Baltic Studies: Tasks and Methods. Edited by Alfred Bammesberger, Heidelberg, 1998: Universitätsverlag C. Winter, 455 pp.
German Baltic studies, with traditions extending back a century, has been enriched by another significant work: the renowned Heidelberg publishing house of Carl Winter has published a book that researchers in various fields of Baltic studies can truly appreciate. The book contains papers presented at an international conference held on November 9–12, 1995, at the Catholic University of Eichstätt. The conference was organized at the initiative of Professor Alfred Bammesberger of the University of Eichstätt, who also edited this volume; he had discussed its plan in 1994 with two other prominent German Balticists, Rainer Eckert and Jochen D. Range.
This carefully published book contains 38 papers written in German, English (5 papers), and Italian (1 paper). By subject, they are divided into five groups: Baltic languages (Baltisch), Old Prussian, Lithuanian, Latvian, and a fifth group, less easily confined to these specific categories, devoted to diverse issues in literature, folklore, and mythology—overarching questions (Übergreifende Fragestellungen). The contributors also come from a very wide geographical area: Berlin, Bochum, Eichstätt, Florence, Greifswald, Halle, Heidelberg, Jena, Kraków, Leiden, Milan, Munich, Münster, Padua, Parma, Pisa, Riga, Salzburg, University Park, Verona, Vilnius.
Naturally, only specialists in individual fields can examine in detail all the papers published in this volume. The purpose of this brief review is simply to celebrate this valuable work in Baltic studies and to outline its contents, if only in broad terms.
Albertas Rosinas (Zur Frage der Motivierung des morphologischen Wandels in den baltischen Sprachen, pp. 17–22) surveys the more characteristic changes in the morphology of the Baltic languages and shows how they are connected with corresponding phonological changes. The most important of these are the shortening of long diphthongs; changes to tautosyllabic an, en, in, un in individual Baltic languages; the alteration of long vowels and diphthongs; and the disappearance of Baltic *u before *ō.
Saulius Ambrazas’s article (Diachronische Stratifizierung der grundlegenden Wortbildungstypen bei Verbalabstrakta im Ostbaltischen, pp. 23–32) is devoted to
248
Page 2
the history of verbal abstracts in the East Baltic languages. He summarizes the findings of his research in the following diagram (the diagram shows the suffixes of the derivatives):
Wolfram Euler examines the Baltic words for sweat and blood (“Schweiß” und „Blut“ in den baltischen Sprachen, pp. 33–34). Alfredas Bammesberger discusses compound words whose first element is *waiš–~weiš- (Baltisch *waiš–~weiš- als Erstelement von Komposita, pp. 35–38).
In a joint article by A. Bammesberger and Simas Karaliūnas (Zu Fragen nach der ethnischen Identität der Aisten, pp. 39–51), the authors revisit the origin of the much-debated name Aestiorum gentes. Drawing on the names of various peoples, the authors are inclined to think that the original meaning of the root *Aist-, *aistr- may also have been “land, region, field, soil,” and that these words could then be connected with Indo-European *aidh- “to burn.” An interesting idea in the article is that the source of Latin succinum “amber” may have been Lithuanian *sakinas “a large lump of resin” (cf. Lithuanian jautis – jautinas “a large bull,” vaikas – vaikinas, sakai – *sakinas).
Among the articles devoted to Prussian studies, Frederic Kortlandt’s article is particularly interesting (The development of the Prussian language in the 16th Century, pp. 55–76). It presents side by side the texts of all three Prussian catechisms, which were translated from the same German text, and then standardizes their orthography and phonemic interpretation. This new, authorially corrected text attests that the catechisms demonstrate the continuity of the language, and that the language of the Enchiridion in fact reflects a real linguistic system.
Another article by F. Kortlandt (Two Old Prussian fragments, pp. 115–120) is devoted to an analysis of the famous Basel epigram (Kayle rekyse…) and the 1583 fragment Deues: does dantes, Deues does geitka. An interesting conclusion is that the words of the Basel epigram may have been written down by a German who heard them from his Prussian colleague. In another article (Who is Who in the Old Prussian Epigram? pp. 127–128), the Dutch linguist disputes some of Wolfgang P. Schmid’s claims concerning the interpretation of the Basel epigram’s text in his 1982 article “Jesus, ich leid.”
