Dėl vienos XVII a. lietuvių asmenvardžių priesagos

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA LI (2004), 29–38 On One Suffix in 17th-Century Lithuanian Personal Names VITALIJA MACIEJAUSKIENĖ Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Vilnius The article deals with the suffix -uitis, attested in 17th century Lithuanian personal names. There is already a certain amount of research into the formation of Lithuanian surnames and the personal names from which they derive. In the historical sources investigated until now, the suffix -uitis was either not found, or it was rare. Its frequency in the 17th century church registers of the Gruzdžiai parish, where it is used to derive as much as 20,5% of all surnames, is therefore a striking fact. The forms were recorded between 1619 and 1690 in the register of ecclesiastical marriages. On the basis of a comparison with what is known about patronymical formations in the period involved, we can conclude that the suffix -uitis was patronymical. The peculiarities of the formation of personal names in the newly investigated source documents also point to this conclusion. The suffix -uitis can thus be added to the stock of attested 17th century patronymical suffixes. 0. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS The relatively few studies in Lithuanian historical anthroponymy differ in various respects. Some of them examine the anthroponymy of almost all of Lithuania over several centuries, for one purpose or another. Here one may mention K. Būga’s study “On Lithuanian Personal Names,” which analyzes the structure of old dithematic personal names, discusses how Lithuanian anthroponyms were written in 13th–15th-century documents, and, on the basis of cases in which Lithuanian vowels were replaced by Russian vowels at the beginnings, middles, and ends of words, reconstructs the authentic forms of the names of nine Lithuanian dukes (Būga 1958). The anthroponymy of various Lithuanian localities and centuries also had to be covered in studying phenomena associated with the formation of Lithuanian surnames: the development of two-name designation, the emergence of surnames and their eventual stabilization, the sources of surname origins, and so on (Maciejauskienė 1991). Some studies examine the anthroponymy of several historical sources, while others deal with only one. In such cases, the setting in which the personal names under examination functioned is fairly specific, and the period studied is relatively short. Examples include a study of the anthroponymy of Vilnius in the early 17th century (Zinkevičius 1977), research on personal names in the Kriaunos parish in the late 17th and early 18th centuries (Maciejauskienė 1993), a study of surnames in Ragainė County in the second half of the 18th and early 19th centuries (Žemienė 2002), or research on surnames in the Samogitian bishopric in 1795 30 | VITALIJA MACIJAUSKIENĖ (Ramonienė 1987), and so on. The study of personal names among Kaunas townspeople differs considerably from all those mentioned above. In this case, the anthroponymy of a specific Lithuanian locality was collected from numerous historical sources dating from the 16th–18th centuries; consequently, the period under study is long (Ragauskaitė 2002). Also worth mentioning is a study of 16th-century simplex names of Lithuanian origin, which examines personal names recorded in sources from many different Lithuanian localities, but from a single century (Maciejauskienė 1997). Understandably, the comprehensiveness and precision of the research findings in the studies mentioned, which differ in kind, cannot be the same either. It is not difficult to draw precise conclusions about the formation (structure) of historical personal names, their tendencies of origin, the circumstances in which people were named, and other matters of interest when the anthroponymy examined comes from one or several sources relating to a specific place and covering a short period (cf. Zinkevičius 1977, Ramonienė 1987, Maciejauskienė 1993, Žemienė 2002, etc.). However, when the aims and objectives of a study require it to encompass personal names recorded over several centuries, from various parts of Lithuania and in numerous historical sources, the researcher, in summarizing the findings, necessarily relies only on analysis of the data collected up to that point. The conclusions of such a study cannot be final. This is particularly true of research into the formation of Lithuanian surnames, the sources of their origins, and the derivation of historical personal names. For as sources continue to be read and their personal names assessed from these or other perspectives, new data that have not been encountered before may be found. The aim of this article is to assess one more 17th-century personal-name suffix, observed while collecting new data in historical anthroponymy, and to place it within the context of the derivational affixes of personal names from this period. This is the suffix -uitis. 