Wege der deutschen Entlehnungen in die ostpreußische Zeitung „Naujasis Tilžės keleivis“ (1924–1940)

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LIV (2006), 27 -47 Ways of the German Borrowings in the East Prussian Newspaper New Passenger ban (1924-1940) InpDRE BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE Siauliy universitetas In this article an attempt made is evaluating at the chronological layering of the German loanwords attested in the newspaper New Tilzés keleivis, whose period of publication spans the last decades the of existence the of Prussian-Lithuanian linguistic community. An overview is given the of typological properties (structure, chronological distribution) this group of loanwords. of The basic German language varieties serving, to various extents, as sources of German loanwords in the Lithuanian language of East Prussia are discussed: these are the Lower German dialects of East Prussia and the standard language that grew out the written language and of developed its professional and political variants. Attention is further given the to Lithuanian language varieties that could have influenced the structural transformation ousting or of German loanwords; the way which in German loanwords were adapted in Prussian Lithuanian from the 18th century onward; the public discussions regarding their use the written in Lithuanian language of East Prussia; and the extent which to the nascent standard language affected their use the in New Passengers are banned. ). PRELIMINARY REMARKS The Lithuanian 7 New TilZés keleivis, which from 1924 to 1940 in Opportunity to German borrowings in the i8ens fiir a studying the zu period when there was already a distinct language variety images In 0,e. newspaper will this Minority language of the speakers themselves with the synonyms Begriffen Prasy lietuviy/lietuvininky kalba dete, whose (deutsch: Preußisch27 InDRE BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE specificity was marked by the consequences of language contact and social bilingualism (cf. Schiller 1999: 225-226, 228). This on the basis of contact linguistics? This paper aims to investigate the ways of German borrowing into the o.e. newspaper, and should therefore cover two areas of responsibility: 1. Theoretical conception of the UnrersucHunescecenstannes (German Borrowings in the Naujasis TilZés keleivis), which requires both a broader theoretical approach (analysis of typological and structural peculiarities) and a historical overview. An exemplary presentation of the ways of German borrowing in the Naujasis Tilzés keleivis, based on the qualitative analysis of the collected corpus. 1. SPECIFICITY OF THE OBJECT OF INVESTIGATION The German borrowings in Naujasis Tilzés keleivis can be described as a difficultly classifiable and non-systematic object of study, the terminological, typological and structural differences between which are difficult to distinguish. Rytprisiy lietuviy kalba (German: Osprey-Lithuanian). Of these two names reflecting political affiliation, the first has been more in the German-speaking literature, the geographically more practical Designation East Prussian-Lithuanian is from Zinkevitius (2002b: 476) used. In Lithuanian linguistic research, the term Magosios Lietuvos lietuviy kalba (German: the Little Lithuanian) is preferred, which is also used by German authors as a synonym for Prussian- -Lithuanian (cf. Hinderling, Hasselblatt 2004: 3272). Nowadays, all these terms are considered historical terms, because the Prussian-Lithuanian language community is already dying out. 2 Contact linguistics investigates situations in which two (or more) languages contact, and at least one of them changes as a result of this contact. The change is to be seen as a complex of closely intertwined linguistic and non-linguistic phenomena (Oksaar 2004: 3160, Clyne 1996: 12). Language contact research is considered as a relatively young and dynamic linguistic discipline and still requires a clear definition of its theories and instruments. The already achieved level of knowledge has found an encyclopaedic documentation in the two volumes of contact linguistics of the HSK series (Goebl, Nelde, Stary, Wolck 1996, 1997). 