LIETUVIŲ KALBOS SANDAROS TYRINĖJIMAI

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXVI (1987)

HALINA STAURUKIENĖ

Borrowings in the Hymnal of “Knygos nobažnystės”

Until now, the vocabulary of the hymnal in “Knygos nobažnystės” has not been specifically studied. The author of the article compiled a register of this part of the Kėdainiai publications, recording 3178¹ lexemes; there are 500 borrowings, i.e. 16%².

Most of the borrowings are Slavicisms (489); the remainder consists of Germanisms (9) and Hebraisms (2). It is very difficult, and in some cases impossible, to determine which Slavicisms came from Polish, Belarusian, or Russian, because of the structural similarity of individual words in these languages. To determine the origins of the words, the author drew on P. Skardžius’s dictionary of Slavicisms, K. Alminauskis’s dictionary of Germanisms, and E. Frenkelis’s etymological dictionary.

This article discusses the morphological structure, adaptation, and semantics of the borrowings.

Noun borrowings. This is the largest group of borrowings in the hymnal of “Knygos nobažnystės” (306)³. Most of them are Slavicisms, and only 6 are Germanisms (kunigas, kunigaikštis, miūras (?), penigas, pinigas, harfa (?)). Slavic and German nouns that enter Lithuanian take Lithuanian noun endings and are incorporated into the noun declension system of Lithuanian as it existed at that time.

A review of direct noun borrowings shows that they tend more to adapt to the productive declension types of nouns in Old Lithuanian: masculine a stem (sing. nom. -as) — 99 (46%), masculine and feminine o stem (sing. nom. -a) — 71 (33%), masculine (i)u stem (sing. nom. -ius) — 21 (10%), feminine and masculine i stem — 18 (8%), feminine ė stem (sing. nom. -ė) — 4 (2%), masculine ia stem — 2 (1%). However, there are no noun borrowings with a consonant stem.

The assignment of noun borrowings to specific Lithuanian declension types is determined by the final segment of the borrowed stem. If the stem of a borrowed noun ends in a hard consonant, the borrowing takes the endings of Lithuanian masculine a-stem nouns and feminine o-stem nouns, e.g., apekūnas “guardian” < Pol. apiekun, balvonas “idol” < Bel. балван, разумас “reason” < Bel. розум. Words whose stems end in a soft consonant most often take the endings of Lithuanian masculine (i)us-stem nouns, with singular nominative -(i)us; feminine and masculine io-stem endings, with singular nominative -ia; and feminine ė-stem endings, with singular nominative -ė, e.g.:

¹ Borrowed proper nouns are not included in this number.

² Plg. Palionis J. Lietuvių literatūrinės kalbos istorija. — V., 1979, p. 80.

³ It is also possible to reconstruct *sėbras and *sėbrystė.

6. 1835

145

karalius “ruler, lord” < Bel. кароль, пакајус “peace, tranquility” < Bel. спакой, Pol. pokój, dušia “soul, spirit” < Pol. dusza, sūdžia “judge” < Bel. суддзя, traicė “trinity” < Pol. trójca. Old Slavic i-stem nouns whose stem ends in a palatal consonant, once adopted as Lithuanian loanwords, take the endings of feminine i-stem nouns, e.g.: mislis “thought” < Bel. мысль, Pol. myśl, mostis “ointment” < Bel. маць, Pol. maść.

The gender of direct, unsuffixed nominal borrowings is retained from the source word, but it may also be associated with formal features. Words denoting male persons that have the ending -a in Slavic languages remain o-stem nouns in Lithuanian, e.g.: monarcha “monarch” < Pol. monarcha, patriarcha “patriarch” < Pol. patriarcha, vaivada < Pol. wojewoda. Most Slavic neuter nouns become masculine nouns in Lithuanian, e.g.: kodylas “incense” < Bel. кадзіла, vaiskas “army” < Bel. ваійска, Rus. войско. However, pekla “hell” < Pol. piekło, prova “law” < Bel. права, Pol. prawo are feminine. This is due to the different ages of these borrowings⁴.

One case of fluctuation in the choice of declension type was observed in the adaptation of Slavic borrowings: pahonis (|| pagonis), -ies || pahonas (|| pagonis), -o, (-io): gen. sg. Pahona 111, nom. pl. Pahonis 69, 70, Pahonis 111, Pagonis 66, 82, Pagonay 73, gen. pl. Pahoniu 69, Pahoniu 140, Pagoniu 93.

