by the Heyligen Gives /which in inhabits us StB) 2 Tim 1,14; ‘ Wilent uses the Inessiv im ganzen ähnlich wie Boards, his Language usage remains however this in Essay unberticksichtigt. 45 GINA KAVALIONAITE S3irdi ne iZagta téikis manip padarit’ mielaufias Wie&patie DP 534,, (Heart c3yfte rac3 me we {right myths Panie Uncle 580,, 44)3 Dideny <belief> btive so’ ligénip 3monaip DP 369, (Wieta <wiara> by tey v niewid/ty chorey Uncle 381,,); Ne tarket / mes fawipi dumofim / mes Abraham Turim Tiew BP 11 240, 2; Nefa iei Sodomoia thie Jobs would be nufsidawe, who tawip nufsidawe BNT (Denn fo 3u Sodom die That's what happened, that's what happened to you LB; Quia si in Sodomis factae fuissent virtutes quae factae sunt in te Matthew 11:23. 2) the Object or Field of human Thoughts or thoughts Emotions: Turekit wiera Diewiep ChNT (Have you believed op Good StB) Mk 11,22; ir Prad3idugos dw3sid mana / Diewiép isganitoiip mandmp DP 47 vag (A vradowal fie duch moy / w Bodge 3bMy love Uncle 502,); Bei [chitaip apturetu am&ina poniep Diewip giwenima ir ifchganima BP I 268,,5 nefang Diewiep cheap ira kiekwienas Radis BNT (Denn bey God ift no thing vnpossible LB; quia non erit inpossibile apud Deum omne verbum V) Lk 1,37. 3) the Localization in of the Near or Surroundings of a Person: Kurfey buwo SergiuBiep Powilep zmogumpi iSmintingampi ChNT (Welcke what den by City governor Sergius Paul a skillful / man StB) Apd 13,7; tacgiau rado tatdi hukiie fawamé ir funup fawgmp DP 355,, (prgzedfié naydowat to w home [woim / y w fine fwoim Uncle 367 Ne well done iog brother- 's wife fawip times BP I 29,; 'Cause you found malane Diewip BNT (du halt gnade bey God Found LB; invenisti enim gratiam apud Deum V) Lk 1,30. v-1s)3 die 4) Localization between several counters, under one Group of Persons: *Beim Collecting the Materials was the im Institute of Lithuanian Language zu Vilnius electronically made Konkordanz zu Bretke's post-it used. 46 The static Local case study at Boards and other old in Lithuanian Texten Tey katbeyau ieties, bedamas jufimp ChNT (Defe things hebbe ick to gefproken u /by u permanent StB) Jn 14,25; ne turéio iifemp wietos DP 41, (no place for v them) Uncle 40,,); Ir IEfus daukfinofe ifchmintije / fenatweie ir maloneie Diewiep ir Sgmonifamp BP I 162,,; ie such jobs Tyroia ir Sidonia would have been murdered, as Iufip had been murdered BNT (weren folche Thatten 3u Tyre vnd 3u Sidon gone, as bey you gone find LB; quia si in Tyre et "Sidone factae essent virtutes quae factae sunt in vobis" (in Italian). V) Mt 11,21. 5) the localization inside an object: uzfodyno Winnic3ia ikafe jeyp profa-wina [...] ir => [pauftuwa ChNT (vineyard planted and [...] dug a wine perfback there in StB) Mt 21,33; Ir pranafsiep. Bilo Wie&patis izgélbeffiu itis WieRpatiié Female iy DP 257,,,, (Y v The Prophet; Mowi Pan I'm scared of them. w Panu God forbid. Uncle 265,,). Diese meaning seems neither in the nor BP im BNT be occupied. zu 6) the Localization in of the Close to one of the object. Bei Chylinski is the Adessiv in dieser Significance not established. Some Examples lie but in DP and BP before: palikig afiéra fawa altéritip DP 296, (officieR dar your ottarzd do Wuj nekurios 304,,); moterifchkes mufifchkiu kuros ankfti / buwa Grabiepi BP II 17,,. Nach Indication of Eglé Zilinskaité (2007:408) make such Adessive 6,43% total Evidence of the Adhesive off. Nach Indication of Gelumbeckaite (1997: 191-192) is this How to use the Adessivs also im BNT not recorded. Der Inessiv driickt im ChNT die Localization in reference to an inanimate