28 German borrowings in the Naujasis Tilzés keletvis requires Prazisierungen. In the absence of a compact theoretical framework for research of this kind, the basic characteristics and the research methodology of borrowings in the above-mentioned fields will be discussed in this part. Zeitung on the basis of the conceptual research on the lends and the investigation of German lends in other Prussian-Lithuanian primary sources. 1.1. Terminological, structural and typological Preliminary remarks The subject of the study is due to the thematic specificity of the newspaper with the result and process-oriented term BORROWERY? designated. The chronological complexity of the corpus can be illustrated by the following examples*:... Bernas, ant Staldo (1) Bertainio (2) stowédamas, nuwirto.... (1926-52-3, I mufu Krafto), -» apfirédgiuji jiidu Kedeliu (3)... (1924-62-3, I8 mufu Krafto),. atidengé Piningy (4) Sgmugelj (5)... (1938-72-3, I8 mufy) Kra8to),. nuwirto ant Sgafijos (6) j Kampq fukdamas... (1926-8-4, Margumynai)- ,... the Führer (7) and Reichskanzler (8) of Germany Adolf Hitler... (1937-46-2, Politikos Naujienos) Whereas staldas,stall‘, bertainis,ein Fach in der Scheune auf den Seiten der Dreschtenne liegend‘, kedelis,Frauenrock, Kittel‘, piningas,Geldstiick, Geldmeinze‘, szmugelis Schmuggel‘, szafija,Chausee‘ are also documented as German borrowings in other sources (see: Alminauskis 1935, Cepiené 1995, Kurschat 1883), mégen fiihreris,Leiter, Fiihrer‘, reichskancleris 2 On the basis of Betz’s typology, borrowing has developed into a broad term in German specialist literature (as a result of word borrowing and loan-taking, but also as a loan-taking process) and agrees with the content of the lit. Correspondence skolinys (borrowed word) no longer iiberein. * The example sentences printed in the Naujasis Tilzes keleivis in German fractured script are reproduced here in Latin printed script (with the preservation of some characteristic fractured letters), meaningfully chronologically 29 InpRE BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE ‘Reichskanzler’ are considered to be later adopted vocabulary, which had not yet been incorporated into other writings. According to m.E. es in View of two Groups of borrowings to speak: 1. On the Borrowing vocabulary taken from the natural German-Lithuanian language contacts and used in both spoken and written Prussian-Lithuanian, im for which this im newspaper clearly only as sekundare Source of use applies (Bsp. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). At the Investigation of linguistic Peculiarities of such German Loans in New Tilzés keleivis I stuitze myself on the comparative method in which you compare the examples with Data from dialectological research (in neighbouring Dialects, s. Zinkevitius 2002a), mit Register in ostpreuRischen Woérterbiichern (Drotvin 1987, Kurshat 1883, Alminauskis 1935) bzw. lexikologischen Studies zu this Word inheritance (Vaccinated 1993, 1995, 2000b) or other East Prussian Schriften (Vaccinated: 1998a, 1998b, Kaukiené: 1997, Palionis: 1995) compared. Der Comparison with other Lithuanian Newspapers East Prusse can only be very confined in Ma&e happened, because after J. Range (1994: 216) and Z. Zinkevitius (2002b) became the German Feud of the in Prussian-Lithuanian Press am Beginning of 20. Jhs. so far only suggestively explored, just as the German Loans of the in Press East in Prussian friar Time (s. dazu Palionis 1995: 175). 2. Celebrate Press as Medium indispensable new Borrowings, which partly still the represent borrowing process, but high Frequency den in Show texts (Bsp. 7, 8), of which, however, some weak phonological-morphological nur Have inclusion (Bsp. 7). Solche Vocabulary are im With regard to the Dynamics of Synchronie® den lending to be assigned, because for them this Newspaper tiberhaupt die primare Source of appearance is. Their linguistic is Analyse done mainly with the help of the Works by C. Berning (1960), K. Doerr (2002), S. Miiller (1994), A. Wolf (1991). ® Vaicekauskiene (2004: 8) defines the dynami Sync as ie variables Use of Fremdwörter in Connection with primary results of this Development, i.e. as the Formation of certain relationships to Language system (s. also Tesch 1978: 23-24, Bechert, Wildgen 1991: 9, Wolff 2004: 21, Coseriu 1975: 138). 