Jono Jablonskio pėdomis: linksnių klaidos ir taisymo motyvai

I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the Footsteps of John Jablonski: Errors and Motives for Correction 25 LANGUAGE IRENA SMETONIENĖ BRIGITA DAMBRAUSKAITĖ Vilniaus universitetas In the footsteps of JONO JABlONSKIO: ERRORS IN LINKSNES AND MOTIVS FOR CORRECTION KEY WORDS: noun, adjective, noun, adjective, pronoun, pronoun, norming. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS There is a lot written about the use, meanings and errors of the linguees. At the end of the 19th century, intensive standardization of the common Lithuanian language began, and articles on the language published in Varpas were important for its development. There is no doubt that since Jon Jablonski the systematization and consolidation of the common Lithuanian language norms has become consistent. At the beginning of the 20th century, the linguistics of the mother tongue was greatly influenced by Pranas Skardžius, Antanas Salys, Petras Jonikas, Jurgis Talmantas, later Juozas Balčikonis, Leonardas Dambriūnas (Dambrauskas). Since the middle of the 20th century, normative activity has become more collective and organized. Various newspapers and magazines began to publish articles periodically to discuss practical issues of the language. These articles usually deal with individual cases of the use of various phrases and errors related to the usage and topics of the time. This article reviews the beginning of correction of humorous errors, interwar linguistic efforts to standardize humorous usage, the motivation of corrections by J. Jablonskis and Native Language Linguists, and some subsequent echoes. As the most important work of J. Jablonski was selected 26 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 this 1928, because it systematically and consistently describes the meanings of verbs, formulates the principles of use of verbs, gives examples, indicates wrong cases. Publications in which J. Jablonskis published a number of articles on language use issues (Varpas, Viltis, Švietimo darbas, Santara, Lietuva, Lietuvis, Kalba, language sections in the newspapers Lietuvos žinios and Lietuvos aidas) were reviewed and also included in the study, as well as valuable articles from other periodicals (Vairas, Rytas, Pradai ir žygiai, Aidas, Draugija, Panevėžio balsas, etc.). Data was also collected from language practice publications. First of all, the language advisor published in 1939, prepared by the interwar linguists of the mother tongue – P. Skardžius, A. Salis, L. Dambrauskas – is worth mentioning. DENOMINATOR Most of the errors in the noun were observed in the use of this vowel instead of part of the noun, when addressing persons, their groups, animals, objects or phenomena as a noun, in the fluctuating use of the noun and the suffix, in the use of the noun and the noun as a noun. The noun was corrected into the genitive of part already by J. Jablonski: in the town of Varėna, in addition to Jews, live Lithuanians (=Lithuanian) (Jablonskis 1911a: 1); not one had unexpected friends (=unexpected friends)1 (Jablonskis 1912a: 1–2); they visited institutions where there were sick Jews (=sick Jews) (Jablonskis 1914: 4); salty springs occur on the earth (= salty springs occur on the earth) (Jablonskis 1920: 26); already forests of fir, cedar and birch (= firs, cedars and birches) occur (Jablonskis 1926a: 2); I never dreamed that such things (=such things) could be (Jablonskis 1926d: 159); there are people (=people) with lesser or greater defects (Jablonskis 1926b: 50). J. Jablonskis also suggested the noun of part when the noun means abstract concepts, material: now there is hope (=of hope) that the sick person will recover (Jaban lonskis 1911a: 1); again, do so that you will have advantage (=benefit) from it (Jablonskis 1925a: 1212); hydrogen is in the composition of all bodies (= hydrogen is in all bodies, in the composition of all bodies) (Jablonskis 1920: 26); clay is all kinds of colors: white, yellow (=clay is, there are all kinds) (Jablonskis 1920: 25). 1 Cited examples are written in accordance with current spelling rules; some examples of article authors abbreviated. Red. note. I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. The years of publication of the articles (1911, 1912, 1914, 1920, 1925, 1926) show the consistency of the corrections made by J. Jablonski. He has written that some sayings could be "justified by one other dialect of people's language" (Jablonskis 1911: 2), but he suggested avoiding such nouns. There are fewer sentences in which the linguist gives both the noun and the adjective: oro, arĝento kaj nun pasilaito en pure formo (=oro, arĝento kaj nun okazas en pura formo) (but oro de la montoj, oro de la tero povas esti ankaŭ en pura formo) (Jablonskis 1920: 26). At the end of one of his articles, J. Jablonskis admits that he does not explain the correction of errors (“it was difficult to find a place for all kinds of interpretations of the language”) (Jablonskis 1925a: 1217). One of the most important criteria for correction is the living language of people and the language norms recorded in grammar. The linguist has emphasized that the most helpful way to use the language correctly would be for people themselves to take an interest in dialects, folklore, and to “use the instructions of one or another linguist and at least one language textbook (language syntax)” (Jablonskis 1911a: 3)2. Pranas Meškauskas also corrected the noun based on the rule of a part of a nobleman: pasklido apylinkėj gandai (=gandų) (Meškauskas 1931: 61); news came from America that 4 more banks went bankrupt (=knowledge; e.g., rumors spread) (Brown 1962: 67). There has been a lot of discussion and debate about the adverbial nominative, especially about the adverbial suffix Mr. Vartosena. Mr. Skardžius used the noun to indicate the prefix of the address because of the tradition of use. In his opinion, next to Mr. Teacher can 2 A strict response to J. Jablonski's corrections was published in the 1912 publication of the Society. Adam Jakštas (who signed himself as Druskis) angrily criticized the linguist for numerous unnecessary corrections, excessive confidence, strictness of opinion and absoluteness of decisions („Rygiškių Jonas neleidžia jokių abejonių, jis kerta kaip su ašmenimi“) (Jakštas 1912: 285). According to A. Jakštas, J. Jablonskis claims that it is necessary to write now there is hope that the patient will recover; eat that there is a desire; had the opportunity to talk to him; whether he has a mind, etc., and sentences are now hope; eat that there is a desire; had the opportunity to talk to him; whether he has a mind, etc. are allegedly false. A. Jakštas believes that both variants are good, only the meaning differs, and suggests that J. Jablonskis should not rely so strictly on human language. J. Jablonskis 1912 m. Viltyje yra parašęs ironišką straipsnį, kuriuo kreipėsi į A. Jakštą ir bandė nuosekliai atremti visas jo pastabas. Teigė, kad A. Jakštas neatkreipęs dėmesio į pastabas, kuriose sakoma, kad jis, J. Jablonskis, nė nemėginęs surašyti visų pataisymų, nes you have to know all the dialects. J. Jablonskis tries to justify, argumentatively justify and some cases of use of phrases. Disagree on sentences now is hope; be and people repair. The motivation is clear: in his opinion, the participle in these sentences, in this case of use, is the most appropriate, but he emphasizes that the noun is also possible, if we are talking about hope in general, all people (Jablonskis 1912d: 2). 