It seems that such variation in forms arose from different sources: pagonas, -o may have derived from Bel. < погань or Old Pol. pogan, while pahonis (|| pagonis) derives from Bel. < погань.

In addition to direct, unsuffixed borrowings, the hymnal also contains direct suffixed Slavicisms:

1) -inykas || -ininkas (9/1), e.g.: biednykas “poor person, pauper” < Bel. бѣдняк or Pol. biedniak, remesnykas “craftsman” < Bel. рамеснік. As in the Slavic languages, this group of borrowings denotes various personal designations.

2) -onė (7), e.g.: koronė “punishment” < Pol. kdranie, metavonė “repentance” < Pol. mętowanie. These borrowings denote abstract concepts.

3) -onis (3), e.g.: egipcionis < Pol. Egipcjanin. The words indicate affiliation with a country or faith.

4) -astis (2), e.g.: šventasis “sacrament” < Pol. świętość. It denotes abstract concepts.

5) -stva (2), e.g.: bliuznierstva “obscenity” < Pol. bluznierstwo.

6) -yčia (2), e.g.: aslyčia “she-ass” < Pol. oslica.

The most widespread borrowings take suffixes characteristic of Lithuanian nouns. These are hybrid derivatives, since they are formed from a borrowed root and a Lithuanian suffix. The most productive suffix is -ystė (25). Most derivatives with this suffix are formed from adjectival borrowings, and only some from nominal ones, e.g.: bagotystė “wealth” from bagotas, panystė “maidenhood” from pana. The suffixes -imas | -ymas (14) are fairly productive. Derivatives formed with them come from borrowed verbs and denote actions, e.g.: dėkavojimas “thanking” from dėkavoti,

* See K. Būga, Rinktiniai raštai. – V., 1961, vol. 3, p. 46.

146

griešymas “the committing of a sin,” from griešyti. There is also the suffix -ybė (11). This suffix is generally used to form nouns from adjectives and denotes qualities, e.g.: bespiečnybė “safety,” from bespiečnas “safe”; smertelnybė “mortality,” from smertelnas. Only latrybė “fraud” is from latras “fraudster.” However, the meaning of this noun is adjectival. The less productive suffixes are -tojas, -toja (5) and -umas (1). The religious character of the hymnbook apparently accounts for the fact that there are also few derivatives with diminutive suffixes -ėlė, -elė (1/1).

The only compound noun hybrids are dėkudarymas “giving thanks,” geradėjas “benefactor,” and piktadėjas “evildoer.”

Adjectival borrowings (58). Adjectival borrowings form a small group. Most are Slavicisms; only liuos as is a Germanism. All direct adjectival borrowings (48) are a-stem, even those that are u-stem in present-day dialects (tykas — tykus). Adverbs could also be reconstructed: *abydus from perbadyždi, *skarus from skaridi⁵.

Most adjectives are primary words, e.g.: čielas, -a “whole, full” < Bel. цѣлы, kytras, -a “wicked, deceitful” < Bel. хитры or Pol. chytry, pūstas, -a “empty, devastated” from Bel. пусты, Pol. pusty.

Some words were borrowed with Slavic prefixes and suffixes, e.g.: nebespėcnas “unsafe” < Pol. niebezpieczny, pav alnas “subordinate” < Pol. archaic powolny “humble, obedient,” strošlyvas “terrible” < Pol. straszliwy, ščeslyvas “happy” < Bel. шчаслівы. Hybrid derivatives formed from borrowed nouns with Lithuanian suffixes are few: -iškas (4), -ingas (3), -uotas (1), e.g.: karališkas from karalius, pakajingas from pakajus, romuotas from rona.

Verbal borrowings. There are 104 Slavicisms and 2 Germanisms among the verbal borrowings (liuosuoti, liuosinti). A further 16 Slavicisms can be reconstructed from prefixed derivatives, e.g.: čvystyti from apčvystyti, ronyti from suronyti, spdakayti from nuspdakayti.

There are no primary verbs⁶. The Slavic suffixes of direct borrowings were transformed into similar Lithuanian suffixes or replaced by Lithuanian suffixes with a similar function: -yti, -ija, -ijo from Rus. -умъ⁷, -avoti from Bel. -аваць or Pol. -ować, -oti from Bel. -аць or Pol. -ać, e.g.: mūsyti “to be obliged” < Pol. musieć, tiešyti “to console” < Bel. цешыць, dėkavoti “to thank” < Bel. дзякаваць, drukavoti “to print” < Pol. drukować; kolioti “to abuse” < Pol. kalać, rugoti “to scold” < Bel. dialectal ругаць.