30 Deutsche Entlehnungen im Naujasis TilZés keleivis Another remark concerns the structural diversity of the corpus. Since the language contacts are based on a dynamic model, the examples also show structural mixing and hybridization (cf. Bechert, Wildgen 1991:154, Vaicekauskiené 2004: 124, Weinreich 1976). The structure of the borrowings ranges from word borrowing (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12) to loan translation (e.g. 9, 10, 11a) to hybrids (e.g. 11b): Beto wa§itija wienas Trukis (9) if Klaipédos (1924-54-4, Gelgkeltrukiu (10) Wa%iawimo Sarafas) Orlaiwiu (11a) (1925-44-1, Naujaufios 3inios)... tapé didyfis Orfépis (11b)... fudraskytas (1925-72-1, Naujaufios 3inios) Winterhilfés (12) Work will be fsiq Ziemq proedas. (1936-63-1, Politikos Ap3walga) In doing so, one should naturally work out structurally prototypical and peripheral elements, whereby the borrowings have to be separated from their extensions (derivatives, replicas) in the language. Structurally speaking, German borrowings are primarily the results of word borrowing (which in turn breaks down into loanwords and foreign words; Range (1994: 218) does not consider this distinction useful for the Baltic languages). The popular forms of borrowing encompass everyday areas of the vocabulary and present themselves to the meistens in Form of assimilated loanwords (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). This group includes both internationalisms of German origin (reichskancleris, Reichskanzler‘), as well as internationalisms of German mediation (sgafija, Chausse‘, automobylas, obsolete form: Automobil‘). In addition to word borrowings, the preferred forms of lending (especially the lending translations (trukis < train, gelzkeltrukis < railway train, orlaivis < airship) and the hybrid forms (orsépis < lit. oras + lit. sépis /German ship) are also examined. The different forms of borrowing usually struggle for their position when the new name is introduced, e.g. the lease translation and the hybrid form (orlaivis vs. orsépis). J. Range (1994: 211) considers the lendmarks in Prussian-Lithuanian as linguistic Interferences that occur on the Ways 31 InpRE BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE the literary Lending resulted. So give the Examples 9, 10, 11 zur Conjecture Anlass, dass die Authors of the Texts also intentionally at the Determination of the form of borrowing, and this requires a historically related Overview that determinin es which Mae the historical Requirements the German Lehngutbestand im New Tilés keleivis could influence. 1.2. On the historical prerequisites The collected Body cannot be considered as true Image of the real of the German Loan word good im written Prussian Lithuanian am Beginning of 20. Jhs. considering what was in great Mafe on the Specific of the newspaper is to be credited, e.g. Attitude to Language and linguistic Knowledge of Copywriters, various Quality of Loans (general Lexik vs. Lexik Special expression). Although the Use of Lithuanian in borrowings Newspapers OstpreuSens often personal was®, held the New Passenger ban Ambitions for the Retention of Lithuanian language and was counted to the zu patriotic newspapers. Neben Information about the political, social and cultural life, they engaged the Lithuanians East Prussia for cultural and language conservation activities (Kaunas 1996: 548). Ihr Publishers Enzys Jagomast was known as Publisher of Lithuanian Schriften in East Prusse, more active Cultural workers who Identity questions were in Vydiinas’ Articles’ treated. From this Reason is the New Tilzés © Nach Palionis (1995: 175) came es mostly on the Publisher to: also im Passenger from F. Kurshat (until there 1880) are es redundant borrowings: festungas »fortress«, kurbas 'Korb'. Alminauskis (1935: 14) also celebrates unconditional Use of Entlehnungen an: ,,Misses the Newspaper writer for any Expression the Lithuanian Word, uses so the er German Word with Lithuanian Extension. Zu such Foreign words certainly include armekoras, “Army choir”, haubitsas, “Howitzer”. Am Beginning of 20 Jhs. steer such Formations the bilingual Readers no longer. 7 Z.B. appeared 1924 his Article on German and Lithuanian: No. 1 Téviskes Zemé / Heimaterde, no. 2 Real Lithuanian Gym / The true Lithuanian Face, no. 8 Klaipėdos kraSto bazny¢ia / Die Church im Memelland (und Polemik: No. 20 Response from Pfarrer Romer, Nr. 33 Vydin: Eine Response to Erwiderung), no. 21 Germans ir Lithuanians / German and Lithuanians, no.37 Likes / Expectations, Nr 43 How do we do it? / How we should behave. 