Latvių kalbotyros veikalai Australijoje

nas, which in many cases is interesting and useful for Lithuanian language researchers. After all, it summarizes many decades of research into the Latvian language lexicon, and even the shortcomings or errors of this dictionary will be a stimulus for further research. Fennell T. G. The First Latvian Grammar J. G. Rehehusen's "Manuductio ad linguam lettonicam...". A fac-simile Text with annotated translation and commentary. Latvian Tertiary Committee. Melbourne 1982. —369 p. Seventeenth Century Latvian Grammatical Fragments. Text, translation and commentary. Latvian Tertiary Committee. Melbourne 1982. —322 p. Georg Dreszell’s Gantz short guide to the Latvian language. Text, Translation, Commentary, Concordance. Latvian Tertiary Committee. Melbourne 1984. —452 p. The Australian linguist Trevor G. Fennell, communicating with the children of Latvian emigrants in his childhood, probably never thought that this friendship on the school bench, the first active Latvian language lessons, would determine his future career as a scientist. It is probably possible to say that in the history of Latvian linguistics we will not find any other linguist who has worked so much in Latvian bars as T. G. Fennell. Suffice it to recall his three-volume textbook of Latvian language "A Grammar of Modern Latvian" (Vol. 1—3, The HagueParis-New York, 1980. 1370 Pr numerous articles on the history of the Latvian language. However, T. G. Fennell deserved particularly much to Latvian linguists by publishing and researching the ancient monuments of the Latvian language. I would like to introduce you to three such publications. In the first book is published the first grammar of the Latvian language published in 1644 — Johann Georg Rehehusen's "Manuductio ad linguam lettonicam", which, according to T. G. Fennello, "despite all its shortcomings, is very interesting for scholars interested in the genesis and evolution of the grammar theory of the Latvian language". This publication is of great importance, since only one original copy is known to date, which is kept in the University Library of Uppsala. In 1901, August Bylenštejn published this grammar.- But he prepared it from the corresponding transcripts and, of course, could not avoid certain shortcomings. This time the facsimile text of the grammar is published alongside the English translation. Below are very detailed commentaries, a register of all Latvian words. The title words are presented in the current Latvian spelling (noun forms of nouns, verbs). They are also translated into English, their forms are registered (the original spelling is given). Such a register will one day be very useful for the future historical Latvian dictionary 1 Plg. Blinkena A. Latvian grammar from a foreigner's point of view. —ZA Vėstis, 1982, 4. P. 135—137; Schmalstieg VW. R. (Rec.) —General Linguistics, 1982. V. 22, No. 2. P. 139-142. 188 organizers. The book also includes a photocopy of P. Berents' article "Pirmas latviešu valodas macibas sastaditajs" published in the journal "Izglitibas ministrijas ménesraksts" in 1930. It is the most complete biography of J. G. Rehehusen to date, although it is not known where and when he was born, where he studied, or when he died. It is known that around 1628 Kurše was ordained to the Evangelical Lutheran priesthood. It is believed that he was a relative of the Latvian lexicographer Johans Langijs through his wife. This article is also available in English. Along with the English translation, the book also publishes a facsimile of A. Bylenštein- ’s German article from the 1901 edition of J. G. Rehehusen- ’s grammar. Thus, this book, so carefully prepared by an Australian linguist, is like a kind of first encyclopedia of Latvian grammar, which gathers in one place the material that has been scattered in various publications so far, provides a detailed analysis of the grammar text, and the translations into English will greatly facilitate the use of this material by wider strata of researchers interested in Latvian culture and their linguistic history. T. G. Fennell’s second book “Seventeenth Century Latvian Grammatical Fragments” is also based on a similar principle. This book publishes two important 17th-century documents related to Latvian grammar — the so-called "Einhorn's synopsis" (Declinationum Letticarum ex D. Einhornij contra Rehehusium tractatu Synopsis brevis) and the "Biuchner's fragments- ". In addition to the facsimile text, English translation, extensive commentaries, the editions of A. Bylenšteinas, A. Augstkalnis, J. Zėverius’ Einhorn synopsis are also published here. "Biuchner- 's fragments" are published mainly on the basis of L. Arbuzov's edition ("17th-century Latvian grammar at the Kurzemes Dukes' Library in Peterpili." —Filologu biedribas raksti, 1925, 5, pp. 106—125). Along with English translations, here are also published excerpts from A. Augstkalnis' article "Veclatviešu rakstu apskats" (Rakstu krastam, 1930, 20, p. 109—110), J. Zēveri's article "Veci latviešu valodas piemenekli rokrakstos" (Izglitibas ministrijas menešraksts, 1937, 5, p. 619—621) and K. Dravinis' article "Latviešu gramatikas materiali Martina Bichnera albuma" (In honorem Endzelini, Chicago, 1960, p. 107—113). The third book is dedicated to the grammar of Georg Dressel (Dreszell) published in Riga in 1685 "Gantz kurtze Anleitung zur Lettischen Sprache". A facsimile text of the grammar, an English translation, very extensive (p.147—421) commentaries and a register of Latvian words are published. I am very pleased that there are funds in Australia (The Australian Research Grants Committee) to publish such works, but, of course, the most important thing is that there is a person working there who is able to publish such works; prepared. Algirdas Sabaliauskas —MEMORIAL OF FATHER'S TALKS Unexpected turns of fate. Sometimes what seems lost forever suddenly comes alive again and shines for a moment in all its glory to rise to a new 189