If the stem of a Slavic verb is soft, the borrowing is soft as well, e.g.: kolioti “to abuse” < Pol. kalać.

Slavic reflexive verbs are rendered in Lithuanian with a reflexive form, e.g.: užsidayvyi “to be amazed” < Bel. дзівіцца, kloniotis “to bow” < Bel. кланяцца or Pol. kłaniać się.

Since Baltic and Slavic prefixes are of common origin, Slavic prefixes are replaced by Lithuanian prefixes of the same structure and function, e.g.: užslūžyti

⁵ The formative -ai after a soft consonant (these adverbs were most likely direct borrowings).

⁶ *boti “to heed” could be reconstructed from atboti (< Bel. дбаць “to care, to make an effort,” Pol. dbać).

⁷ Only rėdyti, -o, -ė “to arrange” and aprėdyti “to adorn” occur with the suffix -yti < Rus. нарядить.

46*

147

“to earn” < Bel. заслужыць, арчўсты, ingadyti “to please” < Bel. угадзіў, Old Pol. ugodžić. In some cases it is difficult to distinguish whether prefixes came along with a borrowing or whether the word is formed by prefixation, e.g.: pamstyti “to take revenge” < Bel. помоціць or Pol. pomścić, pav iervyti “to believe” < Bel. паверыць, Rus. поверить, Pol. powierzyć.

More frequently used borrowings have Lithuanian prefixes, e.g.: sugriešyti “to commit a sin”: griešyti < Pol. grzeszyć, užsłużyti “to earn, deserve” < Pol. zasłużyć. Derivatives with the prefix da-, which is considered Slavic, should also be mentioned: datirdu­ti, datirti, da(si)žinoti.

There are relatively few hybrid derivatives with Lithuanian suffixes. Derivatives with the suffix -uoti are all prefixed, e.g.: išmieruoti, pamieruoti, už(u)mieruoti < Bel. мераць or Pol. mierzyć; užkriesuoti “to mark” < Pol. kres; išliuosuoti “to set free” from liuos as “free” < Germ. los “free”. Only a few hybrids have Lithuanian suffixes -inti (3), -auti (2), e.g.: išvalninti “to liberate”: valnas “free” < Bel. волны or Pol. wolny.

Adverbial borrowings. The hymnbook contains 16 adverbs of manner and 2 adverbs of time. It may be assumed that there are 2 direct borrowings: perabydžiai “painfully” and skariai “quickly,” since the adjectives *skarus and *perabydus are not attested; moreover, there are no borrowed adjectives with a u-stem at all. Adverbs of manner are formed from adjectives with the formant -ai, e.g.: pakarnai “humbly” from pakarnas, viernai “faithfully” from viernas, spakajingai “peacefully” from spakajingas.

Adverbs of time are hybrid derivatives: kasčės “every time,” tačės “at that time.”

Pronominal borrowings. The adjectival pronouns kožnas “each” < Bel. кожны, žednas < Bel. dialectal жадны, Pol. żaden are direct borrowings, inflected like a-stem adjectives.

Invariable words. Conjunctions: aba || abag “or,” bo “because” < Bel. бо, Pol. bo, każei(b) “although” < Bel. хуа, Pol. choćidź, choć; particles: bodai “as if, supposedly” < Bel. бадай, etc.

Noun semantics. The largest semantic groups of noun borrowings are: a) religious terms, e.g.: afjera “offering,” adventas “the period before Christmas,” altorius, anielas “angel,” apaštalas, archanielas “archangel,” bažnyčia, byskupas “bishop,” cherubinas, griechas “sin,” krikštas, kunigas, litanija, pah onis “pagan,” pekla “hell,” šventastis “sacrament,” rojus, šėtonas, tradicė “trinity,” velykos, vier a “faith.” Most of these entered Lithuanian after the introduction of Catholicism; b) designations expressing social relations, e.g.: dpekūnas “guardian,” bdgočius “wealthy person,” patamkas “descendant,” susiedas “neighbor,” ubagas “beggar,” vnūkas “grandchild,” etc.; c) terms relating to administrative and state life, e.g.: dėkretas “law,” herbas, hetmonas “hetman,” majestotas “throne,” mistras “teacher,” parėdkas “order,” paslas “messenger,” stonas “estate, rank,” sūdžia “judge,” tironds, triumfas, tronas “throne,” etc.; d) terms relating to cultural life, e.g.: arfa, choras, cimbolai, citra, knyga, pužonas “trombone,” triūba, etc.; e) various abstract nouns,

148

e.g.: čiastis “happiness,” loska “grace,” mūka “suffering,” nodieja “hope,” patiechd “comfort,” strochas “fear,” tūžma “fear, concern.”

