Pilypo Ruigio ir Kristijono Gotlybo Milkaus leksikografiniai darbai (artėjant Pil. Ruigio ir K. G. Milkaus žodynų išleidimo 250-osioms ir 200-osioms metinėms)

THE LEXICOGRAPHIC WORKS OF PHILIP RUIGYS AND KRISTIJONAS GOTLYBAS MILKUS (As the 250th and 200th anniversaries of the publication of the dictionaries by Pil. Ruigys and K. G. Milkus approach) In the 18th century, most cultural figures in Lithuania Minor concerned themselves with purifying, enriching, and standardizing the Lithuanian language. Grammars and dictionaries were written for this purpose; only a few (those by F. Haack, Pil. Ruigys, and K. G. Milkus) were printed, while the manuscripts of a dozen or so others have not all survived to the present day. These dictionaries and grammars were intended to help German officials, merchants, and pastors sent to Lithuania Minor learn Lithuanian, and to help translators of religious literature find suitable Lithuanian words. The bilingual dictionaries by Pil. Ruigys and K. G. Milkus served the same purpose. This article surveys how the lexicographic techniques of these dictionaries developed, how their authors standardized the language, and how they enriched Lithuanian lexicography. Several decades after the publication of F. Haack’s dictionary1 in 1730, the second bilingual dictionary of Lithuania Minor, “Lithuanian-German and German-Lithuanian Dictionary,” was printed in Königsberg in 1747 by Philipp Ruigys2, a Lutheran pastor in Valtarkiemis. This dictionary is twice as large and considerably more sophisticated than F. Haack’s. Its title states that it contains words and expressions used in the Holy Scriptures and in public life. The preface, written on May 11, 1744, gives more specific information about when its compilation began and about its sources. There Pil. Ruigys states that he began compiling the dictionary in 1733 (in P. Jonikas’s opinion, in 1709)3. He wanted to help non-Lithuanian Lutheran pastors learn Lithuanian well. Pil. Ruigys says that he took the German part of his dictionary from Ch. E. Weismann’s dictionary (Lexicon bipartitum latino-germanicum et germanico-latinum), while for the Lithuanian part he collected words from the living vernacular, the dictionaries of K. Sirvydas and F. Haack, and used the manuscript materials of E. Dicelius (Dizelius), his predecessor in Valtarkiemis4. In the preface he mentioned the manuscript dictionaries of Theophil Schulz and Jacob Perkuhn. Pil. Ruigys was assisted by several Lutheran pastors with a better command of Lithuanian. Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary has 615 pages. The first, Lithuanian-German part of the dictionary, which the author calls analytical, has 192 pages and contains 7,680 words and word combinations. The second part—German-Lithuanian—is much larger, with 423 pages. It contains about 24,000 Lithuanian words and word combinations. The words are arranged not in the usual alphabetical order, but in nests (derivatives are listed under headwords), for example: Bittė (Bittinis, Bičžus, Bičžullis, Bit=Kopis); Perkų (Nūperku, Atperku Atpirkimm as, Pirkikklas, Perkaklis); Wårnas (Wårnas krankia, Wårna, Warnėnas, Warnukštis). The dictionary gives the nominative of nouns and the stem-final segment of the genitive case with its ending Vocabylarivm Lithvanico-Germanicvm et Germanico-Lithvanicvm... von F r i e d e r i c h W i l h e l m H a a c k..., Halle, 1730. Littauisch-Deutsches und Deutsch-Littauisches Lexicon.. von P h i l i p p R u h i g..., Königsberg..., 1747. J o n i k a s P. Lietuvių kalba ir tauta amžių būvyje, Čikaga, 1987, 140. Z i n k e v i č i u s Z. Lietuvių kalba XVIII—XIX a., Vilnius, 1988, 259. 