1. A BRIEF CHARACTERIZATION OF THE FORMATION OF 17TH-CENTURY PERSONAL NAMES Tiriant lietuvių pavardžių susidarymą (Maciejauskienė 1991) įvairiais požiūriais buvo įvertinta kelių šimtmečių antroponimija. Nustačius, kad intensyviausiai pavardės formavosi XVII a., ypač svarbu buvo aptarti šio laikotarpio dvinarío įvardijimo antruosius asmenvardžius. Kaip tik iš jų turėjo susidaryti dauguma lietuvių pavardžių. Visi jie buvo suskirstyti į patronimus ir asmenvardžius be patroniminių priesagų. Patronymics predominated in the 17th century. They were formed with Lithuanian (-aitis, -onis, -ūnas, etc.) and Slavic (-evič, -ovič) patronymic suffixes. The data collected showed that Lithuanian patronymic suffixes were especially frequent during this period. In terms of productivity, they were ranked in the following order: -aitis, -onis, -ūnas, -ovič, -evič, -ėnas, etc. (very rare). Patronymics were formed with these suffixes: from Christian names of various forms (full, shortened, and diminutive), e.g.: Andreiaitis, Gabraytis, Jurgutaytis; Bagdananis, Grigonis, Jonelonis; Alexieūnas, Mikiūnas, Pronckielun; Jakubowicz, Муковичъ, Wołukowicz; Alexiewicz, Staniewicz, Станюлевич; Powilenas, Kazenas, Stasiulenas, and so on; from various personal names of Lithuanian origin, e.g.: Akmenaytis, Baltmiszkaitis, Kieturnitaytis, Szaltnosaytis, Žusinaitis; Burneikonis, Grazulanis, Szyłeikanis, Wanaganis; Ak- DĖL VIENOS LIETUVIŲ ASMENVARDŽIŲ PRIESAGOS 31 meniunas, Medziunas, Rymkunas, Ziamayciunas; Dziugowic, Kiszkielowicz, Trinitowicz; Budrewicz, Gilewicz, Juodziejwicz; Butenas, Niksztelenas, Plikienas, and so on; among the latter patronymics are also some formed from old dithematic personal names, e.g.: Daugwitavits, Galminaytis, Narwayszaytis; Dawnaronis, Nartawtanis, Waysznaranis; Girdwaynowicz, Kontrymowicz, Narwilowicz, and so on; from various Slavic or other personal names of foreign origin, e.g.: Czebotaraytis, Perwaznikaytis, Žukaytis; Czerniukonis, Stalmakaniš; Kowalun, Krowczunas, Zolnierunas; Byczkowicz, Strycharowicz, Szopowalowicz, and so on. Personal names without patronymic suffixes, written in the second position of a two-part naming formula, were very diverse in the 17th century. Most were of Lithuanian origin, e.g.: Ak­menis, Auksz­tawartis, Bat­nagis, Grauz­yk­lis, Kier­deykis, Kupstas, Miltakis, Nareykis, Pakarklis, Silpnis, Szaltenis, Taurakis, Toley­kis, Trejgis, Wabzda, Wanags, and so on; these include old dithematic personal names, e.g.: Dauginas, Dawnoras, Dowtort, Jogmin, Kiezgli, Kimont, Syrgied, Skawgird, Surkont, Swirbut, Wilbut, Zutowt, and so on. Personal names of this type with other origins were rare, e.g.: Endrykis, Łukszas, Miceykis, Razmis, Tamolis (forms of Christian names), Bohumatka, Dobrylo, Merinik, Niewiera; Donmark, Gieyber (other personal names of Slavic or Germanic origin). After dividing personal names into patronymics and those without patronymic suffixes, personal names with diminutive suffixes -elis, -elė, -ėlis, -ėlė, -ulis, -utis, and so on, remain to be discussed. They were not frequent, e.g.: Dagielis, Gierweta, Awinelis, Awizeta, Burbulis, Mažulis, Kiszkucis, Rudutis, and so on. These are personal names of Lithuanian origin. There were also personal names of this type derived from Christian names, e.g.: Banelis, Bochdanelis, Janel, Tumkielis, Antulis, Stanulis, Szeputis, Walutis, and so on. These suffixes could also have a patronymic meaning if names containing them were formed from any member of the father’s naming formula (the first, which by the 17th century was almost always a Christian name, or the second, which could be of various origins). On the other hand, such personal names may have arisen directly from diminutive common nouns or forms of Christian names and may have had nothing to do with patronymics (see also Maciejauskienė 1977: 165–166). This is the general picture of the second personal names used in the 17th century in two-part personal naming formulas—potential Lithuanian surnames (for more on them, see Maciejauskienė 1991: 230–243). It can be supplemented by taking into account newly collected data on the 17th-century anthroponymy of Gruzdžiai parish (Šiauliai district). 