28 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 It could also be said Mr. Teacher, but it is better to say Almighty God, because Almighty is primarily an adjective (cf. good father) (Skardžius 1998: 514)3. J. Jablonski provided the object name as a standard. When correcting sentences, he changed the suffix to the noun: drtu vyru (=drunk man) viditi bjauru (Jablonskis 1912b: 2)4; saldainius (=candy) jų perkama ten, kur gražiau 3 Later, there were many discussions about the form of the address, for example, Vytautas Ambrazas considered the noun to be the more usual form: addressing the word ponas the more usual form is the noun (ponas direktoriau), although the exclamation mark (pone direktoriau) is also used. According to the linguist, the noun prevailed here, apparently because the word in the prefix of politeness has an adjective position (Ambrazas 1990: 11). In this case, both forms are correct. Jonas Šukys agrees that both forms are possible, but the denominator should be avoided (Šukys 1995: 13). Grammar says that the formal politeness address is occasionally expressed in colloquial language by the singular noun of the noun, in other cases the noun is not presentable and is considered a mistake. Antanas Rasimavičius also believes that the prefix preceding the adverb is usually combined with the adverb, but the masculine noun of the noun is not a mistake. In 1976, the language practice guidelines (Lietuvos kalbos praktikos patarimai) gave the noun forms pán, draugas as equivalents, and in all other cases the noun was not used to indicate the adverb. In 2009, he was named the best player in the league, a distinction that is still held. 4 In the third issue of Viltis in 1912, a polemic began between Emša (the writer Marcelinas Šikšnis) and J. Jablonskis. Emša's article on J. Jablonski's corrections and J. Jablonski's reply are published. In criticizing the corrections of the linguist, Emša relied on established traditions. Instead of J. Jablonski’s final, he proposes a nominative: they have already matured their body, and they are also maturing their mind (=their body is already mature, and their mind is also maturing) (Jablonski 1912c: 1). Emša gives analogous examples („they say rye is ripe, summer is ripe, but not summer, rye is ripe“) (Jablonskis, ibid.) and says that, based on colloquial language, J. Jablonskis advises to say this way. Emša doubts whether people really speak this way, and criticizes the linguist for trusting people's language too much ("it seems to me that many forms are used incorrectly, not according to the requirements of grammar and logic" (Jablonskis 1912c: 1). J. Jablonskis agrees that the noun can be used in this sentence, but he also defends his corrected sentence based on other examples of language: he freezes his feet; my legs are tired; he broke his neck; that you break your head; the kitten's paws broke off; have you already warmed your hands; hands feet rest (Jablonskis 1912c: 2). He claims that Emsha's proposed example of rye ripening does not prove anything. Here, according to J. Jablonski, we have the ending of the descriptive or descriptive part. J. Jablonskis has also corrected the following sentence: they are physically mature, they are also mentally mature, so in the very first article he replaced these adverbs with the final vowel, thus, in this case, accepting that both variants are correct, he chose the more acceptable for him – the final vowel. Similarly, J. Jablonskis changed the noun to the adjective in 1926 in the Lithuanian journal when correcting the Monograph of Petro Kriaučiūnas written by Motiejus Gustaitis: in them the student... felt reborn with the spirit of his ancestors (reborn with the spirit of his ancestors); and all return strengthened by the spirit of the nation (= strengthened by the spirit of the nation) (Jablonskis 1926c: 8). No justification for the amendment is provided. In the opinion of Jon Palionis, J. Jablonskis justified the necessity of a finalist with such folk sayings of specific meaning, but of distant meaning, as "nušalęs rankas, pavargęs kojas, galvą nuvargęs, veidą nušvitęs". I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the Footsteps of John Jablonski: Errors and Motifs of Correction in Lienji 29 made (Jablonskis 1914: 4); prisieis kęsti bad (=will have to suffer bad) (Jablonskis 1917: 2). Similarly, Jonas Murka corrected: a young boy needs to develop his intellect (=intellect), so that he can become useful when he grows up („aggregative factor next to the common denominator is needed“) (Murka 1917: 14–15). In the native language, both forms are given: must have that work, must have that work (Talmantas 1933: 40). In the language advisor both variants (nereikia darbas dirbti and reikia darbą dirbti) are presented as equivalent, an important argument is given: the final is more widely used in the western Highland and Zemgale dialects and therefore more representative of the common language (Kalbos patarėjas 1939: 105). Skardžius, although he wrote that the sentences well digging is not easy and well digging is not easy are equivalent (Skardžius 1998: 177), once again emphasized the idea that the noun is widely used in eastern dialects, but Žemaičiai say the adjective instead of the noun. History and current usage indicate that the noun is no longer gaius, so the normative form could be the adjective (Skardžius 1998: 688). J. Jablonskis, based on the living language (man šonus žaida, rankas gira), corrected the noun with the verb sopėti, skaudėti found in the writings to the final form: skaudė visi raumenys, visi kaulai (= raumenys, kaulus) (Jablonskis 1925b: 186); hurt rusty heart (=heart) (Jablonskis 1926b: 50); But with the verbs to get tired, to turn, the linguist leaves the noun and changes the whole construction: he head tired (= his head tired) (Jablonskis 1927: 2, 4). There have always been many questions about the use of the noun and adjective. On several occasions in his articles J. Jablonskis has changed the noun substantive of the condition by the noun noun: Fr. Justinas was professor (=professoris) and economist (=ekonomu) of the Priests’ Academy of Petrapilis, and later – inspector (=inspektoru) of the Žemaičių Priests’ Seminary, and finally its rector (=rektori); The rector of Varniai seminary at the time was Motiejus Valančius (= rector); and it became the hearth of Catholic families (Jablonskis 1926g: 404)5. ĮnagiEmša criticized J. Jablonski's corrections for changing the meaning of the sentence. Here, J. Jablonskis gave examples of other languages (Polish, French, German) and based on them emphasized the importance of context. Obviously, J. Jablonskis tried to correct systematically, tried to establish a system, to create general rules. 5 In an article published in the Society’s publication, A. Jakštas angrily criticizes J. Jablonskis for ordering the noun to be used with the verb be everywhere and for rejecting the construction with the noun. According to the critic, "the author does not do well by leaving only one construction. We are even surprised that Rygiškių Jonas cannot distinguish the meaning of such sentences: he is a king (real) and he is a king (on stage)” (Jakštas 1912: 287). J. Jablonskis does not agree with the unfounded criticism of A. Jakštas. It is not written in this way. The linguist says that he quoted the sentence from the dictionary of Antanas Juška, supported it and advised other similar sentences to be corrected in the same way. The difference between nominative and genitive is felt, but J. Jablonskis more specifically, without mentioning 30 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 ninkas, as J. Jablonskis wrote, is used because of the impermanent noun: bėga upė Kražantė (= runs the river Kražantė); already and village Beduoniai seen (=Beduonių village). By analogy, he has also corrected the word order: that night in the village senos, virtimo, tapsmo. Dabar įprasto termino vardo vardininkas J. Jablonskis nevartojo, jo darbuose minimas veiksnio vardininkas nebuvėlis, kuris taisomas kilof Serdokų (=Serdokų kaime) robbed a farmer's barn; now established school in the village of Bedruskiai (=Bedruskių kaime); Most likely by analogy the place name was also corrected: mill in Radviliškis (=Radviliškio mieste) (Jablonskis 1911b: 2). In his memoirs, the poet wrote that the name of the village was derived from the name of the villager. The words steamship "Kęstutis", high school "Aušra" are foreign to Lithuanian language. It should be said that “Kęstučio” steamship is leaving (Talmantas 1934: 118). Based on living language, Juozas Balčikonis justified such statements