S. Ambrazas. „Daiktavardžių darybos raida (lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodiniai vediniai)“

S. AMBRAZAS. LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE: A BRIEF HISTORY OF LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE. Vilnius, 1993, 296 p. This is a large book examining word formation in Lithuanian language, here "mainly focusing on the significant (semantic) aspect of word formation, which has so far been the least studied" (p. 4). Of course, the author does not take up this work in this aspect from an empty place — he has before his eyes P. Skardzio book "Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba" (Lithuanian language word creation) and the researches of Prof. V. Urbutis, on which he relies beautifully here. S. Ambrazas collected a lot of material from various written sources, especially from the LKŽ and its archives and the volumes of the LKA, and tried to summarize and analyze it. The author wrote an interesting book, in some places he spoke his original and weighty word. Most of the statements are well considered by the author, here are properly presented and accurately explained various facts. A lot of work has been put into it, so sometimes it is regrettable for various inaccuracies that can mislead readers. Unfortunately, there is no shortage of examples. In most of the Žemaičių dialekts, nouns made from verbs with the root tvirtapradies with suffix -imas are pronounced in the root: lūžimas, dirbimas, etc., according to the rules —Krš, Rdn, Eig, Trš, Tl, PJ, Lkv, Sl, etc., rather than "apraiškų randame" ip. 26). You know. tarnsėtje) in most Žemaites is the dark pronoun of the noun (p. 33), as are mėd'ie, k'ėl'ie, vaZie, etc. The word prayer meant a request not only for M. Daukša (p. 37), but also for the Žemaites today in the saying g':va malda pra:ša Rdn and others. For some reason the -čia preposition is not associated with kalčia, kerčia, verčia, grįžčia "grįžtė" and so on (p. 48) —the appropriate examples have not been sought. The adverb risčia has little to do with the suffix -čia (not borrow?) —p. 48. Straumé Plng is from the mainly Curonian villages, and this is no treasure of the Lithuanian language (p. 56). To make the noun imbingynés (p. 64) from the adverb birleşginiu DP168 is quite timid (cf. LKŽ IV 64). Why smdrvé from *smdrdvé (p.72), if this form is heard in Eastern "Lietuvos -Ukm, Ln -kalbos". In Karklėnai there is the form ajū:t'emejūtė, not ėjūtė (p. 82). Why is only kritynė (the relationship between -yné and -iėnė is not shown) taken from all the -gné (bk. -iéné) derivatives in Žemaičių kalba to name dishes? —p. 96 (and this is not soup, but fallen, rotten potatoes, a subspecies of soup). The word is derived from the word "land". still to be proved, and it is presented without reservation —p. 94. Tryškių griūženos (LKŽ III 627) is an uncertainly written form — the speech has no -rtūvokalų sampling (only -rū-). That word is made vns. falls and is himself cut (p. 95). S.B. Chilinskis was from Šventežeris, he could not be a middle highlander (p. 113) —now there is no such dialect division. In Veiviržėnai, Kaltinėnai is the form kriokla||kriokla~krdkla not kridkla (p. 118). The word pakardila is used in Papilyjé, not in Papile (p. 123). The word isméizena Zd (p. 126) is quite unclear. What is the root, where this word comes from, it is hard to say! The suffix —ina (next to -ena) in Samogitian still requires general proof and discussion (as with adita) —p. 127. It cannot be that barškinė is Klp, Tl, Užv (p. 128) —everywhere I was there I heard only barškynė (bar’s’k’i’- n’e). Dusmenų krausééius (p. 132) is a non-existent form from the so-called liars' "foundation", besides, kranksécius was created(!). It is nowhere proved that the diminutive suffix -ikė had a pair equivalent -ikas (Prussian examples hardly support the root or even the existence) —p. 137. In the berries there is the form kiščtūkas, not kiščūkas (p. The Kvėdarnos word ėjūoks transposable ejėkas, 226 08 Ela Salia = not éjokas (p. 141). In Jurbarkas it is called sudžu'u-vūt'is, which is written bk. dried up, not dried up —p. 142. The adverb -inykas (p. 146) the Žemaites (KI, Slnt, YI) do not have now. Merūnas (p. 149) is an entirely borrowed word, no -ūnas suffix (remember that the splinter Rmč (p. 149) is a misspelt word, it is only a splinter). Šiaulėnai is spoken by the western Highlanders, so pakarūkliai (p. 156) is not suitable for the Žemaičiai. The word paistuéklis from Sd, P1 (LKZ IX 124) did not need to be moved to žemaičiai (Sd, KI) (p. 156). M. Valančiaus girtuklis (p. 157) is undoubtedly a transliteration of the word girtūklis Krš, Užv, Rdn, Pvn, TI, Plt, Klp, Sg, StngŽ of many Žemaites, even Prussian Lithuanians. 