221 or just one ending, e.g., Aitwaras, aro; Keddē, ēs; Kancía, cíos; Kòja, ôs; Rogês, giù; Waidas, do. Certain abbreviations indicate the gender of nouns, e.g.: Buddelis, io, m; Kélmas, mo, m; Kiaulė, ēs, f. Verbs are entered in the dictionary in the first-person singular present-tense form, followed by the first-person forms of the past and future tenses, with the infinitive written at the end, e.g.: Abbejóju, Abbejójau, Abbejójų, Abbejóti; Galándu, ándau, ãu, g̃ti; Gabenu, enau, ę̃u, ę́nti; Kapóju, ójau, ó̃ju, óti; Guwėnu, enau, ę̃u, ę́nti; Rabaū, biáu, bysu, byti. Adjectives are given in the full masculine form, while for the feminine and neuter genders (the latter is not indicated everywhere), the stem-final segment with its ending is provided, e.g.: Gražus, ži, žiu; Kiáuras, rá; Ruddas, dá; Tam[ús, [i, [ù. The spelling in Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary is fairly consistent. Like most East Prussian authors of the period, he relied on the alphabet devised by D. Klein5. Following D. Klein, Pil. Ruigys writes nasal vowels with a crossbar, e.g.: Apbaudau Mietą R65, Szwėsey žibbąs R198, though he does so inconsistently. Sometimes he marks nasal vowels in the usual way, with ą, ę, e.g.: Szę Dieną R203, Ne tikray mokas Darbą R211, Drą[s]us R220. He writes the so-called nasal preposition į with a slanted stroke ǀ, e.g.: Užėimi ǀ Namus R114, ǀ Widų R200, but sometimes writes non-prepositional į in this way too, e.g.: Sápnas piktas ǀwyksta R116, ǀlanda R208, Kaip ǀmanai R263. The narrow ė is usually written ē and retained in the middle and at the end of words, e.g.: Dilgelē R84, Gegužē, Garbē, Jaunyštē. Sometimes, however, ė is represented by the letters ie: Kiekštas, Mieła and, conversely, ie is represented by ē: Mēgas, Rēbuttys, Wēwer[ys. The diphthong uo is represented by ū, e.g.: ūdas, ūdega, ūga, ū[is, ū[bwis. This reflects the mixing of the diphthongs ie and uo with the vowels ė and o in the dialects of Prussian Lithuania. Frequently, instead of the mixed diphthongs en, in, he writes ę, į, e.g.: Graudenu, enau, ę[ju, ę́nti; Grūždenu, enau, ę[ju, ęti; Ilginu, inau, į[ju, įnti; Jòdinu, inau, į[ju, įti. The consonant spelling of the period is characterized by consonant doubling. It was especially widespread in Lithuania Minor, where German spelling exerted a strong influence. This doubling was intended to indicate the shortness of the vowel preceding the doubled consonant6. Pil. Ruigys doubles consonants after short a, e, i, u, e.g.: Pellēda, Kallu, Luppū, Diddelįs, Drugys, Ėkkėčios, Middus, Miggis, Pentinnas. He writes the hard consonant č with the two-character spelling cž, e.g.: Cžūpryna, Cžóžu, and the soft č with the character ć, e.g.: Paparčiei, čūu; Bagočius, čiaus; Bučioju. To write the consonant š, he used the Gothic two-character sign [ß at the beginning of a word, e.g.: Sžaltis, Sžápas, Sžárka, Sžaure, Sžermukšnis, Sžernas, Sžėtonas, Sžirmas, Sžwarūs, and ß in the middle of a word, e.g.: Sžefelis, Sžefį, Sžefskas, Sžykštūs, Taßla, Tróßkulys, Wißta. The nominative plural ending of nouns is written ei, e.g.: Broláwaikei, Cžobrélei, Gimdytojei, Gywplaukei, Karčžei. Sometimes the vowel a is omitted from the nominative singular of a-stem nouns, e.g.: Wūnags. The same word is sometimes given with different stem-final segments, e.g.: Pagónas, -óno and Pagonis, -iês R196. In Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary, some words are accented according to D. Klein’s grammar 5 Plg. Palionis J. Lietuvių literatūrinės kalbos istorija, Vilnius, 1979, 19. Cf. Ibid., 24.6 222 the rules indicated. The stress of words given in this dictionary, e.g.: Brólis, Dáiktas, Galwà, Kálwis, Žándas, Žinnóti, Žinójojau and others, does not differ at all from that of the present day. The drawback is that in many places in Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary, stress marks indicate not only stress but also the length of vowels and diphthongs.7 Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary contains more colloquial words than F. Haack’s. The spelling of some of them is illustrated by short word combinations, and sometimes by proverbs and sayings8, e.g.: prie Kapóju (Sufikapója Gaidys Ju kittu), prie Kélmas (Trys Kélmai Bíčiu), prie Kífféłaus (Devints Wandù nu Kífféłaus), prie Kráuju (Lizda kráuju Paukščéje), prie Kérbas (Kérbas Jáutis, kėrba Kárwe). For many words, he gives lexical parallels, among which there