Object out. Inessive von Animata zum Expression of a Task im Awareness of People are not occupied. Will the Inessiv von Animata formed, it is so um Plural forms, and the Meaning is the one Localization in of the In the middle of a Group of People. Es This is a 47 GINA KAVALIONAITE meaning that is not in itself linked to the liveliness. In the plural, adjectives are regularly formed only by those word types that are ranked highest in the hierarchy of activation, i.e., by the pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person singular. Person; otherwise, inessive is usually used. Compare, for example: Whose God is above all, and whose Father is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all, and whose Spirit is in all. In this example, an adjective is found next to an inessive within the same nominal group. There is obviously no difference in case meaning between them, there is only one regarding the marking for liveliness. Also in Dauk§a and in Bretke’s Postille, the use of the adessive is linked to liveliness. Adhesive of Inanimata are very rare, e.g., attoritip DP 296, and grabiepi BP Il 17,,. Rosinas writes about this:,,in sentences with verbs biti, živiti and others, only the participial verb and the adverb of the reflexive verb are used, and in the verbs of the verbs and nouns, without the adverb, the inessive verb is often used“ (2001: 141). Furthermore, Rosinas points out that,,asmeniniy participiniy ir refleksyvinio jvardzio (i.e., those who are ranked highest in the hierarchy of activity — G. K.) posistemis in DaukSo’s texts do not have inesyvo; Instead, an adhesive is used, which is most often used for the inner cavity* (2001: 140). This corresponds exactly to what has been found for Chylinski- 's language system. According to Rosinas, inessive are the personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person. Person not only in DaukSa, but also in Pietkiewicz’s Catechism as well as in Szyrwid (Rosinas 1995: 17-20; 2001: 140). Only Bretke and Wilent have such inessives. This remarkable peculiarity of the language of these writers is therefore to be investigated specifically. 3. DIE INESSIVE INANIMATER NOMINA BEI BRETKE Next, it must be noted that there is also in Bretke a connection of the adesive with the animation. Fiir the categories that are ranked highest in the hierarchy of activity, namely the pronoun of the 1. 48 Die statischen Lokalkasus bei Bretke und in anderen altlitauischen Texten and 2. person and the reflexive pronoun, Bretke regularly uses the Adhesive: In the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s, there were several attempts to re-establish the 1000-yard mark, but the 1000-yard mark has been replaced by the 2000-yard mark, which is the 1000-yard mark used in the 1980s and 1990s, as well as the 1000-yard mark used in the 2000s. Ir netur Rakny fawimp BNT (vnd have no root3el in jhen LB; et non habent radicem in se) Mk 4,17; Dwafe Wiefchpaties ira manip BP II 47,,; And IEfus daukfinofi ifchmintije /fenatweie and maloneie Diewiep and Sgmonifamp BP I 162,,. The distribution of adjectives and indefinite nouns is clearly shown in the following examples. In all cases it is the Holy Scripture or its Parts, there, however, wo a Book with the Name of the If the author is indicated, the adjective is used, otherwise the inessive is used: Schwentamip Ianip trecziame puguldime BP I 420,,; Ponas IEfus Kriftus wadinna Pharifeufchus Rafbainikais / Schwentamip Ianip defchimtame paguldime BP II 61,; nefa ghi Schwentame rafchte liudima diift BP II 