as the river Kražantė (Balčikonis 1978: 72). P. Skardžiaus writes that in names it is better to use the so-called origin of the definition: Šviesos spaustuvė, Baltijos jūra, Švyturio knygynas, „Reginos“ laboratorija (instead of made in the laboratory „Regina“), Pienocentro užkandinė (instead of the snack bar Pienocentras), although some cases of the name noun are not condemned (Skardžius 1998: 741). In an article published in 1938, A. Salys says that the origin of the name is an old example, he does not expand on it here: "the difference between these two vocatives, when used in the black tarin, is a very confusing thing" (Jablonskis 1912d: 3). The fact that A. Jakšto’s criticism was unfounded and that J. Jablonskis did not strictly order the writing of the nominative is shown by the cases when J. Jablonskis proposes both the nominative and the adjective for the sentences to be corrected: they would like to lead the people (=they would like to be people’s leaders, leaders, to lead the people) (Jablonskis 1911b: 2). For J. Jablonski, the systematicity of the language was one of the most important criteria for correction. A. Jakštas, claiming that J. Jablonskis avoids the indefinite participle, does not say why he criticizes this sentence corrected by the linguist: to the experts were invited and then brought five people (=experts were invited and then brought five people) (Jakštas 1912: 287). Speaking about the indefinite participle and its avoidance, Jablonski wrote that he provided several corrections to the same sentence, from which one could choose the correction that was suitable for him, which would also fit according to meaning. According to Jablonskis, A. Jakštas criticized without motivation, without giving any examples. Throughout the article, J. Jablonskis defends himself that he never strictly demands or orders the use of one or another of his proposed corrections. On the contrary, it tries to present several options. In criticizing and reproaching the corrections (not necessarily only humorous ones), A. Jakštas accuses J. Jablonskis of not saying why the correction is better, the linguist unreasonably uses words that are inexplicable by any logic and his own dialect, corrects only because he simply did not like the word or construction, tries to introduce one word instead of the others used, demands that people use his proposed construction, advises to translate Slavic sentences, replaces words with nowhere heard constructions, and the arguments are allegedly non-scientific. Thus, Jablonski was accused of making corrections without motivation and arguments, of overly relying on intuition and sense of language. I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the Footsteps of Jon Jablonskis: Verb Errors and Correction Motives 31 Lithuanian Language Feature, e.g. : Telšiai city, Nemunas river. However, a novelty – the denominator of the name – is becoming more and more common. The examples given by J. Jablonski, such as the café “Aldona”, are novel, but inevitable. In a composite name, not only the denoting words, but also the real name must be conjugated: „Lana“ išdirbiniai (= „Lana“ works); from the newspaper „Ūkininko patarėjas“ (=from the newspaper „Ūkininko patarėjo“); works in the company „Ranga“ (=works in the company „Rangos“) (Salys 1938a: 4). The usage of the nominative and adjective in greeting formulas was discussed. Most of the discussions arose about the use of greetings good morning, good day, etc. A. Jakštas indicates the nominative as more acceptable. His most important motivation – the final good day, good morning is Germanism, not a saying suitable for all situations, but the noun is more suitable because of established traditions and because it is suitable for almost all cases of speech (Jakštas 1933: 2–3). A. Salys, like A. Jakštas, gives the form of the noun primarily because of the tradition of use, which is confirmed by dialect data and old writings. In his opinion, the German influence was responsible for the emergence of the adjective (Salys 1937: 135; Salys 1938d: 3). The language advisor recommends the nominative because it is more common than the adjective. Later, both phrases began to be proposed as equivalent variants of the norm. KIlMININKAS The most commonly corrected cases of adjectives, which raised many questions, are related to the expression of the whole and part of the object characteristic of Lithuanian language. It can be seen that the adjective was changed to the noun or the suffix when the object represented by this syllable had no partial meaning. The least doubts were raised about concrete nouns, meaning things or objects, and the origin of singular nouns with an abstract meaning was discussed. It is interesting that the adjective is corrected into the noun as early as the end of the 19th century in Žemaičių ir Lietuvos apžvalga (1890: 13): from there will come to salt the living and the dead, not the living and the dead. The motivation for the correction is indicated – the control of the verb (the word salt controls the final, not the adjective). J. Jablonskis corrected the genitive, inappropriately used with verbs controlling the final, e.g., reach: and goal (= goal) easier reach (Jablonskis 1925a: 1212); then religion will reach its goal (=goal) (Jablonskis 1926g: 404); come: every man comes to that opinion (=that opinion- 32 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 monę) (Jablonskis 1925a: 1212); the public has the right to be outraged and to come to that conclusion (=konkluzija) (Jablonskis 1926b: 50); Bedier came to the conclusion that the author used the works of others (Jablonskis 1926f: 741, 746). Based on J. Jablonski’s examples, P. Meškauskas also corrected similar cases: out of three states only one Lithuania achieved its goal (=target) (Meškauskas 1931: 236); walked for a long time through the dark suburban streets and reached a small wooden house (=mažą, medinį namą) (Meškauskas 1931: 393); following the notary system, it is possible to arrive at a conclusion (=išvadą) (Meškauskas 1932b: 354). In the case of analogous sentences, P. Skardžius also provided the final, rather than the genitive (to reach a conclusion, not a conclusion) (Skardžius 1998: 710). In his native language, he criticized unnecessary, unnecessary, unfounded corrections and replaced the noun with a noun: kyla bubbleukų (= rise bubbles). It is based on similar examples (foam goes, clouds rise, no foam goes, clouds rise) (Skardžius 1936: 14). The reason for using such adjectives is not that the adjective is a corrected verb in compounds. J. Balčikonis corrected the incorrectly used nobleman: lengva nustatyti. Rašyta, kad tokia vartosena galėjo atsirasti dėl kitų kalbų įtakos, tarmių, dėl rusų kalbos įtakos kilmininkas imtas vartoti su veiksmažodžiu pasiekti, dalis tokių kilmininkų gali būti ir hipernormalizmai. Liudas Vasaris left an indelible impression (=made an indelible impression) (Balčikonis 1935: 45)6. The verb-controlled causative may denote an undefined object, its part. In the language advisor, the following sentence is given as a phrase to be given: duok, paskolink kniivo (Language advisor 1939: 31). Motivation is a short-term request. P. Meškauskas often replaced the noun and suffix with the genitive of the part (expression fluctuating), but he admitted that in some cases it is not appropriate either: Kaune įsteigiama dar nebuvo Lietuvoj draugija, kuri turi tikslą padėti žmonėms (=in Kaunas a society is being established that has the aim of helping people) (Meškauskas 1932: 66). 