2. PERSONAL NAMES IN THE GRUZDŽIAI PARISH IN THE 17TH CENTURY These personal names were extracted from the register book of marriages of the Gruzdžiai parish for the 17th century (1619–1690) (preserved in the archive of this church). In all, there are about 1,900 of them (1,250 male designations and 650 female ones). In describing the personal names of the Gruzdžiai parish, only the second anthroponyms in men’s two-element designations will be discussed here. In doing so, the same system for evaluating 17th-century personal names mentioned earlier is followed. This makes it easy to observe both similarities and differences. Thus, the Gruzdžiai personal names have been divided into patronymics and those without patronymic suffixes. The quantitative ratio of these groups shows that the former clearly predominate. Personal names without patronymic suffixes make up about 30%. And the patronymics in the source under discussion 32 | VITALIJA MACIEJAUSKIENĖ also show that Lithuanian patronymic suffixes are much more popular, and all of them are ranked by productivity as follows: -aitis (about 30.7% of patronymics formed with it), -evič (8.9%), -ovič (3.2%), -ūnas (1.4%), -onis (0.08%). Thus, the most frequent patronymic suffix is -aitis, while the other Lithuanian suffixes are uncharacteristic of personal names in this locality (for more on the distribution of 17th-century personal-name suffixes, see also Maciejauskienė 1977). The Gruzdžiai parish patronymics with the suffixes mentioned above are formed from Christian names in various forms (full, shortened, diminutive), e.g.: Ambroziejaytis, Augustinaytis, Bartlomiejaytis, Ambrazaytis, Grigaytis, Stonaytis, Andrutaytis, Czepłutaytis; Brazewicz, Jankiewicz, Iaskiewicz; Bogdanowicz, Gasperowicz; Grigalunas, Gryciunas, Grinciunas, etc.; from various Lithuanian-origin personal names, e.g.: Balczaytis, Berzaytis, Gaytaytis, Norutaytis; Bangiewicz, Budrewicz, Dargiewicz, Daukƒzewicz, Judrewicz, Noreikiewicz; Girdowicz; Noriunas, etc.; among these patronymics are also some formed from old two-stem personal names, e.g.: Daugintaytis, Daujoytaytis, Miłwidaytis, Radwiłaytis; patronymics formed from personal names of foreign or not entirely clear origin are relatively rare, e.g.: Miernikaytis, Urmonaytis; Ratkunas; Waytonis. Personal names without patronymic suffixes are highly varied. Most are of Lithuanian origin, e.g.: Awizius, Batądis, Bauza, Budris, Butkus, Dagis, Daugwedis, Dauksza, Gielzinis, Jodupis, Judrys, Kairis, Kautakis, Lingis, Lepƒza, Łokis, Monstis, Wower e, Żogas, Zwiłga, etc.; many among them are old two-stem personal names, e.g.: Butowt, Dargaudis, Dowgint, Giedwidis, Geystar, Kantminis, Norgietto, Normatis, Skaudwitaƒ, Sugowdz, Towgintt, Waybut, Woyszwiłt, etc. Other personal names without patronymic suffixes (forms of Christian names or names of foreign origin) are very rare, e.g.: Augustinas, Grinius, Mocius; Duleba, Dulicz, Krupo, Starosta, Szapko, etc. Among the personal names of the Gruzdžiai parish are also those with Lithuanian diminutive suffixes -ėlis, -ytis, -užis, -ulis, -utis, -užis, etc., which, as already mentioned, may also have a patronymic meaning, e.g.: Treciokielis; Jonktytis, Karkaty tis, Laur ytis, Thomaszytis; Piktuyzis; Baniulis, Kibulis; Barutis, Guzutis, Jokubutis, Maniutis; Darguzis, etc. As can be seen, these are personal names derived from Christian names or of Lithuanian origin. Together they make up about 4 percent of the personal names under discussion. What has been said so far about the Gruzdžiai personal names might seem to suggest that they do not differ in any way from the general context of 17th-century Lithuanian anthroponymy. However, this is not the case. Their truly distinctive feature is that they include many derivatives with the suffix -uitis. This suffix has not yet been mentioned here in connection with 17th-century personal names, which means that it was either absent from the sources read earlier or was very rare. Among the Gruzdžiai personal names, however, derivatives with this suffix make up 20.5 percent, making them second in frequency only to derivatives with the Lithuanian patronymic suffix -aitis. Personal names with the suffix -uitis (usually written -uytis, and rarely -u itis, -ujtis) are more often formed from various, relatively clear forms of Christian names (full, shortened, diminutive), e.g.: Roman Adamuytis (the complete two-element designation is given, allowing the frequency of these personal names to be shown more clearly), Aloizius Adomuytis, Izidor Adomuytis, Symon Adomuytis, Simonus Adomuytis, Andreas Andreykuytis, Laurentius Andreykuytis, Simonus Augustinuytis, Martinus Baltramuytis, Ge- DĖL VIENOS LIETUVIŲ ASMENVARDŽIŲ PRIESAGOS 33 orgius Baltronuytis, Jakobus Baltruytis, Paulus Benedyktytis, Josephus Czepuytis, Paulus Czepuytis, Stephanus Czepuytis, Petrus Dawiduytis, Martinus Gasperuytis, Gasper Grygorytis, Augustinus Grygujtis, Petrus Hryhoruytis, Philipus Iakuytis, Ioannes Iankuytis, Ioannes Jocubuytis, Georgius Jonuytis, Stephanus Ionuytis, Andreas Jonuszkuytis, Andreas Jonuszuytis, Gregorius Josuytis, Nicolaus Iozapuytis, Casimirus Iozuytis, Philipus Iurgieluytis, Hryhory Iusuytis, Martinus Kasporuytis, Adamus Kazimieruytis, Thomas Kazimieruytis, Mathias Krisynuytis, Aloizius Łaurynuytis, Stephanus Łaurinuytis, Stefanus Łukoszuytis, Nicolaus Macuitis, Stefanus Macuytis, Stephanus Martinuytis, Nicolaus Matutuytis, Nicolaus Matutuytis, Andreas Mikieluytis, Andreas Mikoluytis, Casimirus Mikoluytis, Joannes Mikuytis, Andreas Morkuytis, Stanislaus Morkuytis, Samuel Motiejuytis, Valentinus Petrikuytis, Iosephis Petrutis, Martinus Petrvytis, Stefanus Petruytis, Ioannes Powiluytis, Martinus Sabuytis, Mathias Sabuytis, Ioannes Sabuytis, Martinus Sabuytis, Matheus Sabuytis, Nicolaus Sabutuytis, Simon Sabutuytis, Casimirus Simuytis, Paulus Simuytis, Andreas Stankuytis, Gasper Stasiuytis, Andreas Stasiuytis, Sebastianus Staskuytis, Gasper Stasuytis, Martinus Stasuytis, Symonus Stasuytis, Ioannes Szymkuytis, Andreas Szymuytis, Georgius Szymuytis, Sebastianus Sztoczkuytis, Aloisius Tamoszuytis, Josephus Tamoszuytis, Simon Tamutuytis, Andreas Wayciuhytis, Martianus Wayciuhytis, Stanislaus Waytekuytis, Aderbertus Waytiekuytis, Casimiri Waytiekuytis, Martinus Waytiekuytis, Mathias Waytiekuytis, Joannes Valentinuytis, Josephus Walentinuytis, Casimirus Walentinuytis, Andreas Wenckuytis, Nicolaus Wenckuytis, Matheas Woycutuytis, Iosephus Woytiekuytis, Samuelus Woytiekuytis, David Woszkuytis and so on. There are somewhat fewer derivatives with the suffix -uitis formed from various other personal names. These derivatives are most often of Lithuanian origin; among them are also forms derived from old two-stem personal names. Others are of foreign origin, while the origin of some is unclear or not entirely clear. This is apparently also because their forms have been inaccurately recorded or distorted. Bearing in mind that the aim of this article is not to establish precisely the origins of the personal names under discussion, examples of all of them are presented together: David Bajoruvytis, Iacobus Bajoruitis, Adamus Batnuytis, David Batozuytis, Iacobus Batozuytis, Bartholomeus Baltonuytis, David Baltoszuytis, Casimirus Baltozuytis, Adamus Baltytis, Stephanus Barczuytis, Joannes Batwiłuytis, Gasper Ciałkuytis, Nicolaus Daynuytis, Bartholomeus Dantuytis, Ioannes Daukszuytis, Laurentius Didinskyuytis, Casimirus Dykyutis, Casimirus Dityutis, Stephanus Dymfuytis, Stefanus Dyrmuytis, Nicolaus Dumszuytis, Stefanus Dwilitytis, Andreas Galminuytis, Nicolaus Giedwiduytis, Valentinus Gieysztaruytis, Iosephus Gielzinuytis, Casimirus Gihuytis, Iosephis Impokuytis, Stanislaus Jodrujtis, Stan. Joduytis, Barthol. Ioteykuytis, Simonus Iurduytis, Ioannes Kaczuskuytis, Stanislaus Kanczekuytis, Oliasz Kantminuytis, Nicol. Kielnuytis, Paulus Kintaykuytis, Paulus Konteykuytis, Stanislaus Kreputyis, Nicolaus Kulhuytis, David Kunigzgenuytis, Mathias Kupruytis, Petrus Kusuytis, Iacobus Łaguytis, Antonius Łaukuytis, Casimirus Łaukuytis, Jacobuſ Łaumakujtis, Iacobus Łokuytis, Stanislaus Łokuytis, Iacobus Ługuytis, Stefanus Maszkuytis, Stanislaus Melickuytis, Bartholomeus Milwiduytis, Iozephus Narkuytis, Michal Norekuytis, Matheus Platkuytis, Stanislaus Poduytis, Martinus Poinkuytis, Mathias Ponikuytis, Mathias Pupuytis, Valerianus Rakuytis, Simonus Raubuytis, Izidor Razuytis, Martinus Rymkuytis, Matheas Rukuytis, Iosephus Sabutuytis, Ioannes Saguytis, 34 | VITALIJA MACIEJAUSKIENĖ Ioannes Sakihytis, Joannes Sauguytis, Samuel Skapuytis, Filipus Skupeykuytis, Stephanus Smilguytis, Simon Sorbutuytis, Gasper Sraguytis, Jacobus Strazduytis, Adalbertus Stunguytis, Bartholomeus