88,,; tadda Ponas Diewas Schwentame fodije /konam pamokfla ditt BP Il 279,,. Da 2004-2005 Distribution of Adhesive and Inessive according to the categorical properties of the Nomens directs so that certain Nomina im Normally only one Adhesive, others only one Inessiv form, the two stand one in Relationship of complementary Distribution. They are therefore not as fully autonomous case, but only as Variants of the same View local zu case study (cf. Smoczyriski 2001: 215). Die Personal pronouns are, however, Boards treated differently than DaukSa and Chylinski. We find here Inessive der Personal pronouns of the and 1. 2. person as well as of Personal titles to Expression of a Process human im Consciousness or im inner Essence of the People. pa&infite, as efch mano Tiewieie + Tiew + pi efmi, ir ius manye —manipi ir efch iufuie —iufuie/iufuia —iufipi BNT (you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. 49 GINA KAVALIONAITE Case is not determined by the case semantics, but by the categorical Features of the nominal groups regulated, whereby the Use of the Adessivs a high Classificain tion of Activity hierarchy reflects. Unlike the previous ancient Lithuanian authors used Bretke Inessive der Personal pronouns of the and 1. 2. person as well as the Reflective pronouns; zum Part of these are Molds nowhere else. Also used for er Animata otherwise not occupied Forms of 3. People Sgt. Mask. (iamije neben iame). Presumably this is es um Imitation of the den in Templates used Constructions with lat. and German in. The numerous Trap, wo this Inessive zu Adessiven have been improved, but have Bretkes Uncertainty in Reference to the Accuracy of this Shape it up. In seinem language system were probably only the Adessive before. Bretkes language system was probably not different here from that of other ancient Lithuanian Authors like Chylinski, Dauk8a a., u. and the Peculiarities of the Use of the Inessivs in seine Texts reflect above all the Peculiarity of its Translation technology, not its Speak back. SPECIAL CHARACTERS > Correction in the Hs. = iiber der Line added synonym Ta3 beginning or End of a correction in the Hs. <...> Emendation of the Hrsg. (Kudzinowski u. Otrebsky 1958) L..J Redemption in the Hs. L..] omitted text {red] in the Statenbibel explaining added word + rankraStyje nejskaitoma raidé 56 Die statischen Lokalkasus bei Bretke und in anderen altlitauischen Texten BNT —NAVIAS TESTAMENTAS. Lietuwifchka Liefsuwi perrafchitas. per ana Bretkuna Labguwos Plebona. 1580. Cited by: NAVIAS TESTAMENTAS. Ing Lietuwifchka Liefgzuwi perrafchitas. by Iana Bretkuna Labguwos Plebona. 1580. THE NEW TESTAMENT translated into Lithuanian by Johann Bretke, pastor in Labiau 1580: facsimile of the manuscript, volumes 7 and 8, Labiau i. Pr. 1580. Edited by J.D. Range and Fr. Scholz. 1991, Paderborn — Miinchen -Vienna ~ Ziirich. BP —POSTILLA tatai efti Trumpas ir Praftas Ifchguldimas Euangeliu [...] Per lana Bretkna Lietuvos Plebona Karaliaucgiuie Prufifu. Poor Prince Georg Oftenberger. 1591. pp. 1591. CHNT —Czestaw Kudzinowski, Jan Otrebski, Lithuanian Bible of Chyliriski. The New Testament. 2, Text, Poznan: Zaktad Narodowy im. Ossoliriskich, 1958. DP —Poftilla CATHOLICKA Tdi eft: [$guldimas Ewangeliu kiekwienos Nedelos and Bwetes per wiffiis metus. Per Ktiniga MIKALOIV DAVKSZ[- A] Kanonikq Médniku / if lgki8ko pergiildita. Su wald and I went to see wireufiuiy. W Wilniui /Printing Academy Society IESV. A.D. 1599. The New Testament, 6. Band. LB — D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe). 