Alongside researchers of the Basel epigram, the editor of this volume, A. Bammesberger, also contributes an interesting article (Anmerkungen zum Baseler Epigramm, pp. 121–126).
Thus, there is certainly no shortage of readers and interpreters for the little Prussian text unexpectedly discovered in 1974 by the American Stephen C. Mc Cluskey in the library of the University of Basel.
249
Page 3
Oswald Panagl (Wortfeldstudien zum Altpreussischen. Am Beispiel des Elbinger Vokabulars, pp. 77–87) analyzes the vocabulary of the Elbing vocabulary list. In this case, however, he is interested not in specific problems of Baltic studies, but in the vocabulary list’s subject matter and principles of compilation.
In a substantial article (Zum Morphologie des altpreussischen Artikels, pp. 89–114), Wojciech Smoczyński continues his research into the morphology of the Prussian language, this time presenting an analysis of the so-called Prussian articles (stas, sta).
It is very gratifying that the young Italian linguist Alessandro Parenti is joining the ranks of active researchers of the Prussian language. The volume includes his article on abstract formations in Prussian with the suffixes -sna, -senna, -sennis (Old Prussian Abstract Nouns in -sna, -senna, -sennis, pp. 129–142). The article’s main conclusion is that when abstracts are formed from secondary verbs with a vowel alternation in the stem, the suffix -sna is used, whereas when they are formed from primary verbs, the suffixes -sna and -sennis are used.
The Lithuanian studies section of the volume opens with an article by Zigmas Zinkevičius on manuscript texts preceding Martynas Mažvydas’s catechism (Das Problem der litauischen handschriftlichen Texte bis Mažvydas, pp. 145–150). It discusses texts discovered by Ona Matusevičiūtė and Sigitas Narbutas, as well as the activities of Franciscan monks in Lithuania.
In his article (Philologisch-sprachwissenschaftliche Aufbereitung und Edition altlitauischer Texte, pp. 151–164), Jochen D. Range briefly recalls the traditions of German Baltic studies and current Baltic studies at German universities, before focusing primarily on the publication of old Lithuanian texts.
Guido Michelini writes (Eine wissenschaftliche Edition der Žemczuga Theologischka aus dem Jahr 1600, pp. 165–169) about an important monument of Lithuanian writing that he carefully prepared not long ago and published together with its Latin original—“Simono Vaišnoro 1600 metų Žemczuga Theologischka ir jos šaltiniai” (Vilnius, 1997).
Paola Cotticelli-Kurras (Morphosyntaktische Untersuchungen zur Bibelübersetzung von Johannes Bretke: Die Pronominalform des Adjektivs in Bretkes Evangelien, pp. 171–194) examines the use of pronominal adjectives in the Gospel text of Jonas Bretkūnas’s Bible translation, comparing Lithuanian examples with the texts of the Bible translation by Martin Luther and the Vulgate.
Another Italian linguist, Loredana Serafini Amato, who once published a book on the use of postpositions in Old Lithuanian (La distribuzione della posposizione nel lituano antico, Napoli, 1976), analyzes in her article (Zum ”Compendium Grammaticae Lithvanicae“ von K. Sapūnas – T. Schultz, pp. 195–205) the so-called Sapūnas–Schultz Lithuanian grammar of 1673, discussing its spelling separately and highlighting characteristic features of its numerals, verbal system, syntax, and lexicon.
In his article (Litauische Lexikographie in Ostpreussen: Handschriften, Publikationen, Untersuchungen, pp. 207–212), Vincentas Drotvinas seems to sum up his research into the lexicography of Lithuania Minor over the past several decades, and
250
Page 4
In discussing publication, it emphasizes that the dictionaries of Lithuania Minor are not only material for the academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language, but also an important source for the history of Lithuanian culture.
Balduras Panzeris (Sprachverwandtschaft bei Philipp Ruhig (1745) und seinen Gewährsleuten, p. 213–227) analizuoja kalbų giminystės problemas – savotiškas lyginamosios kalbotyros užuomazgas, randamas Pilypo Ruigio veikale „Betrachtung der Littauischen Sprache, in ihrem Ursprunge, Wesen und Eigenschaften“ (Königsberg, 1745). Straipsnio autorius nurodo šaltinius, kuriais galėjo remtis P. Ruigys aptardamas šias problemas.