Swarakuytis, Ioannes Szansztowuytis, Stanislaus Sziautuytis, Andreas Szlupuytis, Steponas Szukuytis, Andreas Triwatakujtis, Laurentius Urmonuytis, Nicolaus Urmonuytis, Bartholomeus Vaideuytis, Martinas Wainuytis, Stanislaus Waynuytis, Valentini Wasgirdutytis, Petrus Viliszkuytis, Paulus Winksznuutis, Valenti Woyzgirdutytis, Iacobus Žaguytis, Franciskus Ząsinuytis, Casimirus Zautkuytis, David Zentuytis, Tomas Zoguytis and so on. The source’s anthroponymy shows that patronymics were often formed from the same personal names with the particularly productive Lithuanian suffix -uitis, for example: Adomaytis, Augustinaytis, Dawidaytis, Iakubaytis, Ianuszkaytis, Ionaitis, Josaytis, Jozaytis, Iozapaytis, Jurgietaytis, Kasparaytis, Casimierytis, Łukofzaytis, Martinaytis, Matuthaitis, Mikielaytis, Morkaytis, Motieyatis, Petraytis, Powitaytis, Symautis, Stasiaučytytis, Szimaytis, Tamaszaytis, Tamofzaytis, Waytekaytis, Valentinaytis, Waszkayt, Wenskaytis, Woytiekaitis and so on (from Christian names of various genders), and Baioraytis, Balczaytis, Batozaytis, Barczaytis, Daukfzaytis, Dumfzaytis, Gitaytis, Iodaytis, Iuodraytis, Łaukaytis, Łaumakaytis, Miłwidaytis, Norkaytis, Rymkaytis, Szaulaytis, Slupaytis, Urmonaytis, Woyzgirdaytis, Ziogaytis, Zogaytis and so on (from other personal names, often of Lithuanian origin). Derivatives with the suffix -uitis formed from Christian names of various genders should most often, it seems, be associated with the first personal names in two-part naming—that is, given names. And not only with the canonical forms of these names, which were customarily written in church sources, but also with the shortened and diminutive forms of Christian names used in everyday speech (see in more detail Maciejauskienė 1991: 38–39). Such personal names occur very rarely in the second position of two-part naming (cf. Georgius Augustinas, Jozephus Jurgielis, Martinus Petrutis, Thoma Staniulis, Petrus Stankus, Bartholomeus Stasiulis and the like). Only derivatives of the suffix -uitis formed from non-Christian names can be associated with the second personal names in two-part naming. Some personal names that could be regarded as base words for derivatives with the suffix under discussion are recorded in the source, for example: Balcius, Danta, Dauksza, Daukszas, Dikis, Dykis, Dymsza, Dwilis, Geystar, Gielzinis, Giedwidis, Judris, Judrys, Iurd, Iurda, Kantminis, Krepa, Kriepa, Łagis, Laumakis, Łokis, Noreykis, Podzius, Raubis, Rukas, Smilgis, Smyłgis, Szlupas, Szukis, Triwatakis, Urmonas, Waydyta, Weysgirdis, Zasinas, Zogas, Zogis and so on. As can be seen, the personal names serving as bases for derivatives with the suffix -uitis have the endings -a, -as, -is, -ys, -ius. 3. ON THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SUFFIX -UITIS 3.1. It has already been mentioned that the suffix -uitis was not distinguished in earlier studies of Lithuanian anthroponymy in the seventeenth century. When the personal names in the 1673 inventory of the Šiauliai economy were discussed and assessed from the perspective of their development into surnames, the very few second members of two-member names bearing this suffix were included among personal names without patronymic suffixes. Among about 400 personal names of this type, only 12 had the suffix -uitis (Auguytis, Baluytis, Czernuytis, Gatyutis, Gizuvytis, Jasuvtis, Juzuytis, Mankuytis, Paluytis, Skloruytis, Watuytis, and Žakuytis). About 2,450 two-member names in the source were DĖL VIENOS LIETUVIŲ ASMENVARDŽIŲ PRIESAGOS 35 recorded as a given name and patronymic, and the most frequent patronymic suffix was -aitis (see Maciejauskienė 1991: 91–99). Only in a discussion of 93 personal names of seventeenth-century male townspeople of Joniškis, extracted from the register book of baptisms at the Joniškis church for 1599–1621, is -uitis mentioned among other diminutive suffixes, with examples of its derivatives provided (Biwoñuytis, Buskuytis, Celkuytis, Gnupęutitis, Janutuitis, Jozuitis, Kiepiėtuitis, Lasuitis, Mekuytis, Mitkuitis, Pukuytis, etc.) (Ragauskaitė 2002: 32–33). Moreover, here, as in earlier studies of anthroponymy of this period (Maciejauskienė 1977: 165–166; 1991: 240; 1993: 42), it is also stated that diminutive suffixes could have had a patronymic meaning. 3. 