159) is a non-substantial. It is difficult to say why the lawful a+e=a due to the hiatus is regarded as an ancient unproven example nepaitiwas < *nepaeituvas (p. 160). In the south of Dzūkija (Nč, Knv, Rtn, Drsk) there is the word bad kills with L, not budikslis (p. 178), but žem. kaiséklis (p. 174) should be written kaiséklis, because here there are regressive assimilation affected vowels é.~¢&. In dialect (Vk3) the déglas "fakelas" is a neologism (see. LKZ II! 1948, pp. 247. CIC XXVI 15), learned by people during festivals. The same applies to the ornament from Kairiai and Baisogala (p. 192). Such novelties should hardly be used in historical research. The word atašlina (p. 195, 231), of course, is not the only derivative of the suffix -ina presented — if the root were only -š£ (because ata is a prefix). The bilingual word of the inhabitants of Vilnius region dengéja "tool to cover the roof" as well as fisherman's guide hardly can be a reason to doubt the suffixes -ėjas, -a in the names of tools or objects (p. 202, 230). The name of the Kuršėnai mills part pd.rvara is irreplaceable pervara (p. 204). The adgklis (from the pronunciation ad*t.kl'/- s) (p. 229, 230) written almost from one Grūžiai is unlikely to be released by the dictionaries in an untransposed form. You will not find the form augintūvė (p. 211) in Tryškiai, Pavandenė and elsewhere — there is only augtūvė, and sandėlis, sandélys Uzv, VI (p. 216) is a complete novelty (50 years old), not even having the phonetic law Užv an> on, which is hardly useful for historical research. The pronunciation of the forms is quite lacking, often unhistorical and violating important laws. The historical ancient pronunciation is štlauogė, not šilūugė (p. 9). Rare, new suvéizdéjo, pavčizdėti pronunciation (perhaps even learned from Žemaitės writings) about Marijampolė (p. 23, 101 and others); o inherited from the Samogitians veiz(dėti, véiz(d)a, --(d)éjo; išdūkenia (p. 65) = isdukienia (correct the same form); parts (p. 70) = pdr resources Rsn; ldisvas (p. 72) = free; doors (p. 79) = doors; girnkelis (p. 80) = girnkelis; (p. 90) = gntūžtė; plėsti (p. 93) = to expand (if this is not a proofreading error); afklas (p. 153, 171, 173, 207, 292) (city people, distant from dialects, newly learned) = = drklas; Tv (p. 155) = fisherman; kerėkšla (p. 156) = kerėkšla; pakartūvė (p. 160) = packed; lebeida (!) (p. 161, 227) = writing of lies, non-existent fact; čiupeiza (p. 163, 227) = čiupčiza; nemetgša (p. 167) = no-meadow; mūgšis (p. 166) = magsis (regressive vowel assimilation) Kl and others, nakviša (!) (p. 167) 227 = nakviša; bėris dkt. (p. 170) = birch; ifklas (p. 172, 207) = oar; doklas (p. 172) = case; slices (p. 173) = slices; malt (p. 177) = malt; salykla (p. 176) = salykla; vežėtės (p. 186) = vežėtės; drill (p. 189) = drill; piston (p. 188) = piston; place name Upytė (p. 197) = Upytė; dažyvė (p. 198) = dazijvé; preikalas (p. 203) = = preikūlas; skiedra (p. 223) = skiedrd; duoklė (p. 223) = tribute; terlitiza (!) (p. 227) = terliūza; kramuila (!) (p. 228) = crackle; pakarikla(!) (p. 228) = packed up; turékla (1) (p. 229) = turékla ar gal tureklé ir kt. The main obstacle is the non-observance of F. Saussure's law in some examples, which may mislead many younger researchers. There are also more cases of adjectives that are not known anywhere, e.g. sūnui (p. 36) = sūnui; dtstogos (p. 84) = holidays; manure (p.:98) = manure; spjaudalas (p. 99) = spit; pyliava (p. 101) = pyliava; gruodis (p. 104) = hail; grūdas (p. 104) = grain; (p. 107) = snail; rieké (p. 107) = = riekė; gimdijvė (p. 135) = mother; red (p. 138) = red; viršūnė (p. 150) = peak; satellite (v. 15: 3) = satellite; pavada (p. 153) = escort; valdévas (p. 153) = ruler; veltūzas (p. 164, 229) = veltūzas; deponuoti (p. 202) = to deposit; Tirmantas (p. 234) = Turmantas; musheika (!) (p. 290) = muščika or mušeika; baidyklė (p. 290) = scarer; lebeda (p. 291) = lebed; landijnė (p. 294) = landijnė; sosta (p. 294) = sdsta and others. Defective spelling: atgražčios (p. 48) = atgrąžtys; biurti (p. 49) = bjurti; pražutuvės (p. 50) = lost; pražutis (p. 50) = perdition; neaug (p. 126, 156, 163) = does not grow; nudvėselis (p. 133) = nudvėselis; vyliūgas Vkš, Vdk (p. 162) = willow; smalyžius (p. 162) = smaližius; vosiukas (p. 200) = waxy; sandėlis (p. 211) = warehouse etc. The young scientist worked hard, took a lot from the literature of his teacher, Professor V. Urbutis, but paid less attention to the facts, and as a result, the material under analysis and its interpretation suffered in many places. Vytautas Vitkauskas 228