are quite a few synonyms (though they are not always synonyms), e.g.: Warpas — Žwánas R179, Menkas — Ledakas — Práftas — Blogas R310, Kibkos dréba — urtpa R312, Gérklė — Gurklys R312, Perfulas — Sopéjimas — Perbėjimas R313, Kibkà — Kója — Blauždkaulis — Rétas — Kulbé — Blaužda R305, Nufiminu — Nuljūtu R375. Slavisms predominate among the loanwords in Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary, e.g.: Aduna, Altorus, Afaba, Bacžka, Bagótas, Bagóčius, Béjas, Cžédiju, Cžéltis, Cžyltas, Dabóju, Dawádas, Dėka, Griežnas, Klápatà, Kodylas, Kóžnas, Kulnerus and others. The dictionary also contains many Germanisms, e.g.: Dékis “covering,” Dimžakas “pocket,” Dillės “dill,” Girmolė “carrot,” and others. After the edition of Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary had sold out, in 1800 Kristijonas Gotlybas Milkus published the “Lithuanian-German and German-Lithuanian Dictionary”9. In the dictionary’s title, the author writes that he compiled it on the basis of Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary. In the preface, K. G. Milkus says that his greatest concern was to write a comprehensive dictionary, drawing on Pil. Ruigys’s and other dictionaries and supplementing them with his own knowledge of the language. Most likely, K. G. Milkus took a large part of his new vocabulary from J. Brodovskis’s handwritten “German-Lithuanian and Lithuanian-German Dictionary” (Lexicon Germanico-Lithvanicvm et Lithvanico-Germanicvm)10, e.g.: Kója (Pakója; Kóju Mažgójimas) R — Koja (Eik Ju Kojomis; Kojas ir Rankas atfįgeręs; Bėda Kojas taįjo; Bepig po kitto Stalù Kojas pakifus Jėdėt; Kojomis negal); Pakoja; Bekojis, (Eik tu Bekojį); Palvczkojis; Trikojis MŽ — Kója (Eik Ju Kójo­mis; Kojas ir Rankas atfįgeręs; Bėda Kójas taįjo; Bekójis; negallys Kojomis; Trikojis) B513, 514. It is possible that K. G. Milkus had K. Sirvydas’s “Dictionary of Three Languages” (Dict ionarium trium linguarum) at hand. K. Sirvydas’s neologisms, e.g.:trintu vai. knygininkas are also found in K. G. Milkus’s dictionary. Despite the fact that K. G. Milkus copied Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary in its entirety, the two dictionaries also differ. First of all, they differ in size. K. Milkus’s dictionary has 928 pages and contains about 41,000 words. Thus it is 315 7 V i t k a u s k a s V. Is Lithuanian stress difficult?, Vilnius, 1988, 24. 8 B a l a š a i t i s A. Words and dictionaries, Vilnius, 1984, 64. 9 Littauisch-deutsches und Deutsch-littauisches Wörter-Buch... von Christian Gottlieb Mielcke, Königsberg, 1800. 10 Z i n k e v i č i u s Z. Ibid., 265—266. 223 pages longer than Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary of the same format, and contains about 9,320 more words, not counting various word combinations and phraseology. Lexical additions are particularly abundant in the first part of the dictionary. The German–Lithuanian part has not been changed very much; compared with the corresponding part of Pil. Ruigys’s dictionary, it has only been supplemented with rarer expressions. K. G. Milkus writes about this in the preface to his dictionary. There he also identifies the purpose of the dictionary: knowledge of Lithuanian was supposedly necessary for teachers, clergy, judges, and merchants. It had to be learned from grammars and dictionaries11, since peasants could provide no information about their own language. Thus K. G. Milkus intended his dictionary for practical purposes, and this determined the character of its vocabulary. The vocabulary in both dictionaries is arranged in the same way: the first part is Lithuanian–German, the second German–Lithuanian. The words in both Pil. Ruigys’s and K. G. Milkus’s dictionaries are grouped into nests. The difference is that K. G. Milkus expanded the nests of some words, for example: Būras R — Būras (Būrus Jodinu, Burką, Burijskas, Burijskay) MŽ; Dagys (Dagillis) R — Dagys (Dagau, Idagau, Dagillis, Dagillėlis, Dagillėlei) MŽ; Dailūs R — Dailus (Dailey, Dailinu, Dailáuju, Sudailáuju, Dailydą, Dailydžia, Dailydyjtė, Dailummas) MŽ; Gabenų (Atgabenu, Nugabenu) R — Gabėnų (Gabaną, Atgabėnu, Nugabėnu, Nuſigabėnu, Atſigabėnu, Uſſigabėnu, Iẛgabėnu, Pargabėnu, Prigabėnu, Priſigabėnu) MŽ. K. G. Milkus’s dictionary entry is more complex than Pil. Ruigys’s; it contains more lexicographical elements: explanations, proverbs, and idioms, for example: Galwijas (Galwijas pėnims) R — Galwijas (Oẛka ne Galwijas, Merga ne Ṡzeimyna; Galwijai pėnami) MŽ; Ṡzáudas (Ṡzaudai) R — Ṡzaudas (Ṡzaudai; Iẛ Ṡzaudū iẛėjęs, o Ṡzėno ne pawyęs; Ṡzaudai iẛtiẛini; Trakni, Swėto Lobis Ṡzaudū Kulis) MŽ; Ṡzū (Ṡzunnės; Ṡzunnytis; Ṡzunnyčiai; Ṡzun=Gálwis; Ṡzuns=ūdega) R — Ṡzū (Iẛ Ṡzun’s prapūle; Ṡzun’s Balſas ne eit ÷ Dangu; Kad tawo Ṡzunė Swėtimi pjája, tai gyk, bet kad tawo Ṡzunnys pjáuja’, neẛikiẛk; Strampas wiẛados gul pas Ṡzunnė; Ar tur Ṡzū Gėdós; Ṡzunnytis; Ṡzunnyczei; Ṡzunniẛkas; Ṡzunniẛkay; Ṡzungalwis; Ṡzuns Ūdega; Ṡzunsūdėgius; Ṡzunlaibkei; Ṡzunmetės; Ṡzunremunės; Ṡzunẛudai; Kur daug Ṡzunnū, cze ir daug Ṡzúnẛudū) MŽ. The structure of K. G. Milkus’s dictionary is essentially the same as Pil. Ruigys’s. The authors present nouns and adjectives in the same way. Only the arrangement of verbs differs from Pil. Ruigys’s. K. G. Milkus lists all the verb forms first and only then gives the German equivalent, for example: Gimdau, džia u, įẛu, iti ich gebäre; Láukiu, kiau, áukẛu, áukti, ich warte. Pil. Ruigys, after the headword form in the first person, gives the German equivalent of the word. There are also differences in spelling. Pil. Ruigys followed D. Klein’s alphabet, although he changed some things, while K. G. Milkus departed from it more substantially. In K. G. Milkus’s dictionary, nasal vowels with a crossbar are no longer found. In other respects, he does not differ from Pil. Ruigys in his spelling of nasal letters; he also writes nasal ū in the genitive plural, for example: Ar 11 Littauisch-deutsches und Deutsch-littauisches Wörter-Buch..., von Christian Gottlieb Mielcke, 2–4. 224 ne turri [mulkū? MŽ; Waikū Waikai MŽ311, Tēwū Tēwai MŽ. He writes nasal į with an oblique stroke -, for example: - widduwi- MŽ152, Surabau- Knugas MŽ152. K. G. Milkus writes č with the two-character spelling cz in all cases, for example: Aukbėgjāusas, Buczioju, Czaudullys, Czọžinyczia, Drumsczìu, Marti, czios. K. G. Milkus accents words much less often than Pil. Ruigys. Their accentuation is essentially no different, although sometimes the same word has a different stress (or diacritic) mark, for example: Gabenų R. — Gabėnų MŽ. Both use the same accent marks, have no system, and often use accent marks to indicate the length of vowels and diphthongs12. Like Pil. Ruigys’s, K. G. Milkus’s dictionary was written in the Western Aukštaitian dialect of Lithuania Minor. This created favorable conditions for the activists of the national revival, who spoke the same dialect, to make use of the written standard language developed in Lithuania Minor. At the time, K. G. Milkus’s dictionary was popular not only in Lithuania Minor but also in Lithuania Major. It was used by D. Poška, a prominent nineteenth-century nurturer and researcher of the Lithuanian language.13 K. G. Milkus’s dictionary was also used by later lexicographers of Lithuania Minor, among whom G. F. Nesselmann and Fr. Kuršaitis compiled dictionaries of particular importance to linguistic scholarship and practice. Today, the works of K. G. Milkus and Pil. Ruigys are of interest and importance to the history of Lithuanian lexicography as one significant attempt to compile bilingual dictionaries intended to help Lithuanian gain a foothold in social, scholarly, and cultural life, standardize the vocabulary of the Lithuanian standard language, and provide a basis for learning and using Lithuanian. The linguistic works of cultural figures from Lithuania Minor help shed light on the development of the standard language and on the ways and means by which linguistic resources were enriched and improved. Algis Rubinas 12 Vitkauskas V. Ibid., 24. 13 Vanagas V. Dionizas Poška, Vilnius, 1994, 146. 225