2. In works devoted to word formation in Lithuanian, the suffix -uitis is mentioned and described. P. Skardžius states that it is used mainly in Samogitian dialects and, following K. Būga, regards it as a blend formed through the merger of the suffixes -ūtis and -ytis; thus paukštūtis may derive from paukštūtis + paukštytis (Skardžius 1943: 365). B. Kabašinskaitė (1996: 27; 1998: 89) and S. Ambrazas express the same view. The latter, discussing the use of the suffix -uitis in Samogitian and neighboring Aukštaitian dialects, calls its derivatives from names of living beings (e.g., arkliūtis, kiaulūtis, mergūtis) diminutives (Ambrazas 2000: 105). This suffix is discussed somewhat more extensively in Lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje. There it is mentioned in connection with diminutives and regarded only as a suffix characteristic of certain dialects (the northern Samogitian dialects and neighboring Aukštaitian dialects). It is also stated that diminutives with this suffix are formed only from names of living beings, and two groups of derivatives with the suffix -uitis are distinguished: 1) true diminutives, usually used with a sense of smallness or endearment (arkliūtis, kalūūtis, karvūtis, mergūtis, vaikūtis); 2) names for young animals and birds and for children, which also have a meaning of descent (gandriūtis ‘a stork’s child, a young stork’, kalakutūtis, katūtis, velnūtis, žąsūtis) (Ulvydas, ed., 1965: 282). In both cases, the discussion concerns the common lexicon. 3. 3. In the context of the formation of proper nouns—personal names—the suffix -uitis is mentioned in the Lietuvių kalbos atlase. In its discussion of surname suffixes for unmarried men (boys), -uitis is also discussed. It is noted that its derivatives are used mainly in northern Samogitian and some other dialects (and are already disappearing), and that they are formed from the father’s surname, whatever its stem, e.g., Dāntuitis (: Dānta), Gėdgauduitis (: Gedgaudas), Keršūitis (: Keršys), Rāštikuitis (: Rāštikis), Rimkūitis (: Rimkus), and so on. It is further stated that in some places these derivatives have differences in meaning: they are used to refer to smaller, younger children, or have a pejorative connotation (LKA₃ 119). 3. 4. The fact that surnames for unmarried men (boys) are formed from the father’s surname with the suffix -uitis allows it to be regarded as patronymic. This is also supported by usage in the common language, which attests derivatives with this suffix that denote the young of animals and birds and children, and also express descent (cf. the second group of derivatives with this suffix distinguished in Lietuvių kalbos gramatikoje). It should be noted that the surnames of unmarried men (boys) in question are not official (the latter are not formed in any way, but simply inherited unchanged from the father). Their formation is a feature of spoken language 36 | VITALIJA MACIEJAUSKIENĖ This is a fact, and in a sense it also links these unofficial personal names with those of the seventeenth century. The latter, recorded in sources, were likewise unofficial; they often attested to phenomena of spoken-language usage, could change, and gradually become—or even fail to become—surnames. Thus, the personal-name suffix -uitis used in Gruzdžiai in the seventeenth century should be regarded as patronymic, and its derivatives as patronyms. The frequency of this suffix alone, among other things, would preclude treating it as merely diminutive (as noted earlier, its derivatives make up about 20.5 percent of all second personal names in two-part naming, whereas those formed with all diminutive suffixes account for about 4 percent). Furthermore, as the data presented above show, the personal names discussed here with the suffix -uitis are in no way distinct either from the general context of seventeenth-century patronyms formed with various suffixes or from the context of Gruzdžiai patronyms formed with the most frequent suffix, -aitis. They are all formed from Christian given names and other personal names (most often of Lithuanian origin), that is, from the first or second elements of the father’s two-part name. The source also records a considerable number of personal names with the same stem but without the suffix -uitis. These are, of course, the base words of the patronyms under discussion, the derivatives with the suffix -uitis. Accordingly, the list of Lithuanian patronymic suffixes used in the seventeenth century should be supplemented with the suffix -uitis. Clearly, it was characteristic of the personal names of only certain parts of Lithuania. On the basis of the data currently