1968: Hermann Béhlau's successor -Weimar Academic Pressu. Verlagsanstalt -Graz. STB —Biblia, That Is The Whole Holy Scripture, Containing All The Canonical Books Of The Old And New Testament. By laft der Hoogh-Mog: Heren Staten Generael van de Vereenighde Nederlanden [...] Uyt de Oorfpronkelijcke talen in onfe Nederlandtfche tale getrouwelijck over-gefet [...] ende Door gemeene orde der Nederlandfche Kercken verbeterd van Druckfauten en Misftellingen die in den Eersten Druck gevonden worden. T’Amsteldam, Printed by the Widow of the deceased Paulus Aertfz van Ravefteijn [...] Anno 1657. V —The Vulgate, quoted from: Roger Gryson, ed., 1994: Biblia Sacra Vulgata. London: British Bible Society. WuJ —Poltilla Catholicka Mnieyfza. It is ieft: Short Sermons /dlbo expositions of many Gospels [...] Prgezy D. IAKVBA WVYKA 3 Wegrowca /Theologa Societatis IESV. [...] in Krakow in the printer's house of Andr3eia Piotrkowc3yka / Paryfki Year 1590. 57 GINA KAVALIONAITE LITERATURNACHWEISE ANDERSON, S. R. 1985: Inflectional morphology. In: T. SHOPEN, ed., Language Typology and Syntactic Description 3. Grammatical categories and the lexicon. Cambridge etc. : Cambridge University Press, 151-201. GELUMBECKAITE, J. 1997: Postpositional placeholders in the translation of J. Bretkino,,The Gospel according to Luke“. Baltistica 32.2, 179-202. GELUMBECKAITE, J. 1999: Use of links and prepositions in John Bretkin's translation of the Gospel according to Luke*. Doctoral dissertation handwriting. KAVALIONAITE, G. 2001. The New Testament Translation of Adesyvas Chylinski. Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 45, 93-111. KUDZINOWSKI, Cz. 1997: Index to,,DaukSos Postilé“ 1-2. Poznan: University of Poznan Press, 2006. Adam Mickiewicz. LAIGONAITE, A. 1957: Localities of the Pas-de-Calais in the present language. In: Ch. LEMCHENAS, Hrsg., Some Questions of Lithuanian Grammar. Vilnius: Valstybiné politinés ir mokslinés literatiiros leidykla, 21-39. MASKULIUNAS, B. 2000: Dél one case of possessiveness expression in ancient raids. Baltistica 34.2, 199-208. PALIONIS, J. 1967: Lithuanian literary language in the 16th and 17th centuries. Vilnius: Mintis. RANGE, J.-D. 1992: Annotated edition of volume 7 of the Old Lithuanian Bible translation (Gospels and Acts) of John. Bretke, Labiau 1580. Habilitation thesis, submitted to the Department 13 of Romance Studies and Slavic Studies of the Westphalian Wilhelmsuniversität Miinster. RANGE, J.-D. 1995: Allative and Adessive in Old Lithuanian Texts of the 16th Century. Jahrhunderts. Linguistica Baltica 4, 96-102. ROSINAS, A. 1971: Dél asmeniniy jvardZiy formy (miis)-uje i (miis)-yje kilmés. Baltistica 7.2, 174-152. ROSINAS, A. 1995: Balty kalby jvardziai: morphological development, Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas. ROSINAS, A. 2001: The semantic and morphological structure of the texts of Mikalojus Daukšas. Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopedia Publishing. The static Local case study at Bretke and other ancient in Lithuanian texts SILVERSTEIN, M. 1976: Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In: R. M. W. DIXON, ed., Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Humanities Press, 1999. 112-171. W. 2001: Local cases of the Baltic languages. In: Ders., The Lithuanian Language in Comparative w Perspective. Kraków: Jagiellonian University Press, 2006. 214-216. E. 2007: Adhesive Mikalojaus DaukSos Postiléje. Baltistica 57.3, 407422. Gina KavaliiinaiLietuviy kalbos institutas te P. Vileisio 5, LT-10308 Vilnius [email protected] lt It 59