Less common are: a) names of plants and animals, e.g.: alyva “olive tree,” asilas, aslyčia “she-ass,” levas “lion,” pelikonas “pelican,” radastas “wild rose,” etc.; b) names of products and materials, e.g.: balsomas “balm,” kodylas “incense,” marmoras “marble,” mira, siera, vynas and others; c) names of household objects and clothing, e.g.: kubkas “goblet,” jupa, ploščius “cloak.”

The original source of a large proportion of the words in the groups mentioned is Latin, Greek, or Germanic.

Adjective semantics: The following semantic groups of adjectives can be distinguished:

a) a person's psychological characteristics and moral-religious evaluation, e.g.: griešnas, -a “sinful,” pabažnas “God-fearing,” razumnas “intelligent,” viernas “believing,” etc.

b) social status, e.g.: bagotas “rich,” biednas “poor,” liuosas “free,” ubagas “beggarly,” etc.

c) a person's psychological disposition, e.g.: smūtnas “sad,” spakainas “calm,” šešlyvas “happy,” etc.

d) physical and physiological characteristics, e.g.: kaliekas “crippled,” patvarnas “ugly,” čystas “pure,” etc.

e) other concepts, e.g.: abehas “simple,” noprosnas “unnecessary,” etc.

Semantic groups of verbs:

a) words denoting mental actions, e.g.: afierdoti “to sacrifice,” dvytis “to be surprised,” dūmoti “to think,” gordyti “to despise,” karytis “to obey,” liūbyti “to like,” metavoti(s) “to repent,” tiesyti “to comfort,” etc.

b) verbs of active action, e.g.: brajyti “to revel,” budavoti “to build,” liečyti “to heal,” provyti “to rule,” mieruoti “to measure,” koroti “to punish,” kryžiavoti “to crucify,” etc.

c) words denoting abstract actions, e.g.: čėdyti “to preserve,” sūdyti “to judge,” pilndvoti “to protect,” šefavoti “to govern,” etc.

c) verbs denoting the process of speaking, e.g.: bliuznyti “to speak obscenely,” dėkavoti “to thank,” kolioti “to scold, revile,” rūgoti “to reproach,” etc.

Conclusions

The largest share of borrowings in the hymnbook of “Knyga nobažnystės” consists of Slavicisms (there are only a few Germanisms). The morphological adaptation of borrowings is characterized by the following:

1. Noun inflection types depend on the softness of the final stem consonant in the borrowed word. Borrowed nouns are most often inflected according to the productive Lithuanian noun inflection types. The masculine and feminine gender of the source word is generally retained, while the rendering of the neuter gender varies. Nouns are incorporated into the Lithuanian morphological system also through the use of Lithuanian suffixes. The most productive suffixes are -ys-tė, -imas, -ymas, -ybė.

149

2. Adjectives are incorporated into the Lithuanian morphological system most often through inflectional adaptation. There are few derivatives with suffixes.

3. Slavic suffixes in direct verb borrowings are transformed into similar Lithuanian suffixes or replaced with Lithuanian suffixes serving the same function.

Semantic analysis shows that most borrowings are terms related to religious concerns (nouns denote concrete and abstract objects and phenomena, while adjectives and verbs describe a person’s mental characteristics or activities expressing them). Words denoting active action are also common. Names of plants, animals, and materials occur less frequently.

BORROWINGS FROM THE HYMNBOOK “KNYGA NOBĄŻNYSTĖS”

Abstract

The article examines borrowings from the hymnbook of the Lithuanian Reformed Christians “Knyga nobąžnystės”.

In the process of morphological adaptation, nouns are most often assigned to productive Lithuanian declension types. Adjectives are characterized by inflectional adaptation. Slavic suffixes and prefixes in direct verb borrowings are transformed into similar Lithuanian suffixes and prefixes or replaced with Lithuanian suffixes serving similar functions.

The semantic groups of borrowings are also considered.