available, in the seventeenth century it was widespread around Gruzdžiai and is attested in the previously mentioned Joniškis church source from this period—that is, in the same areas also cited in discussions of the use of common-noun diminutives with the suffix -uitis and of the prevalence of unmarried men’s (boys’) surnames with this suffix (the area usually mentioned is Samogitian, especially northern Samogitian, and the neighboring Aukštaitian dialect area). In addition to the previously mentioned personal names of Joniškis townspeople with the suffix -uitis, its use in this locality is also attested by examples from baptismal records drawn from the same source and presented in a study of Lithuanian forms of oikonyms in sixteenth- to nineteenth-century sources. Alongside other personal names, these include derivatives with the suffix -uitis: Bartlomieus Kraguitis, Vrbons Szaruiitis, Joannis Pirtininkuitis (Garliauskas 1998: 152–153). It may be assumed that the use and frequency of this suffix would also be confirmed by the anthroponymy of other parts of Northern Samogitia and nearby areas. 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS Research into the formation of Lithuanian surnames has shown that most of them must have arisen in the seventeenth century. The principal source of surname origins was the second element in the two-part names used during that period—patronyms and other personal names. The former were much more common. This was also confirmed by the anthroponymy of the seventeenth-century Gruzdžiai church source discussed above. Once patronyms became surnames, they became hereditary and, passed down from generation to generation, must have survived to the present day and thus be found among current surnames. The data in Dictionary of Lithuanian Surnames show that there are only a dozen or so surnames with the suffix -uitis: Adomuitis, Jakuītis, Januitis, Jasuītis, Jonuitis, Južuitis, Mačiūitis, Martynuitis, Motejuitis, Motejuitis, Petrūitis, Prančuitis, Pranuitis, Samuitis, Slašiūtis, Tamašiūtis (LPŽI, 66, 792, 804, 819, 844, 877; LPŽII 129, 169, 273, 274, 447, 503, 505, 671, 810, 1014). Almost all of them are recorded in the areas around Akmenė, Gruzdžiai (Šiauliai District), Joniškis, Kartena DĖL VIENOS LIETUVIŲ ASMENVARDŽIŲ PRIESAGOS 37 (Kretinga District), Klaipėda, Kuliai (Plungė District), Kuršėnai (Šiauliai District), Kurtuvėnai (Šiauliai District), Linkuva (Pakruojis District), Meškuičiai (Šiauliai District), Papilė (Akmenė District), Plungė, Skaistgirys (Joniškis District), Šiauliai, Šiaulėnai (Radviliškis District), Užventis (Kelmė District), Vaškai (Pasvalys District), Vegeriai (Akmenė District), and Žagarė (Joniškis District)—that is, mostly in the areas where the suffix -uitis has already been mentioned as being used. A few exceptions—surnames recorded in Kaunas, Vilnius, and Žeimiai (Jonava District)—are readily explained by the possibility that these personal names migrated. Thus, if we assume that the listed surnames arose from patronyms formed with the suffix -uitis and used in the seventeenth century (or earlier), we can establish, at least approximately, the geographical range of this suffix. More precise data can clearly be expected only through research into the historical anthroponymy of these areas in the seventeenth century (and earlier). Given the frequency and variety of patronyms formed with the suffix -uitis in use in the Gruzdžiai parish in the seventeenth century, one may ask why so few current surnames bear this suffix. This is readily explained by the phenomenon of patronymic suffix loss. The essence of the process is as follows: as patronyms became surnames, or as surnames arose from patronyms, they often lost their patronymic suffixes. This has been discussed in several studies devoted to historical anthroponymy. It has been observed that as early as the sixteenth century, forms of personal names with and without a patronymic suffix could be used interchangeably to refer to the same people and were equivalent. This is associated with the loss of patronymic suffixes (Jonikas 1973: 207–208). It has been suggested that, having lost their original meaning, patronymic suffixes in the seventeenth century were dropped not everywhere in Lithuania, but only in certain areas, for example, in Samogitia (Salys 1933: 1269). However, a more detailed study of patronymic suffix loss seems not to have confirmed this claim (Maciejauskienė 1991: 151–169). The fact