6 An article in which J. Balčikonis commented on the language of Vincas Mykolaitis-Putinas’s novel Altarių šešėly (In the Shadow of the Altars) received a resounding response (Balčikonis 1935: 45–48; Skardžius 1935c: 124–126; Skardžius 1997: 192). In Vaira was published an article by Eduardo Viskanta, which attempted to refute the issues of language raised by J. Balčikonis, P. Skardzis (Viskanta 1935). According to P. Skardžius, E. Viskanta boldly and even ridiculously reproaches Putin’s language correctors and himself takes on the superficial task of solving language issues (Skardžius 1997: 192). In the 1980s, the name was changed to the Baroness's Goodbyes. E. Viskanta considered such a nobleman with a commonality for expressing a purpose to be common in Lithuanian language, for example, mother came to get the child (Viskanta 1935: 369), I went to the pigeon shooting (Viskanta 1935: 700). In the opinion of Mr. Skardzis, E. Viskanta solved a lot of things extremely superficially. It is emphasized that several things are confused: no linguist suggests blindly copying the folk language, but the use of our language must be supported by Lithuanian prepositions (Skardžius 1997: 193). I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. 33 Regarding the use of compounds of objective meaning with singular nouns denoting abstract concepts (honour, sympathy, influence, significance, impression, etc.), it is written that in these cases, in order not to offend another person, it is necessary not to use the origin of the part, but the end: I have the honour (= honour) to congratulate; express deep sympathy (=compassion) (Kalbos kertelė 1933: 3). This comment was later accepted in the Mother Language: "instead of having honour, I mean sympathy, of course, it is said, written, I have honour, I mean sympathy" (labokas 1933: 63). Skardžius wrote that kilmininkas should be used only when the part is clearly expressed: give me bread, take water, but baked bread, lost his money, etc. It is possible to express sympathy (if we mean little, only a part; this expression of sympathy is fainter, smaller) and sympathy (all; this expression is stronger, more significant). Similarly, it is said to make an impression and to have an influence. For Mr. Skardžius, it is particularly strange that the newspapers often use the phrase “I express my deepest sympathy to the relatives” (“what can be the deepest sympathy here, if only one part of it is expressed? What greatly, and even more so with the greatest sympathy, our speech wishes is to sympathize, not to sympathize. [...] Similarly [...] we have an honor, not an honor to ask, I mean respect for you, not respect"). 1936: 17) does not agree with the use of a nobleman, he provides a final. M. Jurkynas also suggests the finalis instead of the adjective: after inquiring and finding (=having inquired and found) the person sought, we have the honour (=honor bę) to inform; have the honour (=honor) to ask Mr. Director (=Mr. Director) (Jurkynas 1938: 21). In the language advisor both variants are already allowed, but the choice of adjective and suffix depends on the context. In some cases, it is said I mean sympathy (all) and I mean sympathy (part) (Kalbos patarėjas 1939: 31). Later, a different opinion was expressed by L. Dambriūnas (1962, 1964). In many cases, he provided a nobleman. In general language, the pronoun of nouns defined by numerals and quantity nouns is not used to indicate the comparative quantity with adjectives of the higher degree. The ancestor is consistently strange in the comparative construction: last year more than a hundred (=over a hundred) people were killed here (Jablonskis 1911a: 1, 2); it will be more years (=more than a year) since we began to urge in our newspaper columns to fight against drought (Jablonskis 1911b: 2); more than a hundred people died (=more than a hundred) (Jablonskis 1914a: 2, 3); a craft school to be opened not later than next autumn (=as next autumn) (Jabų lonskis 1914a: 2, 3); our body is more than three quarters made up of water (=more than three quarters) (Jablonski 1920: 26); already more than two- 40 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 The adjective tends to displace other adjectives and is often chosen with verbs that do not control it. There has been a lot of heated debate about the verb to represent. The final is often used incorrectly with this verb, and mistakes in common language are not avoided today. J. Jablonski corrected the adjective: I represent the Polish king (=king) (Jablonski 1925a: 1213); one represents love, and the other revenge (Jablonskis 1926b: 51); their son represented the best layer of our youth (=sluoksniui) (Jablonskis 1926a: 2); he represents in parliament one part of Paris (=parts) (Jablonskis 1930: 31, 33). J. Jablonskis used the whole system of control of similar verbs as a motivation for correction: he is our servant, representative, he serves us, represents us or leads us (he also corrected the nominative: Mykolui pritiko vadovauti galvažudžiai (=perhaps važudžiams) (Jablonskis 1925d: 4)10. A. Salys wrote that the finalis is used according to examples from foreign languages, and when describing the purpose, the verbs to lead, to rule, to represent are used only with the utilitarian: he represented Lithuania in Italy for five years (Salys 1938d: 4). Other linguists have also corrected: you will represent Sunflowers (=Sunflowers), and Niaura – Friends (=Friends) (Švietimo darbas 1920: 73). J. Kruopas, discussing the use of the verb represent, wrote that the noun is usually chosen, but it is also said with the adjective. The usage is evident from the usage of other similar words: represent the country, rule the world. So in this case, not the final but the instrumental is used (Kroopas 1951: 31). From the old object, the adjective has been corrected to the noun of the denial. Already Antanas Baranauskas gave the genitive of the negation as a consummate: I can't work, I don't want to cut hay, I have neither a plough nor money (Baranauskas 1896: 68). J. Jablonskis also suggested correcting the final in the genitive of the negation: knygas laikyk, nelaikyk knygų (Jablonskis 1919: 7); corrected and the denominator: jiems galva (=gal10 Lithuanian aide published articles criticizing J. Jablonskis' work. In one issue of 1930, an article by J. Jablonski (Jablonskis 1930: 31–36) is analyzed, discussing the use of the verb represent with the noun. It is written: "The meaning of representation is much closer to the meaning of substitution, substitution. After all, the representative represents the whole. Service is a concept of the receiving sense – he serves me, but if he goes to a meeting instead of me, he represents me there. If we call that meaning representation, then it seems that the thing does not acquire the meaning it is supposed to have.” (Lithuanian Echo 1930: 4). These ideas are criticized by Mr. Skardžius. Based on comparison with other similar verbs (serve, enslave, preside, lead), he states that the verb represent controls not the adjective but the noun (Skardžius 1930: 84–93). I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the footsteps of John Jablonski: the errors and correction motives 41 of the phrases barely) do not hurt (Jablonskis 1926b: 50); corrected by other linguists: ėmė melste dreaming Polish melsti sūnų, kad nuo jos neslėptų savo ligos priežastį (=priežasties) (Vireliūnas 1923: 486; remiamasi kupiškėnų tarme); tačiau suprantama, kad joks liberalizmas, jokios laisvės negalėjo nuraminti besvajojančius lenkų bajorus (=bebarons) (Meškauskas 1931: 235); after all, no one asked him to express his beliefs (=no one asked him to express his beliefs) (Juška 1938: 30); did not allow the establishment of the “Light” society (=friendship); let’s enjoy the winter, but let’s not forget the work (=laboro) (Stonys 1940: 59). The final is used incorrectly in purpose constructions. In Warp, Jablonski wrote that the purpose can be expressed by adjectives after transitive verbs: I go to water, sent me letters, a man drives wood (Jablonski 1893: 150). The genitive is also used after intransitive verbs denoting a constant state: the virgin cries for a crown, the horse is squeezing oats, he sleeps for lunch, calls for dinner (Jablonski 1893: 151). A rule is formulated: the pronoun is appropriate when one is said. When speaking about a construction with a conjunct (or a subjunctive), the adjective should be used: everybody rushed to kiss the hands of grandpa, Stankūnas ran away with his money to the lawyer (Jablonskis 1893b: 151). The reasoning is that the verb to attack does not require an