Rūdolfui Grabiui atminti

Latvia. All the more so that the author himself devoted a whole chapter to the description of Lithuanian islands and traces in Gudija and Poland (pp. 386-388) and mentioned there the unmarked dialects. In addition to the notes, it can be added that on p. 420 the exact spelling of Daukanto Būdas has not been preserved: instead of Daukanto i (a diacritic similar to a circumflex), signifying a special Žemaičių extended sound i [e], everywhere it is marked i (before birth). It is not possible to distinguish the circumflex from the diacritics. However, for the Italian reader, such marking will not differ at all from the adjacent page (p. 421) of the song Mėnuo saulužę vedė žodžiai anksti, the first of the words interspersed with the left strikethrough (gravi). In addition, the word jau has been omitted in the translating of the Žemaičių text (p. 421, 1 e.). Proofreading errors are very few, although they occur (p. 296 instead of Drotvinas is Drotivine, p. 440 Ramoniene instead Ramonienė, p. 511 "Vanagienė" (in Lithuanian). All comments should not detract from the work, they will be important to take into account in future editions. By the way, among Baltic linguists it is becoming banal to say that Dini’s work is being translated. Introductions to Baltic philology were written by Ernstas Fraenkelis (in German, and translated into Lithuanian by Simas Karaliūnas), Jonas Kabelka. However, Dini’s book is a much broader, more detailed work. From what has been said, it is clear that Dini is familiar with sociolinguistic approaches, as the titles of some of the subsections show: “Limited Linguistic Purism”, p. 365, “Interference with Russian”, p. 369, “Language Contacts”, p. 381. The book does not do without presentation of cultural theories (Vytautas Kavolis, Tomas Venclova, pp. 298—300), without archaeological data (Maria Gimbutienė, Rimutė Rimantienė, G. Cesnis, V. Šimėnas, pp. 12-16, 188-190). Today, in the absence of encyclopedias of Baltic languages, we could use Dini Le Lingue Baltiche as a preferred encyclopedia. By the author’s own nature, the work has encyclopedic ambitions. Therefore, just as it is impossible to cover everything in a review of any encyclopedia, all Dini’s reviews of Le Lingue Baltiche are doomed to remain incomplete. No other language has published a book of this level on the Baltic languages. Therefore, at the risk of being banal, I would say that it would be important to translate it at least into those languages in which Baltic studies are most often published: Lithuanian, Latvian, Russian, Polish, German, English. It is a representative book of Baltic philology studies. University of Illinois at Chicago RŪDOLFS GRABIS RECORDING Latvian linguists have honored their older colleague Rūdolfs Grabis on the occasion of his ninetieth birthday by publishing an interesting collection of articles “Savai 257 Languages’ (For your own language. It is true that 1997). the book was published after the jubilee’s death, but on po his birthday he still managed to enjoy a proofread copy of it. Be own R. "Remembering the Dead" (Remembering the Dead, p. 8-67), 1996) - Bibliography 1991 jo (p. 306-312), The book contains 18 articles on various topics of Latvian linguistics. Some of the articles may be more or ar less interesting for Lithuanian linguists: ir Laimutė Baluodė „Exotic” borrowings in Latvian toponymy“ („Eksotiskie“ aizguvumi Latvijas toponimija, p. 68-72), Maijos Baltinas „Varddarinašanas varianti teksta autorite rakstu ir valodas vēsturē,“ (Word-making variants text authority in the history of written language. un p. 73— 77), Andrėjaus Bankavo "On terminology of linguistics" (On the terminology of linguistics, p. 78-82), Ainos Blinkenos „Attitude to į foreign words in the history of Latvian common language“ (Attieksme pret svešvārdiem latviešu literaras kalbas vėsturė, p. 83-96), Ineses Edelmanés „Microfields of some lexical elements in the Latvian plant nomenclature system“ (Dažu leksēmu mikrolauki latviešu valodas augu nosaukumu shēma, p. 131-140), Janis Rozenbergs’s “Implied actualization” (Implicēta aktualizācija, p. 240-246), Marta Rudzytė’s “Dialect in place names” (Izloksne vietvardos, p. 247-259), Anna Stafecka- ’s “Pronoun in old Latgalian scripts and present Latgalian dialects” (Vietniekvards senūkajos latgaliešu rakstos un mūsdienu Latgales izloksnes, p. 272—281), Pēteris Vanags’s “Variants of the diphthong au in the oldest Latvian scripts — phonetics or spelling question?” (Divskana au varianti visvecakajos latviešu rakstos—fonétikas vai rakstibas jautajums?, p. The book also includes articles by Brigita Bušmanienė, Elga Kagaines, Regina Kvašytė, Sarmytė Lagzdinytė, Daina Nytinaitė, Kornelija Pokrotniecė, Iveta Pūtelė, Valentina Skujinytė, Anna Vulanė. Those who are interested in Latvian linguistics or in the history of Latvian culture in general will be delighted to read the aforementioned memoirs by R. Grabis: there is a very vivid portrait of Janis Endzelyns, the cultural life of the students of the University of Latvia, beautiful images of the old Latvian village, the troubles and joys of the post-war employees of the Institute of Language and Literature of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. At the same time, a picture of a very nice, friendly, probably eternal optimist, Rūdolfas Grabis himself, emerges here. I want to quote the last sentence of his memoirs: “Already when my mother washed me in the jail, and also later, she used to say: ‘Rūdytis will have an easy life: his washed hair dries quickly.’ And now, when I am eighty-five, I dare say that this mother’s prophecy has been fulfilled so far.” Scientific editor of the book Aina Blinkena. Algirdas Sabaliauskas 258