In his article (Lateinisch sciens, scientēs in den Evangelien und in litauischen Übersetzungen, pp. 229–240), Bernfried Schlerath shows how translators of the Bible into Lithuanian (from Jonas Bretkūnas to Česlovas Kavaliauskas) render the Latin forms sciens, scientēs in various ways.
Elvyra Julija Bukevičiūtė’s article (Zur Verwendung der diakritischen Zeichen in der preussisch – litauischen Bibel des 18. Jahrhunderts, pp. 241–258) is devoted to an analysis of the spelling—and, more precisely, the diacritical marks used—in the so-called 1735 Bible of Johann Jacob Quandt (2nd ed. 1755).
Gertruda Bense attempts to resolve (Studien zu einem preussisch-litauischen Text des 18. Jahrhunderts: die „Kinderlehre“ von 1735, pp. 259–267) the very complex question of the authorship of the booklet “Pienas mažėms Waikėlems,” published in Königsberg in 1735. There is some reason to look for the booklet’s compiler among those associated with the so-called Bible Commission of the time. In any case, this 36-page booklet is of interest not only to researchers of the Lithuanian language but also to educators, since it so beautifully formulates the basic principles of a pupil’s conduct: “At school one must not talk or play, nor sleep or eat, nor lie on books or tear books, but sit properly and learn by heart.”
Rosemarie Lühr (Zur Genese von konzessiven Strukturen im Litauischen, pp. 269–288) writes about the structure of concessive sentences in old Lithuanian written monuments.
Giovanni Gobber examines interrogative sentences in Lithuanian (Entscheidungsfragesätze im Litauischen: Zu ihren Formen und Funktionen, pp. 289–296).
Alfred Bammesberger discusses questions of the etymology and word formation of certain Lithuanian words įščios, tévas, trínka, yra (Etymologie und Wortbildung: Litauische Beispiele, pp. 297–304). He also discusses the character of a new practical Lithuanian-German dictionary (Ein neues Wörterbuch Litauisch-Deutsch, pp. 315–318).
William R. Schmalstieg’s article is also devoted to new Lithuanian lexicography (Lithuanian Post-Independence Dictionaries, pp. 305–314). He draws attention to changes in the illustrative material in dictionaries after Lithuania regained independence. He is struck by the ingenuity of our lexicographers, who, while avoiding illustrative material associated with religion during the Soviet years, attributed the sentence Honor your father and your mother to Jonas Jablonskis.
251
Page 5
Janina Jakelait ytė (Das Litauische im diplomatischen Verkehr: Probleme und Aufgaben, p. 319–329) examines the shortcomings of contemporary Lithuanian diplomatic language.
Frank Heberlein devotes his article (Aufgaben einer synchronen komparativen Baltistik, p. 331–344) to practical problems in teaching the Lithuanian language.
The section on Latvian studies begins with an article by the well-known Italian Balticist Maria Teresa Ademollo Gagliano (Eredit à lessicali indoeuropee in lettone, p, 347–357), which discusses a dozen or so old words of Indo-European origin found only in Latvian (agrs ‘early’, āires ‘sedge’, asins ‘blood’, dēt ‘to suck’, grīva ‘(river) mouth’, grūts ‘difficult’, ģuovs ‘cow’, jumis ‘twin ears of grain’, kauns ‘shame’, sieva ‘wife’, sirpis ‘sickle’, smiet ‘to laugh’, *suvs, cf. suvēns ‘piglet’, sviedri ‘sweat’, vepris ‘young boar’).
Peter Vanags’s article (Die altlettischen Texte und einige Probleme ihrer Erforschung, p. 359–369) is devoted to problems concerning old Latvian texts. Incidentally, he recently defended his habilitation dissertation on this topic at Vilnius University.
Ojārs Bušs (Eine Streitfrage der lettischen Namenkunde (Ortsnamen mit Paun-), p. 371–376) argues that Latvian place names containing Paun- may be Latvian, but some meadow names and river names (cf. Latv. Paunupis) are probably of Finno-Ugric origin.
Pietro U. Dini also augments the substantial roster of Italian authors with his article (Ein unbeachteter altlettischer Zweizeiler (1607) von Hieronymus Megiser, p. 377–382), which analyzes a couplet that had hitherto escaped researchers’ attention, published in the German humanist Hieronymus Megiser’s multilingual Little Catechism of Martin Luther.