32 Deutsche Entlehnungen im Naujasis Tilzés keleivis keleivis not only as a catalogue of language usage®, but also as a cultural product, partly also as a corpus planning instrument, which is reflected in the rare articles for language care (especially in the years 1936-1938). 2. GERMAN LOAN IN NAUJASIS TILZES KELEIVIS: THE This project is naturally closely linked to the historical and socio-cultural phenomena in Prussian-Lithuanian from the 13th to the middle of the 20th century, and is intended to provide an overview of the influence of the Prussian-Lithuanian language on the German language. as well as with the sociolinguistic differentiation of each language. The fundamental questions of this research are: From which German language varieties have borrowed Prussian-Lithuanian dialects or dialects of the Baltic languages? Writings found their way to the press and therefore appear in the newspaper? From which German language varieties were the borrowings taken directly? In the investigation of the German origin varieties, this analysis aims at the identification of the characteristic thematic groups as well as at the subject-related stratification of the loanword wealth. In the presentation of the Prussian-Lithuanian intermediate varieties, the extent to which the corresponding conceptual tendencies of the time were used in the use of borrowings is also discussed. All this requires a chronological Procedure and terminological clarity, which in turn can only be represented very schematically, because overlaps and overlaps are always to be expected. As the freest source of borrowing (German dialects) can be seen the mainly spread in the former Prussian-Lithuanian local dialect (city dialect) Low Prussian (also: East Prussian), which is summarized under the general term Low German (also: Low German). * In the study of the borrowings, Grosses (2002: 257) Note in Taking care that the Newspaper a mosaic Collaborative work of many authors is, whereby the risk of subjective language phenomena arises. Therefore, in this research the individual use (e.g. if the loan only occurs once) was treated as a special case. 33 INDRE BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE Prussian-Lithuanian dialects megen as Lithuanian Mediation varieties apply. As a jiingere Variety fiir Borrowings can the under historical from the point of view of distinguishable German written language. The Prussian-Lithuanian Written language is considered as an eventual Variety of mediation. The youngest Borrowing variety is given as German Default language (as they in Save values and Grammar collected and standardized am Beginning of 20. Jhs. vorlag) or High German (this Term is here defined as Contrast zu Low German, although er in der present has become ambiguous). From historical Griinden can not be a Prussian-Lithuanian language variety as Start the intermediate variety. 2.1. General lexics borrowed from German settlement dialects and their Prussian-Lithuanian intermediate variants Celebrate Borrowings from German Settlement dialects are naturally considered as primary Sources of use Lithuanian Dialects OstpreuRens. The German Vocabulary remained im Prussian-Lithuanian since Beginning 13th Jhs. durch intensive folksprachliche Contacts miindlich iibernommen. In der newspaper become from german Mouthpieces ins Prussian-Lithuanian ibernommene Nouns for the material culture used some Uncovering aspects of Eastern European social history (cf. Cepiené 1993, vgl. im Polish Wiktorowicz 2002: 337). Es handelt sich um Borrowings from the following thematic Groups: Household items (surprise) ,Korb‘< ostpr. korb, korv’, dekis ’Cover’< ostpr. dek), Clothing (Cadelis) ,Frauenkittel‘< ostpr. kédel, ceikis ’Zeug’< ostpr. zeik), buildings and Building components (staldas,Stall‘< mud. stall, staircase ,Stube‘< ahd. stuba), building material (white) ’Beams, Trusses’ < month. beams, planks ’Planke’ < o.i.p. planke), administrative vocabulary (vaktmistras,Wachtmeister‘< ostpr. wachméster), Essen (Smanta Cream, Schmand’< ostpr. 5mant, plume / plume ‘Pflaume’< ostpr. pen). Of her Embedding im Prussian-Lithuanian witness the Extensions, especially the Diminutive forms (Dead ,smaller Frauenkittel’, ° The East Prussian forms of borrowing are presented on the basis of Alminauskis (1935), Drotvinas (1987), Fraenkel (1962), Kurschat (1883). 