Iš vardų ir pavardžių rašymo dokumentuose istorijos

PRANAS KNIŪKŠTA Institute of the Lithuanian Language FROM THE HISTORY OF WRITING GIVEN NAMES AND SURNAMES IN DOCUMENTS KEYWORDS: Resolution of the Supreme Council, Lithuanian characters, draft regulations, writing of given names and surnames. The recording of personal names in documents of Lithuania, which had restored its independence, began with the issuance of certificates to citizens of the Republic of Lithuania. A resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Council dated 9 May 1990 established that “surnames, given names and fathers’ names (patronymics) are written in Lithuanian characters in the certificate of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania...” At the request of persons of non-Lithuanian nationality, their personal names may also be “written after the primary entry without adding Lithuanian endings.” Specifying the use of Lithuanian characters was important because until then (during the Soviet period), personal names and other information in documents were also written in Russian. It was necessary to break with that former practice. However, the previously valid principle of writing the surname before the given name, and adding the father’s name after the given name, was retained. Entirely new was the provision allowing the personal names of persons of non-Lithuanian nationality to be written without endings after the primary entry. The writing of given names and surnames was regulated differently in the passport of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania. Under the regulations for the passport of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania, approved on 8 November 1990, information in the passport of the Republic of Lithuania is entered in Lithuanian, and the personal data to be recorded include given name(s) and surname. From this wording, we can see that given names come before surnames, while the father’s name disappears altogether. A separate resolution provided that the specific procedure for writing surnames in the passports of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania “shall be established by the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania upon the recommendation of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language.” Several linguists from the Institute of the Lithuanian Language, members of the Language Commission, discussed the initial draft of the proposals. We then considered them with the Department of Nationalities and representatives of national minorities. The Union of Poles in Lithuania, active in Lithuania at the time, was particularly vocal. 50 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 86 The Language Commission carefully examined the proposals. Their first and principal point was formulated simply and clearly: “In the passport of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania, given names and surnames are written using Lithuanian letters, in accordance with the entries in the passports or other personal documents held by the person, on the basis of which the passport was issued.” It proved more difficult to define the principles for writing the given names and surnames of persons who were not of Lithuanian nationality. The procedure for writing double forms of personal names used for citizens’ identity cards (writing personal names without Lithuanian endings after the main entry) was unsuitable for passports. But forms of the given names and surnames of persons of other nationalities without endings had to be recognized and legalized. The principle of an additional option was chosen. First, the general procedure was set out: the given names and surnames of persons who were not of Lithuanian nationality are written according to pronunciation and “grammaticalized by adding Lithuanian endings.” An exception was then added: upon the citizen’s request, their given name and surname in the passport “may be entered without grammaticalization (without Lithuanian endings)”: The Language Commission submitted its proposals to the Supreme Council in December 1990 (Kalbos kultūra 63: 13). The Supreme Council adopted the resolution “On the Writing of Given Names and Surnames in the Passport of a Citizen of the Republic of Lithuania” on January 31, 1991. The Commission’s first proposed point, setting out the general principle that given names and surnames in passports be written using Lithuanian letters, was approved without amendment. The procedure for writing the given names and surnames of persons who were not of Lithuanian nationality was refined somewhat: to avoid doubts and misunderstandings, it was additionally stated that these, too, are written using Lithuanian letters. But a more democratic procedure was established for grammaticalizing personal names (adding endings): their grammaticalized and non-grammaticalized forms were presented as entirely equivalent alternatives. The following specific point was formulated, leaving no room for ambiguity: “2. The given names and surnames of persons who are not of Lithuanian nationality shall be written using Lithuanian letters in the passport issued to a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania. At the citizen’s written request, the given name and surname shall be written in one of the prescribed forms: a) according to pronunciation and without grammaticalization (without Lithuanian endings), or b) according to pronunciation and with grammaticalization (by adding Lithuanian endings).” The resolution also has a third