As noted, the final part of the book is devoted to broader problems in Baltic studies. It opens with an article by the German philologist Friedrich Scholz, who has made a very significant contribution to Baltic studies (Zum Problem des Zeitpunkts der Entstehung einer eigenständigen Schönen Literatur in den Ländern des Baltikums, p. 387–400), on the development of belles lettres in the Baltic countries (Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia). As we know, F. Scholz has published an excellent book on this subject, „Die Literaturen des Baltikums: Ihre Entstehung und Entwicklung“ (Opladen, 1990).1
Drawing mainly on examples from Lithuanian literature, Liane Klein (Aspekte der Vermittlung eines baltischen Literaturverständnisses, p. 401–408) analyzes the development of literature in the Baltic countries at the beginning of the twentieth century.
Nikolai Mikhailov, who works in Italy and speaks Lithuanian remarkably well, has recently taken a particular interest in Baltic mythology. In the article published in the book (Baltische Mythologie. Der aktuelle Zustand der Forschung: Pro-
1 Vilnius University awarded Prof. Friedrich Scholz an honorary doctorate on September 29, 1998.
252
Page 6
(Problems and Perspectives, pp. 409–416) he surveys the current state of research into Baltic mythology and attempts to formulate its main lines of inquiry.
Magdalene Huelmann, who recently published a valuable monograph on Lithuanian and Latvian work songs (Die litauischen und lettischen Arbeitslieder. Ein Vergleich, München, 1996)2, also summarizes the results of her research in the book under discussion (Aspekte des litauischen und lettischen Arbeitslieds, pp. 417–426).
The book concludes with an article by the distinguished German Balticist Rainer Eckert (Brauchtum und Folklore im Ostbaltischen: Zum Johannisfest (lett. Jāņi: lit. Joninės, und zu den Johannisliedern, pp. 427–455), in which, after briefly surveying the main problems in the study of Baltic folklore, he analyzes reflections of the Midsummer festival in Latvian folk songs. Indeed, perhaps no other people’s folk tradition contains so many beautiful stanzas devoted to this celebration.
One cannot help but welcome this valuable publication. All that remains is to offer our sincere thanks to the conference organizer and editor of the volume, Professor Alfred Bammesberger of the Catholic University of Eichstätt, who, among other things, recalled in the book’s preface certain ties between his city and Lithuania in Lithuanian words: “After the war, a group of Lithuanians settled in our district. And even now we wish to continue contacts between Eichstätt and Lithuania, but this generation wants them to be absolutely peaceful.”3
As we have mentioned, the work was published by the renowned Carlo Winter publishing house. It should be noted that this publisher began publishing and distributing Lithuanian studies books in 1879. Thus, it has no equal in this field.
Algirdas Sabaliauskas
PIETRO DINI. LE LINGUE BALTICHE
Looking at Pietro Dini’s shelf of Lithuanian and Baltic studies books, one might think that storks bring them to him. Alongside L’anello baltico (Genova, 1991), H. J. Lysius, Katekizmas (Vilnius, 1993), L’inno di Sant’Ambrogio di Martynas Mažvydas (Roma, 1994), Repubbliche baltiche (Milano, 1994), alongside the newly arriv-
2 Cf. Kudirkienė L. Lituanistica, 1997, 3 (31), pp. 141–143.
3 From 1945 to 1949, a Lithuanian gymnasium operated in Eichstätt. To mark the school’s anniversary, Professor A. Bammesberger appealed to former pupils and teachers of the gymnasium through the Lithuanian press in the United States and Canada. After this appeal, “Very good responses began to come in: both former teachers and former pupils recounted their impressions and memories” (Darbininkas, 1998. V. 28.) It is worth noting that the well-known Lithuanian scholars Stasys Barzdukas, Izabelė Matusevičiūtė, and Sergejus Treigys taught at the Lithuanian gymnasium in Eichstätt. Our distinguished architect Vytautas Žemkalnis (Landsbergis) taught art. Among the 55 graduates of the first class, who received their secondary-school diplomas here on May 14, 1946, was also the current President of the Republic of Lithuania, Valdas Adamkus; cf. Rudys S. Eichstaeto lietuvių gimnazija, Lietuvių švietimas Vokietijoje. Ed. V. Liulevičius, Chicago, 1969, pp. 322–341.