adjective, and the hand is not an object in the first sentence. In the second sentence Stankūnas did not run away with the money, but carried it to give it (Jablonskis 1893b: 151). However, in the Lithuanian grammar of 1901, both these sentences are used with the adjective: visi puolė bučiuotų rankų seneliui and Stankūnas nubėgo į įdėtų pinigų advokatą. It is based on the same rule of the genitive after the shift verbs (Jablonskis 1901: 74). Similar cases were corrected by J. Jablonski later: said that he would visit his brother (=brother) in Vilnius; the thief (=the thief) went to interrogate (Jablonskis 1911a: 1); the Germans came to greet the prince; he also came here to sow discord (=discord) (Jablonskis 1925a: 1213). He was also the author of a book on the history of the United States, The History of the United States (1929–1930). P. Skardžius has written in „Native Language“ that the history and usage of the pronouns shows that the pronoun is more characteristic of Lithuanian language, and it is used in common language: reikia eiti mėšlą vežti, although in western Lithuania the suffix is often used to indicate the circumstance of the aim: reikia eiti mėšlą vežti (Skardžius 1935a: 3, 7). P. Skardžius has noted that after the verb kviestis should be used the genitive of the object, not the adjective, cf.: šeimininkas pakvietė svečius 42 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 fields to explore; the boy invited the maiden to a roll dance; thus invites to celebrate their name day (Skardžius 1999: 738); Sargenis wanted to go back to Kaunas to do some business; goes out to get all that devil (=all those devils) out of his head (Skardžius 1998: 656). In 1923, in the Educational work, sentences with a nobleman are given: she begged her son anyway; I ask the same of Tamsta; give a quarter of an hour to ask God for forgiveness of sins (Vireliūnas 1923: 487). It is based on the Kupiškėn dialect and it says that a back end is needed. The motivation for the correction is as follows: with the final vowel the idea is clearer and more precise. When saying I ask Peter for a knife, it is not clear whether the person wants the knife that is Peter, or whether he is addressed to him with a request (Vireliūnas 1923: 487). J. Jablonskis assigned these sentences to the originators of the seeking: the sick asked (cried) for a doctor, a priest (he asked that a doctor, a priest be brought to him) (Jablonskis 1928: 33); I asked a horse, a man (to give); Did you ask him for a horse? (Jablonski 1928: 34). With the verb to ask, both the genitive and the dative are used: the courageous father asked his son(s) for shoes, the son gave them (Jablonskis 1928: 45). At the end of the chapter, it is written that the pronoun and adjective are used not without reason (no further explanation, but probably due to ambiguity) (Jablonskis 1928: 46). Skardžius suggested the finalis, because it makes it easier to distinguish the requested person from the requested object and thus avoids ambiguity (Skardžius 1998: 694, 750). When discussing the use of adjectives with the verb prašyti (I asked Mrs. teacher or I asked Mrs. teacher), J. Jablonskis and P. Skardžius are referred to: it is better to use the suffix for the requested person, and the noun for the requested object. This avoids ambiguity. We should say I asked Mrs. teacher for a book, I asked father for a watch (Horodničiūtė 1938b: 3); we need to distinguish between sayings asking what and asking what. He asked me about you (he wanted to know about you from me) and he asked me about you (he wanted to know something about me from you) (Horodničiūtė 1938a: 3). The use of these verbs is discussed by A. Salis, P. Skardžius, L. Dambrauskas, M. Jurkynas in the Mother Tongue. In general language, it is better to use the suffix, because it makes it easier to distinguish the person being asked from the object being asked, avoiding ambiguity (Skardžius 1935b: 173). There must be a strict distinction between the sick person asking the priest (to do something) and the sick person asking the priest (to take him). He also asks the father and asks the father. The use is based on dialects and live use (Salys 1937: 134). He also wrote a book on the subject, The Child's Choice: How to Choose a Child's Choice (1964–65). I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the Footsteps of John Jablonski: Errors in Lienji and Motives for Correction 43 The main errors of the ingressor: to express the object with verbs denoting the full, to express the quality content with adjectives denoting the abundance, with the verb forms to be to express the unchangeable state. In his articles, J. Jablonskis corrected the nobleman into a nobleman: the glass is filled with water, living silver, sand (= the glass is filled with water, living silver, sand) (Jablonskis 1920: 26). He also corrected the noun with the abundance adjective rich: are you not sometimes rich in money (=are you not sometimes money-loving)? ; our region was once very rich in folk songs (=was very much sung, was very much sung) (Jablonskis 1911b: 2), P. Meškauskas also corrected: in the order of work, abundant in reports, information prevails (Meškauskas 1931a: 396); the union increases in number of members (=auginama narių) (Meškauskas 1931b: 61). P. Skardžius wrote that in Lithuanian, the full noun should be used instead of the noun: The Lord filled you with love; filled the pot with milk (Skardžius 1998: 561). He corrected incorrectly used nouns by reviewing literary writings as well: filling life with his old-fashioned strenuousness (= his old-fashioned strenuousness); building, that one huge mass grave, one ruin, filled with mountains of corpses persunktas krauju (=kraujo) (Skardžius 1937: 159). Šis linksnis ne kartą taisytas ir Švietimo darbe, ir Vaire: su fakelais galėtų įeiti į pripildytą dūmais namą (=dūmų pripildytą) (Meškauskas 1931a: 395–396); virs didysis mies- (=filled with mountains of corpses) (Meškauskas 1931c: 347). Incorrectly used with verbs meaning full, the verb innagininkas has also been corrected by linguists in the Native Language: did they not fill the temples with the wealth seized from the enemies (=seized from the wealth of the enemies) (Balčikonis 1935a); the stadium will be filled with Lithuanians (=lietuvių) (lengvinas 1938: 5). It is often mistakenly used to indicate a permanent or unchangeable state. At the helm, P. Meškauskas corrected it: the hydroelectric power station would be a source of electricity (=source) for the whole of Lithuania (Meškauskas 1931a: 392); the owner of the factory is Vaitkus (Meškauskas 1931a: 395); the reason for this (=the reason for this) is that the storm caused by the collapse of the German banks has not yet subsided (Meškauskas 1932: 67); The reason for the uprising was the reduction of soldiers' wages (Meškauskas 1932a: 508). Especially inappropriate to him seemed to be the reason for the corrector, who everywhere indicated the same motivation, that it is a foreign word taken from the Russian language. The end of 1936 was the darkest period in its history (=was the darkest period in its history) (Juška 1938: 30). 