34 Deutsche Entlehnungen im Naujasis Tilzés keleivis Stubelé,‘small room’). Some borrowings show the evolution from Low German (Burgermiftras) to High German (Burgermeifteris, Biirgermeifteris). Since many such borrowings from dialectological studies of the West Lithuanian dialects of the 20th century. are known, they should also have been common in spoken Prussian-Lithuanian. As far as its assimilation is concerned, however, only a few examples can prove that the newspaper directly used the borrowing forms present in spoken Prussian-Lithuanian: for example, for ‘prison, jail’ in Naujasis Tilzés keleivis, the word Siktizé, which has been etymologically altered, is not used, but Cuktugé, which corresponds more to the original form zuxthis. The newspaper examples suggest the assumption that the Naujasis Tilzés keleivis used the forms of folk-language borrowings common in other writings. Thus, the Prussian-Lithuanian written language proves to be a medium variety. From the spoken Prussian-Lithuanian (in some cases also directly) the German fief passed into the written variant (religious writings, word-erbicher, later also into the press language). In fact, in Naujasis Tilés keleivis we find word deductions of folk-language origin, which were found in the writings of the 16th-17th centuries. Jhs. used, e.g. stunda,Stunde- ,, turmas,Turm‘, stukis,Stiick‘ (cf. Cepiené 1998a, 1998b, 2000b). It can be said, however, that the language conservation ideas regarding the borrowings in Prussian-- Lithuanian were only modestly implemented in practice. The general Lithuanian written language of East Prussia was formed on the basis of the West-Oukštaitian dialect and was codified by Daniel Klein in his grammars of 1653 and 1654 (Rima 1972: 75, Palionis 1995: 39). In the 18th century. the ideas of the séuberung and the wider use of the Preußisch-Lithuanian spread at the same time as the ideas of the purification of the German language. Michael Morlin’s treatise Bedencken tiber das principium primarium in lingva lithvanica (1706) was a project to reform the religious writings (Giréiené 2003: 397, also Aleknavidiené, Schiller 2002: 91-97, *° The treatise called for avoiding Polonisms and Germanisms (everything that is Germanic should not be used if one can find another way of saying it) and not trusting the folk language so much because it is corrupted by Germanisms. The incomprehensible terms should receive paraphrases, no 35 InpRE BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE We can no longer fake,,S3pygelis“ or,,3erkolas“, because the Wiener Zodi is a Wokifka, another Polish, but we have to fake beautifully,,Weidrodis“, that is, the Thing that Weida shows, Kédé needs to fake in the Wieto an ugly Word »53talé«, which is taken from the Wokifka Language. Also, it is not appropriate to write Zodj »Krafé«, because it is a Zodj of MawiSkofian Language. The clock is a more graceful Word than the Pawadinimas,,3égorius, which pafidaré i& wok. The word »3eiger® or platt-woki&kojo,,- 3éger, Séger“ (1936-23-4, Youth Camp). Such sections on language maintenance appeared in Naujasis Tilzés keleivis mainly in the years 1936-1938, the emerging Lithuanian high language was considered only in certain spheres and not without intention of the publisher- ’® as a model for standardization. 3. CONCLUDING REMARKS In general, it can be said that the present German loanwords in the newspaper Naujasis Tilzés keleivis were created due to close German-Lithuanian language contacts in East Prussia, whereby the German language varieties were borrowed from German dialects. Settlement dialects up to High German are rich and can be regarded as sources of borrowing to varying degrees. The mediation work of Prussian-Lithuanian language varieties (oral forms, written language) should not be underestimated. This complicated structure is very simplified by Fig. 1 illustrated. The popular word borrowings (general vocabulary) in New TilZés keleivis may of course not have been borrowed directly from German settlement dialects, but may have been conveyed through the spoken Prussian-Lithuanian and especially the Prussian-Lithuanian written language, where they had already found their linguistic adaptation earlier. Many of these word denials were already made in the 17th-18th centuries. Jh. diskuund had appropriate Lithuanian equivalents, yet they have im Prussian-Lithuanian incorporated. In Prussian-Lithuanian Written language (Bible translations, newspapers) the literary hnung was promoted, i.e. many individual prints designed at the entrance to the texts of the Naujasis Tilzés keleivis. 