point, concerning persons who had held the citizenship of another state; it specifies that their given names and surnames may be written in accordance with the document they hold from that state. At the time, this point was not relevant, but later it proved necessary. (We will discuss this further below.) P. KNIŪKŠTA. Iš vardų ir pavardžių rašymo dokumentuose istorijos 51 The Supreme Council’s resolution answered the most important questions about writing given names and surnames that had arisen at the time, but various uncertainties emerged in practice. For example, the resolution regulated the writing of given names and surnames in the passport of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania, but said nothing about writing them in other documents. Many minor questions arose about writing non-Lithuanian personal names when passports had to be issued on the basis of documents that did not contain entries in Lithuanian letters. The writing of Russian personal names using Lithuanian letters had been regulated by an instruction issued in 1990: Instructions for the Transcription of Surnames, Given Names, and Place Names from Russian into Lithuanian and from Lithuanian into Russian. Its rules were also suitable for entries in the new passports. The rules for writing the given names and surnames of Lithuania’s Poles, Belarusians, and Ukrainians were prepared and approved by the Lithuanian Language Commission in the autumn of 1991. They were submitted to the Passport Division of the Ministry of the Interior and the Civil Registration Division of the Ministry of Justice, and in 1993 were published in the volume Regulatory Documents on the Citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania and the Citizen’s Passport. Submitting the rules to the Civil Registration Division implicitly meant that they were proposed for application to civil registration documents as well. The Government, too, had its say on the implementation of the Supreme Council’s resolution. By its order of May 12, 1993, it established a working group “to examine issues concerning the writing of given names and surnames in personal documents.” The group included employees of the Ministries of Justice and Foreign Affairs, as well as the Departments of Migration and Nationalities. I was appointed head of that group, so I had to plan and organize its work. The working group began its activities by recalling the rules for transcribing into Lithuanian the given names and surnames written in Russian, Polish, Belarusian, and Ukrainian. It was additionally stated that personal names written in the scripts of other languages are to be transcribed using Lithuanian letters according to the rules set out in the publication Writing Non-Lithuanian Proper Names in the Lithuanian Soviet Encyclopedia. The rules in this source are applied first and without exception to documents of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania. But it is not entirely clear how they should be applied to the personal names of citizens of other states. Under the Supreme Council’s resolution, their given names and surnames “may be written in accordance with the passport of a citizen of that state or a corresponding document.” Nothing is said there about the letters to be used, so two interpretations are possible. In accordance with the general principle, the personal names of foreigners can be transcribed from their documents using Lithuanian letters. But a more logical conclusion is that, since the first- 52 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 86 The first and second points of the resolution concern Lithuanian characters, whereas the third does not mention them, and that requirement does not apply to it. Those responsible for handling documents and the public also had various other linguistic and legal questions about the writing and use of first names and surnames. For example, it was not clear to everyone how children’s surnames were formed and written in birth certificates, especially when a child’s surname was chosen on the basis of the mother’s maiden name. Questions arose concerning changes to first names and surnames or their forms, the correction of errors, and other matters of spelling. Various questions and uncertainties had to be clarified with employees of offices and institutions, chiefly those of passport and civil registry departments. There were requests to prepare a broader overview of the use of first names and surnames and to present it to the wider public as advice or instructions. An initial version of such an overview was prepared and discussed with members of the working group at the end of 1995. At the beginning of 1996, the experts of the Language Commission considered and supplemented it several times. The experts approved the revised version, and its title was confirmed as “Regulations on the Writing of First Names and Surnames in Personal Documents.” The proposed regulations had five sections: 1. General principles for the use and writing of personal names; 2. Writing first names and surnames in a passport of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania; 3. Writing first names and surnames in other documents; 4. Writing the first names and surnames of persons connected with the citizenship of other states; 5. Changing first names and surnames, correcting forms of personal names and errors. The regulations were based on the Supreme Council’s 1991 resolution and adhered to its requirements, but sought not to repeat its statements verbatim and were not limited to them. Additional