44 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 Attention was drawn to the aggressive use of the noun in bijective syllables, when the noun part of the verb is represented by the noun of adjectives or noun words. Almost all linguists have corrected the incorrectly used noun noun: the priest urges them to be sober and decent (=to be sober and decent) (Jablonskis 1911b: 2); all will feel happy (=feel happy) (Jablonskis 1925c: 54, 57); he had to be born with a hump of misfortune (=hump) (Jablonskis 1926b: 51); not from what we earn, but from what we save, we will remain rich (=rich; cf. stay healthy) (Jablonskis 1926e: 12, 13). A lot corrected by P. Meškauskas: I deliberately pretended to be drunk (=girų tas), because I wanted to catch you (Meškauskas 1932: 67); could not be said that the voice of the owner of the winter coat seemed triumphant (=triumphant) (Meškauskas 1932b: 351). Meškauskas proved the necessity of the denominator by comparing Lithuanian constructions with German and Russian ones. In the Native Language: our temple teaches us what (=what) we should be; you are something greater (=something greater) (Balčikonis 1935a); The heroes of Aeneid know how to be merciful (=misericordious) (Barzdukas 1940: 24); feels terribly unhappy (=unhappy); seemed funny (=juokingas) (Salys 1937: 135); I confess guilty (=guilty) (Dambrauskas 1937: 68–69); he feels happy (=happy); dedasi geru (=good) (Language advisor 1939: 126); Tarutis deliberately wanted to appear weak and black (=weak and black) (Skardžius 1998: 639). Because of the resulting denial, the nobleman corrects the nobleman: words do not make a man holy and righteous (=holy and righteous), but righteous conduct makes a man pleasing to God (=pleasing) (Jablonskis 1926g: 404); I am not holy and I do not want to make you holy (=being holy) (Jablonskis 1925a: 1213); otherwise (=otherwise) sodiečiai had not seen Burzdulis (Education work 1920: 73). Sometimes the servant displaces the servant: will it be worth the prince to be grateful to me (=grateful); a soldier should not be cruel (= cruel) (Jablonskis 1925a: 1213). J. Jablonskis replaced the noun with the suffix to the transitive verb (pa)daryti: those few years make them easy and pleasant (=easy and pleasant) (Jablonskis 1912b: 2); earth particles make the water cloudy (=turbid); impurities make it dangerous (=hazardous) to health; makes the axe harder (=harder) (Jablonskis 1920: 26); the peculiarities of the works made them strictly different (=different) (Jablonskis 1926b: 51); frugality makes a person rich (= rich); Latin canonical quotations made his language boring (=boring) (Jablonskis 1926e: 12–13). Mr. Meškauskas correcting I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the footsteps of Jonas Jablonskis: verb errors and reasons for correction 45 consistently relied on the rule that in Lithuanian the adjective is combined by gender, number, verb and only in very rare cases is it incompatible. In his opinion, the Russian word for dress should not be used: in fact, women have now become even more naked, and moralists, remembering the days of short dresses, will soon have to admit that they were the most decent (= women’s dress was the most decent) (Meškauskas 1931c: 348); they even embellish spring with their mobility, make it warmer (=warmer) (Meškauskas 1932b: 351). P. Skardžiaus corrected the verb next to the transitive verb (pa)daryti: the abbreviation made the language more fluid (=fluider) (Skardžius 1998: 722); corrected in Native language: will lose the balance that makes him powerful today (=powerful) (Balčikonis 1935a); makes that limit almost impossible (=that limit... impossible) (Barzdukas 1938: 61). Niaura neskaitė (= did not count) on profit, which could increase the wealth and make him richer (= wealthy, richer) (1920: 72); those signatures alone made Niaura necessary and even necessary (=made necessary and even obligatory) in the village (1920: 72); remorse makes a person senseless (=senselessness) (1920: 73). In the common language there was already a competition between the noun of the means and the prepositional constructions with the same meaning. J. Jablonskis corrected the noun used without a preposition into a prepositional construction: he will stand with a weapon in his hands (=with a weapon); came messengers with laurel branches (=with laurel branches) in their hands; prisoners were surrounded by soldiers with spears (=with spears) in their hands (Jablonskis 1921: 138); Having two diplomas – of the gymnasium and the academy, Kriaučiūnas decided to acquire with their help the highest census of world science, necessary for the gymnasium department (=having the certificate and diploma decided with their help) (Jablonskis 1926c: 8)11. One of the researchers of J. Jablonski’s works, Arnoldas Piročkinas, later wrote that J. Jablonski corrected the consonant because it could seem to him to be a dialect (Piročkinas 1986: 197). In order to better understand and explain the corrections made by J. Jablonski, it is useful to refer to several sentences in which the linguist suggested changing the preposition. J. Jablonskis corrected this as follows: B. congratulated the king with the new year (=new year) by telegraph (Jablonskis 1914c: 4) (next to this there is an editor’s annotation: “probably on New Year’s Day. Later on, in the sentence with mielnym chęcią, J. Jablonski, once again emphasizing the importance of the context of the correction, based on his own dialect and citing a similar example of Polish language, was inclined to correct – miło, chęcią (Jablonski 1928b: 3). The same correction is given in the adverbs and prepositions: or jį su noru (= willingly, willingly, willingly) ima (Jablonskis 1928: 123). The corrections show J. Jablonski’s considerations, the clear difference between the circumstance of the noun and the noun with a prefix denoting a means or a way. 46 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 kis does not explain these corrections in more detail in the article, but only states that it is necessary to make the corrections in the article. Semyon Yedreikin smashed all the glasses with the laikytis vienų bendrų taisyklių (Jablonskis 1921: 140). P. Meškauskas, greičiausiai remdamasis pirmaisiais J. Jablonskio taisymais, siūlo vartoti prielinksninę konstrukciją: anglas mielu noru (=su mielu noru) most precise brotherly honesty; cafe owners soon noticed how favorably (=with what favour) men accepted the novelty (Meškauskas 1931c: 351). J. Balčikonis also corrected the innagininkas: su dideliu vargu (=su dideliu vargu) įstojo jis pagaliau į kažkokį departamentą (cf.: su mielu noru, su ašaromis prašė) (Balčikonis 1978: 210); I will gladly accept that grace (=with pleasure); performances were very successful (=with great success) (Balčikonis 1978: 71); willingly (=with desire) work (Balčikonis 1978: 828). From J. Balčikonis’s explanations it can be concluded that he relied on colloquial language, J. Jablonski’s examples. P. Skardžiaus opinion is the same as that of J. Balčikonis – he proposed a noun with a prefix based on similar sayings with great joy, with great success, with an open heart (Skardžius 1936b: 97). In the Native language, the verb was corrected later, e.g.: į pasitarimus dalyviai dideliu dėmesiu (=with great attention) išklausė (Kulbokas 1968: 19). SUBSTITUTE Pronoun usage errors are among the most common. Interwar linguists claimed that the use of localities is most affected by foreign languages, the reason for many errors is the confusion of localities in Lithuanian and Russian, new, especially abstract, localities appear and the need to intelligentize the language. The pronoun is most often misused to denote the experiencer of a state, the scope of action, the state or sign, the cause or basis of the state, the mode of action or the time. The subject and object are not represented by the pronoun, so it is not used to represent the experiencer of the state. J. Jablonskis assigned the following sentence to the pronouns denoting a place: besides there is no milk in the cows, but next to it he gives a more common example – besides cows without milk (Jablonskis 1928: 97). Both of these statements are given by J. Jablonski as being correct. I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the footsteps of John Jablonski: errors and reasons for correction 47 A number of corrections concerning the incorrectly used locus to denote the area of action, state or characteristic (but not the place). Such a placeholder is corrected by J. Jablonski: they are accused of espionage (=for espionage) (Jablonski 1911b: 2). When correcting incorrectly used localities to indicate the scope of action, Mr. Meškauskas also indicated the motivation for the correction. He wrote that in Lithuanian language these localities have arisen due to the influence of the Russian language: suspects in murder (=suspected murder participants, suspected murderers) are summoned to court, shown to witnesses, but they refuse to admit that they saw them being shot (Meškauskas 