6 Sea D, Kaunas became the Issue of this Newspaper also from the Lithuanian Government co-financed. Deutsche Entlehnungen im Naujasis Tilzés keleivis The strong influence of the German written language and the German high language is to be highlighted in the borrowed technical vocabulary, whereby the borrowings break down into certain technical languages (with borrowed internationalisms) and into the Reichssprache. When borrowing, the text authors chose different forms of loan that competed with each other. In many cases, the newspaper was the primary source of German borrowings, the standard language of independent Lithuania exerted only an indirect influence, in that it offered the tendencies to purify Prussian-Lithuanian and the equivalents for some of the old word borrowings. Figure 1. Ways of German borrowings in the Naujasis Tilzés keleivis German borrowings in the spoken Prussian Litauischen (in den Mundarten) (2.B. : curved Korb’, staldas Stall', Smanta Cream, butter) German borrowings in the Prussian-Lithuanian written language (2... hours Hours, holidays Holidays, landlords fk} Landrat’) Really. Buicher Wérterbiicher Press (e.g. Gardynai Gardinen’, hotels Hotel’, rofeseris Professor’, automotive Auto’, strelas Strike, friend Mitbruder', giant train') 43 Indre BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE LITTERACY ALEKNAVICIENE, O., ScuiLter, Ch. 2002: Found second Michaelium Mérlino Principium primarium in linguae Lithvanica (1706) specimen. Archivum Lithuanicum 4, 79-98. ALEKNAVICIENE, O., SCHILLER, CH. 2003: Jacobas Perkuhnas prie’ Michaelj Morlina, Johanna Schultza ir Philippa Ruhiga Treaty Well-founded Bedencken About the Ins Litthaufche Uberfetzte 3toes Fables Atfopi, And the same passionate 3ufchrifft (1706). Archivum Lithuanicum 5, 15-50. Auminauskis, K. 1935: Die Germanisms of the Lithuanian. Part 1: The Germans Lehnwärter im Lithuanian. Kaunas: St. Kazimiero D-jos Bookstore. Becuert, J., WiLpGEN, W. 1991: Einfiehruin ng die Speech contact research. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. BerninG, C. 1960: Vom ,,Proof of pedigree“ for ,,Zuchtwart". Vocabulary of National socialism. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter. Ciyne, M. 1996: Language, language user, language area. In: H. Goebl, P.H. Nelde, Z. Stary, W. Wolck, eds., 1996, 12-22. Seseriu, E. 1975: Synchronicity, diachronicity and Typology. In: D. Cherubim, Hrsg., Sprachwandel. Reader to diachronic Linguistics. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter. Cupiene, N. 1993: Germanisms XVII a. Magosios Lietuvos vakary in Aukštadvario dialect (based on ,,Lexicon Lithuanicum*). Lietuviy linguistics questions 30, 37-46. Ceptene, N. 1995: Germanisms of Lithuanian ir jy language phonetic adaptation. Abstract of the doctoral dissertation. Vilnius. Cepiene, N. 1998a: The Germanic DaukSos races. Lietuviy linguistics questions 34, 31-38. Ceprene, N. 1998b: Jono Bretkiino The Germanic Bible. Baltistica. V Annex, 91-96. Cepiene, N. 2000a: Germanisms Small In Lithuania. In: Small Encyclopedia of Lithuania 1. Vilnius: Institute of ir Science and Technology 463-— 464. 44 German Loans im New TilZés pasaivis Cepienz, N. 2000b: Names of household items of German origin F, W. Haacko, P. Ruigio ir K. G. Milka In the gardens. Minutes Linguistics Lithuanica 43, 34-38. Doerr, K. 2002: Nazi German: An Ideological Language of Exclusion, Domination and Annihilation. In: R. Michael, K. Doerr, Nazi-German / Nazi-German: An English Lexicon of the Language of the Third Reich. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 27-46. Drotvinas, Lithuania V. 1987: Lexicon Lithuanicum. Rankrastinis XVI a. German-Lithuanian Kalby Zodynas. Vilnius: Science. FRAENKEL, E. 1962: Lithuanian etymology Wérterbuch. Bd.1, 2. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Girétenk, J. 2003: Tendences of lexical purification in the history of common Lithuanian language. Archivum Lithuanicum 5, 391-410. Gors1, H., Neve, P.H., Stary, Z., WotcK, W., eds., Contact Linguistics. 