that most patronyms used in the Gruzdžiai parish in the seventeenth century, or surnames derived from them, lost their patronymic suffixes is most clearly attested by the anthroponymy in the marriage-register books of the same church from the eighteenth century (1699–1773), a source also held in the church archives. Of approximately 1,500 second personal names in men’s two-part names, only about 8 percent have the Lithuanian patronymic suffix -aitis and about 1 percent the suffix -uitis (in the seventeenth century these personal names accounted for 30 and 20.5 percent, respectively). The number of personal names without patronymic suffixes increased noticeably: they make up about 67 percent of all second elements in two-part names (in the seventeenth century, they made up about 30 percent). The suffix -uitis may have been dropped particularly intensively because it was a regional feature—that is, a derivational affix in patronyms used only in some parts of Lithuania. By contrast, for example, the Lithuanian patronymic suffix -aitis was not only the most productive in the seventeenth century but also the most widely distributed across different parts of Lithuania (Maciejauskienė 1977: 160–161). There is even a view that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries a so-called patronymic system of personal names with the suffix -aitis was taking shape, or had more or less taken shape, throughout ethnic Lithuania (Zinkevičius 1977: 155). This, presumably, was one of the reasons why a comparatively large number of current Lithuanian surnames have the suffix -uitis. What has been said about the loss of patronymic suffixes provides one more argument for calling the personal-name suffix -uitis, used in the seventeenth-century Gruzdžiai parish and elsewhere, patronymic. 38 | VITALIJA MACIEJAUSKIENĖ ABBREVIATIONS LKAIII – MORKŪNAS, K., ed. in chief, Atlas of the Lithuanian Language 3, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1991. LPŽI–II – VANAGAS, A., ed. in chief, Dictionary of Lithuanian Surnames 1–2, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1985–1989. LITERATŪRA AMBRAZAS, S. 2000: Daiktavardžių darybos raida II. Lietuvių kalbos vardžodininiai vediniai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. BŪGA, K. 1958: Apie lietuvių asmens vardus. Rinktiniai raštai 1, Vilnius: Politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, 201–269. GARLIAUSKAS, V. 1999: Lietuviškos oikonimų lytys nelietuviškuose XVI–XIX a. šaltiniuose. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 40, 123–204. JONIKAS, P. 1973: Lietuvos studentų pavardės XV–XVIII a. Europos universitetuose. Lituanistikos darbai 3, 201–216. KABAŠINSKAITĖ, B. 1996: Lietuvių kalbos liaudies etimologija ir kontaminacija. Kalbotyra 45 (1), 20–29. KABAŠINSKAITĖ, B. 1998: Lietuvių kalbos liaudies etimologija ir artimi reiškiniai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. MACIEJAUSKIENĖ, V. 1977: Lietuvių asmenvardžių priesagų paplitimas XVII a. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 17, 159–168. MACIEJAUSKIENĖ, V. 1991: Lietuvių pavardžių susidarymas, Vilnius: Mokslas. MACIEJAUSKIENĖ, V. 1993: Kriaunų parapijos XVII–XVIII a. asmenvardžiai. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 32, 34–99. MACIEJAUSKIENĖ, V. 1997: Vienkamieniai lietuviškos kilmės vardai XVI amžiuje. Darbai ir Dienos 4 (13), 111–133. RAGAUSKAITĖ, A. 2002: XVI–XVIII a. kauniečių asmenvardžiai. Daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. RAMONIENĖ, M. 1987: Litovskije familii konca XVII v. Avtoreferat dissertacii na soiskanie učenoj stepeni kandidata filologičeskich nauk, Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas. SALYS, A. 1933: Asmenvardžiai. Lietuviškoji enciklopedija 1, Kaunas: Spaudos fondas, 1266–1270. SKARDŽIUS, P. 1943: Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba, Vilnius. ULVYDAS, K., red., 1965: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1, Vilnius: Mintis, 282. ZINKEVIČIUS, Z. 1977: Lietuvių antroponimika. Vilniaus lietuvių asmenvardžiai XVII a. pradžioje, Vilnius: Mokslas. ZINKEVIČIUS, Z. 1977: Tėvavardinė asmenvardžių sistema Lietuvoje. Baltistica (II priedas), 151–156. ŽEMIENĖ, A. 2002: XVIII–XIX a. Ragainės apskrities lietuvininkų pavardžių daryba ir kilmė. Daktaro disertacija, Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas. Vitalija Maciejauskienė Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lietuva [email protected] Gauta 2004 03 21