points or statements were often added after the main provisions, discussing the issue more broadly and comprehensively. Thus, for example, the rules for writing the first names and surnames of persons who were not of Lithuanian nationality were set out. After the principal instructions—that they “are written in the passport using Lithuanian characters, in accordance with the Lithuanian entries in the personal documents held,” and that “men’s first names and surnames may, at the person’s discretion, have a grammatically adapted form (with a Lithuanian ending) or an unadapted form (without a Lithuanian ending)”—the following addition was included: “The roots and suffixes of the first names and surnames held are not Lithuanianized; for example, Ryšard or Ryšardas is not changed to Ričiardas, and Vasilevskij or Vasilevskis is not changed to Vasiliauskas; Lithuanian suffixes are not added to the first names and surnames of girls and women held, for example:” P. KNIŪKŠTA. Iš vardų ir pavardžių rašymo dokumentuose istorijos 53 Rimovič does not become Rimovičiūtė or Rimovičienė, and Kuzmicka does not become Kuzmickaitė or Kuzmickienė.” Another explanation of the writing of these personal names can be found in the section on writing them in other documents. After the general instruction that “various forms of personal names required by the text are used in documents,” the following is added: “Men’s personal names whose official (citation) form is uninflected (without an ending) are also written with the ending required by the case, e.g.: The certificate was issued to Janui Kozlovskiui; A marriage was registered with Janu Kozlovskiu (official forms without Lithuanian endings: Jan Kozlovski).” Names and surnames written in non-Lithuanian characters and belonging to citizens of other states were also considered in this regard; it was stated that they are not inflected (Lithuanian endings are not added). “However, when personal names are written in a part of a document that requires particular case forms, endings are added to men’s first names and surnames after an apostrophe, e.g.: A marriage was registered with Fischer’iu.” The section on persons holding the citizenship of other states was itself considerably expanded and detailed. Three groups of such persons are distinguished: 1) citizens of other states, 2) persons holding dual (Lithuanian and foreign) citizenship, and 3) citizens of the Republic of Lithuania who have married a citizen of another state. The writing of their first names and surnames in Lithuanian and other languages’ Latin-based characters is discussed; it is added that the latter may be written without diacritical marks. A considerable portion of the provisions is not directly related to the resolution of the Supreme Council, but is indirectly based on it. This applies first and foremost to the section on other documents. It discusses, point by point, the writing of personal names in various documents and illustrates it with specific examples. The first section is even further removed from the resolution, but it is connected to the provisions as a whole and serves as a kind of introduction; without it, the provisions would be detached from the general use of personal names, as if suspended in midair. The provisions were prepared as guidelines for the practical use of first names and surnames and as advice in this area for the general public. It is regrettable that they were not officially approved and never reached the public. The Language Commission approved the provisions but did not formally adopt them, since they concern not only linguistic matters but also legal ones. They were designated a draft of the provisions and sent out under that title to ministries and institutions dealing with the writing of first names and surnames in documents. The recipients were asked to express their views and submit proposals and requests. 54 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 86 The feedback and assessments received were favorable; the project was approved in principle by everyone, although various additional and editorial comments were made. The Ministry of the Interior approved the project without reservation (its staff had also participated in drafting the regulations). As might be expected, the Ministry of Justice submitted the most proposals. Since the lawyers’ opinion was particularly important and aligned with the general direction of the proposals, we will review their comments in greater detail. As many as four of the seven comments proposed clarifying the wording of the text: instead of persons connected with the citizenship of other states, it was proposed to write persons holding citizenship of other states; in documents issued by the Republic of Lithuania – add in documents issued by institutions of the Republic of Lithuania; citizens of Lithuanian ethnicity – add citizens of the Republic of Lithuania of Lithuanian ethnicity; acquiring citizenship under the simplified procedure – replace with acquiring citizenship under the general procedure. These proposals do not alter the substance of the statements; still less do they add anything new to the regulations project as a whole or remove anything from it. Only two comments concerned the document’s content: in one place, it was proposed to delete the words and residents of other states “as unnecessary”; in another place, to delete the indicated paragraph, because “the provision set out in it is not a subject matter regulated by this document.” One could add to these comments a question: should the