Latvių kalbotyros veikalai Australijoje

which is interesting and useful in many respects to researchers of the Lithuanian language as well. After all, it summarizes decades of research into Latvian vocabulary; even the shortcomings or errors in this dictionary will spur further research. Algirdas Sabaliauskas WORKS ON LATVIAN LINGUISTICS IN AUSTRALIA Fennell T. G. The First Latvian Grammar J. G. Rehehusen’s ”Manuductio ad linguam lettonicam...”. A facsimile 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 Dreszel’s Gantz kurtze Anleitung zur Lettischen Sprache. Text, Translation, Commentary, Concordance. Latvian Tertiary Committee. Melbourne 1984. — 452 p. As a child, the Australian linguist Trevor G. Fennell socialized with the children of Latvian emigrants and probably never imagined that this friendship formed at school, and his first active lessons in Latvian, would determine his career as a future scholar. It may be said that throughout the history of Latvian linguistics, we will find no linguist from another country who has contributed as much to the field of Lithuanian studies as T. G. Fennell. It is enough to recall the three-volume Latvian textbook ”A Grammar of Modern Latvian” (Vol. 1—3, The Hague-Paris-New York, 1980. 1370 p.)1, which he prepared together with the Latvian emigrant Henrik Gelsen, as well as his many articles on the history of the Latvian language. However, T. G. Fennell made his greatest contribution to Latvian linguistics by publishing and studying early monuments of the Latvian language. Here we would like to introduce three such publications. The first book publishes the first Latvian grammar, issued in 1644—Johann Georg Rehehusen’s ”Manuductio ad linguam lettonicam”, which, according to T. G. Fennell, ”despite its various shortcomings, is of great interest to scholars concerned with the origins and evolution of grammatical theory in the Latvian language”. This publication is very important because, to date, only one surviving copy of the original is known, held in the Uppsala University Library. It is true that in 1901 Augusts Bielenstein published this grammar. However, he prepared it from corresponding transcripts and, naturally, could not avoid certain shortcomings. This time, a facsimile of the grammar’s text is presented alongside an English translation. What follows is a very detailed commentary and an index of all Latvian words. The headwords are given in modern Latvian spelling (nouns in the nominative, verbs in the infinitive). They are also translated into English, and their forms are listed (in the original spelling). Such an index will one day be very useful to compilers of a historical Latvian dictionary 1 Plg. Blinkeną A. Latviešu gramatika cittauteišu skatijumā. — ZA Vēstis, 1982, 4. P. 135—137; Schmalstieg W. R. (Rec.) — General Linguistics, 1982. V. 22, No. 2. P. 139—142. 188 . The book also includes a photocopy of P. Berents’s article ”Pirmās latviešu valodas mācības sastādītājs”, published in 1930 in the journal ”Izglītības ministrijas mēnešraksts”. In fact, this is the most comprehensive biography of J. G. Rehehusen to date, although it is not known where or when he was born, where he studied, or when he died. It is known that around 1628 he was ordained as an Evangelical Lutheran pastor in Courland. It is conjectured that through his wife he may have been related to the Latvian lexicographer Johann Langij. This article has also been translated into English. Along with the English translation, the book also includes a facsimile of A. Bielenstein’s German article from the 1901 edition of J. G. Rehehusen’s grammar. Thus, this book, so meticulously prepared by the Australian linguist, is in a sense an encyclopedia of the first Latvian grammar, bringing together in one place material hitherto scattered across various publications, providing a detailed analysis of the grammatical text, and offering English translations that will greatly facilitate access to this material for a wider community of researchers interested in Latvian culture and the history of its linguistics. T. G. Fennell’s second book, ”Seventeenth Century Latvian Grammatical Fragments”, is compiled along similar lines. It publishes two important seventeenth-century documents relating to Latvian grammar—the so-called ”Einhorn Synopsis” (”Declinationum Letticarum ex D. Einhornij contrà Rehehusium tractatu Synopsis brevis”) and the ”Büchner Fragments”. Alongside the facsimile text, English translation, and extensive commentary, editions of the ”Einhorn Synopsis” by A. Bielenstein, A. Augstkalns, and J. Zēvers are also presented here. The ”Büchner Fragments” are published primarily on the basis of L. Arbuzov’s edition (”17.g.s. latviešu gramatika bij. Kurzemes hercogu bibliotēkā Pēterpilī”. — Filologu biedrības raksti, 1925, 5, p. 106—125). Along with English translations, excerpts are also presented here from A. Augstkalns’s article ”Veclatviešu rakstu apskats” (Rakstu krājums, 1930, 20, p. 109—110), J. Zēvers’s article ”Veci latviešu valodas pieminekļi rokrakstos” (Izglītības ministrijas mēnešraksts, 1937, 5, p. 619—621), and K. Dravinis’s article ”Latviešu gramatikas materiāli Mārtiņa Bichnera albumā” (In honorem Endzelini, Chicago, 1960, p. 107—113). The third book is devoted to Georg Dresel’s (Dreszell) grammar ”Gantz kurtze Anleitung zur Lettischen Sprache”, published in Riga in 1685. It presents a facsimile of the grammar’s text, an English translation, very extensive commentary (pp. 147—421), and an index of Latvian words. It is very pleasing that funding (The Australian Research Grants Committee) is available in Australia to publish works of this kind; but, of course, most important is that someone there is doing the work, someone capable of preparing such books. Algirdas Sabaliauskas A MONUMENT TO THE PARENTS’ LANGUAGE Unexpected twists of fate. Sometimes what seems already lost forever suddenly comes back to life and, in an instant, shines forth in all its splendor, only to rise anew 189