1931c: 350); here acquaintances are made, love is confessed (=admits his love) (Meškauskas 1932b: 353). The sentence through school we will rise in culture (= will rise our culture) is corrected based on similar examples, not typical of Lithuanian language: "it is not said pakilo sveikatoje, sustiprėjo sveikatoje". According to P. Meškauskas, “here the word is understood as our own quality, as health, wisdom, intelligence. It is possible to strengthen, rise, grow only in circumstances that are close to us, e.g.: it arose at work, in life” (Meškauskas 1932a: 506). Similar incorrectly used localities were corrected by P. Skardžius: laikyti jį arešte (=arrested) (Skardžius 1998: 707); suspected of murdering his father (=father murder) (Skardžius 1998: 306); the German court found him guilty (=guilty) of unlawful use of public property, taking bribes (=for unlawful use of property, taking bribes) (Skardžius 1998: 306). In his mother tongue, J. Kruopas described the most typical mistakes of the local. Among them and often incorrectly native, the scope of action: in interrogation called himself a foreign name (= during interrogation, being interrogated); won a record in a run (= won a running record); the comedy in that director's production (=produced) was successful; was suspected of arson (=padegimu) (Kroopas 1939: 124). The placeholder is not used to indicate the condition, state or characteristic of an object. Such cases were corrected by J. Jablonski in his articles: what (=what) is he guilty of? (Jablonskis 1911a: 1, 3); the water is to blame for that (=that) (Jablonskis 1914b: 2, 3); us convinces of this (=mus tuo įtikina) (Jablonskis 1920: 26); In native language corrected by A. Salys: kame dalykas (=kas dalykas); ne tame reikalas (=not that thing) (Salys 1935: 8) and J. Kruopas: dalykas tame (=such) (Kroopas 1939: 124); J. Balčikonis: the author likes accuracy in everything (=everywhere, always) (Balčikonis 1978: 210). Skardžius, correcting the sentence „nelaimė tame (=nelaimė, kad) daugelis emigrantų užmiršta gimtąją kalbą“, emphasized that such a pronoun is a pure Russian that cannot be used in Lithuanian (Skardžius 1936a: 92). 48 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 Often linguists correct locals in clothes, garments, uniforms, etc., e.g.: next to me sat a woman in white clothes (=white garments) (Jablonskis 1926b: 52); he walked in priest's clothes (=priest's clothes) (Jaban lonskis 1926c: 8); the present owner of the manor, Faria di Castro, a slow-moving grandfather, complains about the difficult conditions in a homemade soap (=clothes) (Meškauskas 1931c: 351); immediately come to me in full uniform (=with full uniform; the deputy appeared due to the influence of the Russian language) (Meškauskas 1932: 69); pharaoh in war clothes (=with war clothes) (Balčikonis 1935a); child in silk clothes (= velvet clothes) (Dambrauskas 1937: 68, 69); met in a soldier's clothes (=clothes) (Juška 1938: 30); appeared in full uniform (=pilna uniforma) (Kroopas 1939: 124); released in one white (=one white) (Kroopas 1939: 124); Berlin policemen always look like they are in new clothes, white gloves (=new clothes, white gloves) (Skardžius 1936: 15); most Samoyeds walk in their fur clothes (=fur clothes; with fur clothes) (Skardžius 1998: 636). When correcting such localities, P. Skardžius repeatedly indicated the motivation of the correction: a locality usually means a place where something is or is happening. The aforementioned sentence means that Samoyeds walk not in clothes, as in the yard or outside, but in fur clothes or with fur clothes (Skardžius 1998: 636). Jau tarpukariu taisyti dėl kitų kalbų įtakos įsigalėję vietininkai. Atstume: 25 mylių atstume nuo Viduržemio jūros (=už 25 mylių nuo Viduržemio jūros) (Balčikonis 1935). In the case: making excuses [...] in this case (=in this case) would harm (Juška 1938: 30); in that case (=that case) (Kroopas 1939: 124); in all cases (=in all cases) superficial relationships are proved – the pronoun is not suitable in all cases as in all circumstances: here only the noun is to be used by the preferences of our language (Skardžius 1936a: 93). In the copy: this pronoun has been corrected in the Native language: the writing is presented in two copies (=two copies) (Jurkynas 1938: 19). In force: all the prescriptions that restrain a woman from shepherding remain in force and she still has to adhere to them (=remain of the same value) (this pronoun is a foreign word that came from the Russian language) (Meškauskas 1931c: 348). In form: the player is in good form (=good form) (Kroopas 1939: 124); plg.: he has a good head, strong lungs). In a good mood: he was in a good mood (Skardžius 1998: 344); Mr. Meškauskas corrects this localist because he in Lithuanian language I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the footsteps of John Jablonski: motives for the errors and correction of verbs 49 found the influence of Russian and German languages: if women are often in an optimistic mood, then they are (=optimistically disposed) (Meškauskas 1932: 68). Pavidale: pure limestone, like other minerals, sometimes occurs in the form of crystals (=crystal form) (Jablonskis 1920: 26); the Germans have assigned all of Lithuania to Poland, but do not yet know in what form [...] or in the form of the Lublin Union (=in what form [...] or in the form of the Lublin Union) (Juška 1938: 30); appeared in the form of a lion (=pavidalu) (Kroopas 1939: 124). In the matter: their hearts are sensitive in the affairs of the nation (=their hearts for the affairs of the nation) (Barzdukas 1940: 24); in that matter (=that matter) turn to him (Kroopas 1939: 125). Composition: hydrogen is in the composition of all bodies (= hydrogen is in all bodies, in the composition of all bodies) (Jablonskis 1920: 26); came out in a permanent composition (=nuolatine sudėtimi) (Kroopas 1939: 124). In number: printed in a large number (=a large number) (Kropas 1939: 125). Sum: bill of exchange in the amount of 300 litas (=sums) (Kroopas 1939: 124); wrote an invoice in the amount of 100 litas (=sums) (Skardžius 1998: 344). In style: the palace was built in Swedish style (=swedish style) (Meškauskas 1932c: 70); the house was built in a national style (=stiliu) (Kroopas 1939: 124). Standing: are you not ashamed to appear to people in such a position (=as such) (Meškauskas 1931c: 350); requested to report on the status of debt recovery (= how much debt has been recovered) (Skardžius 1998: 720); it is a shame to appear in such a position (Kroopas 1939: 124); found him drunk standing (=drunk) (Skardžius 1998: 344). In the topic: we wrote an essay on the topic (=theme) „Maironio lyrika“ (Skardžius 1939a: 9). J. Jablonskis also corrected other locals, for example: his newspaper would be printed in two languages (=dviem kalbom); all newspapers are published in Lithuanian (=Lithuanian language); and the Latvians wanted to speak in their native language (=to speak in their native language) in the assembly (Jablonskis 1911b: 2); he shows that he is well versed in all the characteristics of socks (=about characteristics) (Jablonskis 1926f: 741, 746). P. Skardžius also corrected similar cases: the Germans knew very little in Lithuanian (=about Lithuanian). In his opinion, to be knowledgeable in language or other matters is an unjustifiable translational foreignness (Skardžius 1936a: 92), saying everything is in order is a translational feature of the language of the intelligentsia (from German, Russian languages) and therefore foreign to Lithuanian. Mr. Skardžius strictly this place- 56 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 M e š k a u s kas P. 1931a: The shortcomings of newspaper language. – Vairas, No 7–8, pp. 390–397. M e š k a u s kas P. 1931b: The shortcomings of newspaper language. – Steering wheel, N r. 9, pp. 58-67. M e š k a u s kas P. 1931c: The shortcomings of newspaper language. – Vairas, No 11, pp. 345–354. M e š k a u s kas P. 1932: The shortcomings of the newspaper language. – Vairas, No 1, pp. 66–69. 