prepared document be called rules rather than regulations? The opinions and comments on the draft regulations showed that such regulations were needed and that the submitted draft had, in essence, been properly prepared. The identified shortcomings and inaccuracies were easy to correct. It was much harder to decide what to do next with the project as a whole, and who should approve it and how. Many thought that the Language Commission could do so. Lawyers from the Seimas Legal Department rejected this view. According to their explanation, if the regulations were adopted by a resolution of the Language Commission, the Commission would exceed its authority; adoption by a Government resolution, however, would be appropriate. The Language Commission considered the revised draft, amended in response to the comments received, on 30 May 1996 (Minutes No. 7). It resolved: To approve the draft Regulations on the Writing of Names and Surnames in Personal Documents and submit it to the Government of the Republic of Lithuania for approval. P. KNIŪKŠTA. Iš vardų ir pavardžių rašymo dokumentuose istorijos 55 The Government did not undertake that work, so it fell to the Seimas, to which a revised version of the draft, amended in response to comments from institutions and ministries, was submitted. The Seimas no longer needed to consider its content; the most important thing was to give it legal status as a document. The status of the future document and its relationship to other documents, first and foremost to the resolution of the Supreme Council, had to be determined. It could not replace the resolution, nor could it be published as an appendix to it. In terms of content, it was a supplement to the resolution, but their connection emerged only after a long interval. It was proposed that the draft provisions be approved by a separate law. The best solution would have been to turn the Supreme Council’s resolution into a law and formalize the provisions to be approved as its appendix. There were also other ways to approve the planned document, so it was becoming unclear why the Seimas was delaying. After a while, the reason became clear: Poland would not allow it. It demanded that the surnames of Polish Lithuanian citizens be written using Polish-language characters and sought to impose this demand through a treaty. The Treaty on Friendly Relations and Good-Neighbourly Cooperation between Lithuania and Poland, concluded in 1994, does not mention characters; it speaks only of the use of names and surnames “in accordance with the sound of the language of the national minority.” Detailed rules for writing surnames were to be established in a special treaty. Negotiations on such a treaty began while the fate of the Provisions on the Writing of Names and Surnames in Personal Documents was being considered (in May 1996). The Lithuanian delegation adhered to the principles of the Supreme Council’s resolution; there was no need to rely additionally on the draft provisions, as they could add nothing new. Poland considered the provisions the main obstacle to concluding a treaty that met its wishes. It expressed its opposition to the draft provisions in various ways, even sending a note about them. They were of little significance to Lithuania, so, for the sake of peace, they were put on the shelf. But this did nothing for Poland: the planned treaty was not concluded. Attempts were made to negotiate it several more times (in 2002 and 2004), but once again no treaty was concluded. Unable to blame the provisions, Poland began to criticize the Supreme Council’s resolution, almost openly demanding that it be repealed. The Government could not withstand the pressure and twice (in 2007 and 2010) tried to do so—to push through an unconstitutional law allowing the surnames of Lithuanian citizens to be written using non-Lithuanian characters. Fortunately, the Seimas did not allow it. I have written several articles about this; they were published in the book Between Grammar and Politics, so we will not revisit those questions here. 56 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 86 CONCLUSIONS 1. The basis for writing names and surnames in documents was established by the resolution of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania of 31 January 1991, “On the Writing of Names and Surnames in the Passport of a Citizen of the Republic of Lithuania.” Its principal declared principle was that the surnames of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania be written using Lithuanian-language characters. 2. The resolution did not cover other documents or all possible cases of writing names and surnames. Broader rules or some other normative document were needed for that. At the end of 1995, the Provisions on the Writing of Names and Surnames in Personal Documents were drawn up; the Language Commission submitted them to the Seimas for approval. They became stalled in the Seimas and were not approved. 3. No major ambiguities or misunderstandings arise concerning the writing of the names and surnames of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania in documents. Only the Poles make a fuss, dissatisfied that their surnames, like those of other Lithuanian citizens, are written in documents using Lithuanian characters. Poland also makes claims—it wants to impose its preferred arrangement through an interstate treaty and almost openly demands that the Supreme Council’s resolution be repealed. 