1996/1997: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Halbbd. 1, 2. Berlin— New York: Walter de Gruyter. Grosse, S. 2002: To the German Sprache between 1918 and 1933. In: D. Cherubim, Karlheinz, J. Linke, eds., New A. German Language History: Mentality, Culture and Social History Cohesion. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 253-268. HINDERLING, R., HASSELBLATT, C., Baltisch 2004: / Deutsch. In: W. Besch, Betten, A. Reichmann, O. Sonderegger, eds., S. Language History. Ein Handbuch zur History of German language and their Research. 3. Teilbd. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 3269-3282. Jonixas, P. 1987: Lithuanian ir language is spoken by the people of Amdiy bivyje. Social features of the history of Lithuanian language. Chicago: Institute of Lithuanian Studies. Cauxine, A. 1997: Klaipėdos krašto vakary aukstaitiy tarmé. Broly Viliaus ir Makso Gaigalaiciy rasty on the basis of language. Klaipeda: KU leidykla. Kaunas, D. 1996: Minor The Lithuanian Book. Development of the Lithuanian book 1547-1940. Vilnius: White circles. 45 Inpre BROKARTAITE-PLADIENE Kurscuat, F. 1883: Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language. 2. Lithuanian-German dictionary. Halle a. S.: Bookshop of the Orphanage. Miter, S. 1994: Sprachwörterbicher im Nationalsozialismus: the ideological influence of Duden, Sprachbrockhaus and other reference books during the,,Third Reich“. Stuttgart: M&P, Verlag für Wissenschaft und Research. Naujajis Til¥és Keleivis. Tilzé, 1924-1940. Oxsaar, E. 2004: Terminology and subject of language contact research. In: W. Besch, A. Betten, O. Reichmann, S. Sonderegger, ed., Language History. Ein Handbook of the History of the German Language and its Research. 3. Teilbd. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 3160-3170. Pationis, J. 1995: History of the Lithuanian written language. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijy leidykla. Yeah, yeah, yeah. ENz, P. von 1998: From language imperialism to language pride. Das 20th century in the language policy history of the German-speaking Lander. In: H. Kamper, H. Schmidt, eds., Das 20. Century. History of language —Contemporary history. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 9-26. Rance, J. 1994: On the Study of the Lehngut in the Baltic Languages. Linguistica Baltica 3, 211-231. RimSa, V. 1972: Elements of the East Prissian Lithuanian language in the present common Lithuanian language. Linguistics 24 (1), 75-81. Scuitier, Cu. 1999: [Rec.] Audroné Kaukiené, Klaipėdos krasto vakary aukstaiciy tarmé. Broliy Viliaus and Max Gaigalaiciy rasty on the basis of the language. Archivum Lithuanicum 1, 222-228. Srepse, A. 1989: German Language Yesterday and Today: Introduction to the History of Language and Linguistics. Miinchen: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Tescu, G. 1978: Linguistic interference. Theoretical, terminological and methodological basic questions for their research. Tiibingen: TBL-Verlag Narr. VAICEKAUSKIENE, L. 2004: Theory and practice of foreign-language standardization in the new Lithuanian language. Doctoral dissertation. Vilnius. 46 Deutsche Entlehnungen im Naujasis TilZés keleivis WeinreEicu, U. 1976: Languages in Contact: Results and Problems of Bilingualism Research. Ed. and afterword by A. de Vincenz. Miinchen: Beck. Wixtorowicz, J. 2002: The German-Polish Neighborhood and its Reflection in the Polish Language. In: D. Cherubim, ed., New German Language History. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 337-348. Wo r, A. 1991: The German National Socialist Party. Freiburg im Breisgau: University of Applied Sciences. Wotrr, G. 2004: German Language History from the Beginning to the Present. A study book. Tiibingen, Basel: A. Francke Verlag. Zunkevičius, Z. 2002a: Thoughts after the publication of the first volume of the Lithuanian Language Atlas. In: Ders., Selected articles 1. Vilnius: Lithuanian Catholic Academy of Sciences, 404410. Zinkevicius, Z. 2002b: The influence of German on East Prussian-Lithuanian at the beginning of the 20th century. Jahrhunderts. In: Ders., Selected articles 2. Vilnius: Lithuanian Catholic Academy of Sciences, 393-398. Indré Brokartaité-- Pladiené Faculty of Humanities Siauliy universitetas P. Visinskio g. 38, LT-76352 Siauliai, Lithuania [email protected] 47