1932a: The shortcomings of the newspaper language. – Steering wheel, N r. 4, pp. 505-510. M e š k a u s kas P. 1932b: The shortcomings of newspaper language. – Vairas, No. 3, 350– 358. M e š k a u s kas P. 1932c: The shortcomings of newspaper language. – Vairas, No 5, pp. 70–74. M e š k a u s kas P. 1932d: The shortcomings of newspaper language. A reply to E. Viskant and a few clarifications. – Vairas, No 7–8, pp. 358–363. 1917: J. R. R. Tolkien: The Journey. – Laisvoji Lietuvos mokykla (Petrapilis), No. 1, p. 14–15. P i ro č k i n a s A. 1986: Jono Jablonskio pataisymai, Kaunas: Šviesa. 1925. pp. 25. "A. A. S. A.: A. Vireliūno "Lingvos neaiškumai"" (in Lithuanian). – Lietuvis, No. 10, March 6, p. 10–11. 1935: The School and the Sense of Language. – Mother tongue, s ą s. 1-2, pp. 7-10. S a l y s A. 1937: From the practice of the new language. – Mother Tongue, vol. 8, pp. 134–137. 1938, pp. 198. "About the name and the namesake". – Lietuvos Aidas, No. 167, April 13, p. 4. S a l y s A. 1938b: Not in the majority, but the majority agreed. – Lietuvos Aidas, No. 106, March 9, p. 4. S a l y s A. 1938c: To lead, to represent whom, not what. – Lietuvos Aidas, No. 193, May 2, p. 4. S a l y s A. 1938d: good day, not good day. – Lietuvos Aidas, No. 470, October 17, p. 3. 1979. pp. A. 1979. T. 1. Common language, Rome. Skardžius P. 1999: Selected Writings. T. 5. Accentology, general language culture, publicistics, Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopedia Publishing. S k a rd ž ius P. 1930: On the opinion of our critics on the matters of language. – Kalba, vol. 2, pp. 84–93. S k a rd ž i u s P. 1935a: Common language and its types. – Mother Tongue, vol. 1–2, pp. 3–7. I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. Jono Jablonskio pėdomis: linksnių klaidos ir taisymo motyvai 57 S k a rd ž i u s P. 1935b: Klausimų kraitelė. – Mother tongue, vol. 10, p. 173. S k a rd ž i u s P. 1935c: Apžvalga (dėl E. Viskantos „Putino kalbos kritikos šešėly“). – Gimtoji kalba, sąs. 8, p. 124–126. S k a rd ž i u s P. 1935d: Taisymai. – Gimtoji kalba, sąs. 10, p. 171–173. 1936. pp. 36. "S.P.A.". – Mother Tongue, vol. 1–2, pp. 13–17. 1936a: Taisymai. – Mother Tongue, vol. 6, pp. 92–93. 1937. pp. 37. "Review". Lightning. – Mother tongue, vol. 9, p. 158– 160. 1939. pp. 39. "S.P.A.R.E.S.E.". – Mother tongue, vol. 1, p. 9. S k a rd ž i u s P. 1997: Selected Writings. T. 2. Vilnius: Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopedia Publishing. S k a rd ž i u s P. 1998: Selected Writings. T. 3. General language subjects, Vilnius: Institute of Science and Engineering. S t o ny s M. 1940: Modernity in our press language. – Mother Tongue, vol. 4, pp. 58–59. Š u k y s J. 1995: What is better: Mr. Director or Mr. Director? – Mother Tongue, No. 8–9, p. 13. 1920: Criticism and Bibliography, No. 8–9, pp. 62–76. 1933. pp. 193. "A Question of Time". – Mother Tongue, vol. 3, pp. 39–43. 1934. pp. 34. "About Us". – Mother Tongue, vols. 7–10, p. 118– 120. 1923. "V i r e liūna s A. 1923: Kritika ir bibliografija" (in Lithuanian). – Educational Work, No. 6–7, pp. 486–488. 1925: The Language of the Uncertainty. – Lietuvis, No. 7, February 13, p. 13. 1925a: Language ambiguities. Answer to Sally. – Lietuvis, No. 14, April 3, p. 13. V i s k a nta E. 1935: Language matters. "Putin's speech in the shadow of criticism". – Vairas, No 7–8, pp. 366–371. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1890, No. 2. Received 30 November 2011 58 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 FOllOWING THE PATH OF JONAS JABlONSKIS: CASE ERRORS AND WHY THEY SHOUlD BE AMENDED Summary Starting with Jonas Jablonskis, the systematicity and attempts to strengthen the lithuanian language norm have become more consistent. At the beginning of the 20th century the norm experienced a major impact from linguists working in the journal Gimtoji kalba, such as Skardžius, Salys, Jonikas, Talmantas, later—Balūnas, Damb riūnas (Dambrauskas). Since the middle of the 20th century attempts to set the norm have become much less individualistic, more organised, contributors of the journal Gimtoji kalba were engaged in heated discussions on a number of topics relating to the theory of language culture as well as many of its practical issues, language use and norm setting in standardised language. Various newspapers and magazines started publishing articles dealing with practical language issues, including debatable topics. The articles focused on the research into grammatical cases and their usage, including errors, found in the actual language usage of the time. The present paper offers an overview of the first steps when the cases were started to be amended, attempts to amend the usage of the cases by linguists of the period between the two world wars, reasons for such amendments given by J. Jablonskis and linguists of the Gimtoji kalba, some later repercussions. The overview of early amendments of case usage can be summarised by pointing out that the reasons for such amendments were not always sufficiently detailed and wellgrounded; in most cases reference was made to the impact of Russian, Polish and German. Some authors pointed out the impact of foreign languages as the key reason for all amendments, with no reference to the laws of language. An inclination to adopt the reasons from other authors is noticeable. The reasons supported by arguments are only given in the discussion section. In the course of discussion, some other, more vivid, reasons emerged; different opinions and new approaches to language were actively expressed. Jablonskis abstained from commenting and attempted to provide more examples, tried to save space and time. Very often the explication mainly included a sentence quoted from another author, which was given as an example of standard language. No discussion as to its wellformedness was found. In other words, the sentence by another author was the motivation to present it. In many cases the name of the author was mostly relied on. Often the same tradition of amending is noticeable in the works of several authors. Jablonskis must have relied on the data of the dialects, folklore, collections of songs and grammars. In all of his amendments Jablonskis attempted at language wellformedness, systematicity and consistency. His pro- I. SMETONIENĖ, B. DAMBRAUSKAITĖ. In the footsteps of Jon Jablonski: linksnių klaidos ir taisymo motyvai 59 posal to replace the nominative case by the partitive genitive (Genitivus partitivus) was among the most consistent. When amending, reference was mostly made to the data of the dialects, the language norms set by grammars; however, the context and tradition of usage were also important. The genitive case was among the most heatedly debated and most frequently amended cases, which must have been due to the wholepart relationship often expressed in lithuanian by the genitive case. Numerous amendments of the dative case were the result of longlasting discussion and a range of different opinions. The dative erroneously used to refer to an object was amended in the most consistent manner. The overview of all amendments of the accusative, comments and ideas suggested by different authors have led to a conclusion that the usage of the genitive case with the verbs of address was fluctuating. The data collected from different authors has led to a conclusion that the most frequent reason for amending the instrumental case is the impact of other languages (Russian, Polish, German). Jablonskis, in his discussion with some other authors, used the data of the dialects. later linguists more often referred to the context, very seldom also to the laws of the lithuanian language. When amending the locative, the linguist’s intuition seems to have been the least reliable; more arguments were provided. Despite that the usage was rather fluctuating, the amendments of the locative were largely stable. KEy wORDS: nominative case, genitive case, dative case, accusative case, instrumental case, locative case, codification. IRENA SMETONIENĖ BRIGITA DAMBRAUSKAITĖ Vilniaus universitetas Universiteto g. 3, lT01513 Vilnius [email protected] [email protected]