4. Unable to withstand the pressure, the Government twice (in 2007 and 2010) prepared unconstitutional draft laws that would allow the surnames of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania to be written in documents using non-Lithuanian characters as well. The Seimas rejected those drafts. It is to be hoped that such drafts will not be foisted on the current Seimas either. LITERATURE AND SOURCES Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania “On the Writing of Surnames, Names and Fathers’ Names (Patronymics) in the Certificate of a Citizen of the Republic of Lithuania,” 9 May 1990, No. 199. (Valstybės žinios, 1990, No. 15–414). Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania “On the Approval of the Regulations for the Passport of a Citizen of the Republic of Lithuania,” 8 November 1990, No. 1–776. (Valstybės žinios, 1990, No. 33–795). Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania “On the Writing of Names and Surnames in the Passport of a Citizen of the Republic of Lithuania,” 31 January 1991, No. 1–1031. (Valstybės žinios, 1991, No. 5–132). Treaty on Friendly Relations and Good-Neighbourly Cooperation between the Republic of Lithuania and the Republic of Poland, 21 April 1994. (Valstybės žinios, 1994, No. 97–1907). P. KNIŪKŠTA. Iš vardų ir pavardžių rašymo dokumentuose istorijos 57 Regulatory Documents on Citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania and the Citizen’s Passport, Vilnius: Migration Department under the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Lithuania, 1993. Letter from the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania to the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language under the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, 18 March 1996, No. 01–03–345/393. Writing N Lithuanian Proper Names in the “Lithuanian Soviet Encyclopedia”, Vilnius: Chief Editorial Board of Encyclopedias, 1986. Instructions for the Transcription of Surnames, Names and Place Names from Russian into Lithuanian and from Lithuanian into Russian, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1990. Proposals “On the Writing of Names and Surnames in the Passport of a Citizen of the Republic of Lithuania.” – Kalbos kultūra 63, 1992, p. 13. Regulations on the Writing of Names and Surnames in Personal Documents. Considered and approved by the Commission of the Lithuanian Language on 30 May 1996, minutes No. 7. Received 2013 11 04 Accepted 2013 12 20 FROM THE HISTORY OF SPELLING OF FIRST NAMES AND SURNAMES IN DOCUMENTS Summary The fundamental principles for the spelling of first names and surnames in documents were established by the resolution of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania dated 31 January 1991 on the spelling of first names and surnames in the passports of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania. The key principle stipulated in the resolution maintains that first names and surnames of the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania must be written in Lithuanian characters. The same principle applies to the Lithuanian citizens of non-Lithuanian descent, only they can choose whether to write their first names and surnames with a Lithuanian ending or without it. The resolution was directly applicable to passports but failed to cover other documents as well as all the cases of spelling of personal names. Therefore, the employees of institutions issuing documents, mostly passport divisions and civil registry offices, used to face various questions. Their requirement for the drafting of more extensive guidelines for the spelling of first names and surnames or a differently titled description of such type became increasingly intense. The description was drafted at the end of 1995 under the title “Regulations of Spelling of First Names and Surnames in Personal Documents”. They were considered by the experts of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language for several times; afterwards, they were distributed among ministries and institu- 58 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 86 tions for acquaintance. The draft regulations corrected in line with the feedback received were further considered and approved by the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language. Whereas the regulations are not only concerned with language but also legal issues, the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language passed them for the approval of the Seimas; however, the approval of the regulations was not undertaken by the Seimas. The spelling of first names and surnames in documents does not cause greater uncertainties and misunderstandings. Confusion is only due to the citizens of Polish descent, dissatisfied that their surnames are written in Lithuanian characters in documents in the manner identical to other Lithuanian citizens. Claims are also brought up by Poland, wishing to impose its requirement by a cross-border agreement and expressing an almost open demand to revoke the resolution of the Supreme Council. The Government failed to withstand the pressure by producing unconstitutional draft laws for a couple of times (in 2007 and 2010), enabling the spelling of surnames of the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania in non-Lithuanian characters. However, these draft laws were rejected by the Seimas. KEYWORDS: resolution of the Supreme Council, spelling of names and surnames, Lithuanian characters, draft regulations. PRANAS KNIŪKŠTA Institute of the Lithuanian Language 5 Petro Vileišio St., LT-10308 Vilnius P. KNIŪKŠTA. Iš vardų ir pavardžių rašymo dokumentuose istorijos 59