Profesoriui Arnoldui Piročkinui – 80 metų

A. PUPKIS. Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas – 80 years 285 PerSonAʎoS ALDONAS PUPKIS ProFeSorIUI To Arnold Pirochkin – On February 25, 2011, Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas, a well-known philologist, linguist, historian and cultural scientist, turned 80. And although in these times of devaluation of personalities it is becoming unusual to write commemorative articles, the work of Arnoldas Piročkinas deserves more attention than it has been given to it in contemporary literature on the history of Lithuanian linguistics. Therefore, it is appropriate to say a few words about these works in honour of the anniversary and the respected readers of the Language Culture publication. 286 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 The years of Arnoldas Piročkinas’ life and work seem to differ in nothing from those of other peer linguists: primary and secondary education and studies of Lithuanian studies at Vilnius University, brief work in schools, then postgraduate studies in the same Vilnius, long-term teaching work at the same university, the same concerns for Lithuanian language and culture after retirement. During these years – almost half a century – a lot has been done: almost three dozen books have been written and prepared, about 500 scientific, popular articles and reviews of various kinds and publications have been published, a number of translations and edited books have been published. And their list is getting longer and longer: as rarely any scientist of these years, Arnold Pirochkin is full of energy and continues to publish in the press article after article, from which would be made not one study or book. To the wider public, Arnold Pirochkin is mainly known as the most prominent researcher of the legacy of Jan Jablonski. For his work in this field – the books At the Origins of the Common Language (1977) and J. Jablonskis – the Promoter of the Common Language (1978) – he was awarded the Lithuanian State Prize in 1979. In 1978, he defended his doctoral dissertation on the significance of the works of Jonas Jablonskis for the development of the common language. In addition to these capital works, the scholar published two books of the legacy of Jan Jablonski: Jan Jablonski letters (1985) and J. Jablonskis. Articles and letters (1991), as well as several educational publications (among them the most important corrections of the language of Jonas Jablonskis, 1986). And in the 150th anniversary of Jan Jablonski’s birth Arnold Pirochkin published a series of articles dedicated to the famous linguist, which are not a repetition of past thoughts, but new research works, which present many new insights, raising the studies of Jablonski’s legacy to a qualitatively new level. Arnoldas Piročkinas began to study the works of Jan Jablonski while still studying at Vilnius University. His diploma thesis in 1922 was on the grammar of the Lithuanian language by J. Jab lonskis, and his supervisor, Prof. Jonas Palionis, can be proud of having brought a gifted student to the bars of studying Jablonskis’ legacy. Although the young linguist later turned to the field of syntax (in 1965 he defended his PhD dissertation on the syntax of composed sentences in Lithuanian), the seed sown by the scientific director did not allow Jablonski to be forgotten, was diligently cared for and after a couple of decades began to bear an incredibly productive harvest. In summary, it can be said that Arnoldas Piročkinas not only thoroughly studied the biography, scientific activities and works of Jon Jablonskis, but also obviously expanded the horizons of Lithuanian linguistics and the com- A. PUPKIS. Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas – 80 years of 287 boss history has been enriched with important discoveries and sometimes unexpected, but well-founded insights. It can be said that in the 1970s of the 20th century, Jonas Jablonskis was rightly recognized for the first time as one of the greatest scholars of Lithuanian language of the end of the 19th century and the first three decades of the 20th century, whose work played a decisive role in the history of modern common language. In his studies of Jon Jablonskis, Arnoldas Piročkinas categorically rejected the romantic approach to the linguist’s work, rejected the widely used name of Jablonskis as the father of Lithuanian (general or written) language and gave him the title of a great Lithuanian language scholar and practitioner. It should be added that this provision, which was formulated more clearly for the first time in the works of the jubilee’s teacher, Jon Palionis, was developed by Pirochkin and based on extensively collected archive facts and clever interpretations of those facts and works. Without going into more detailed analysis of the researches of Arnold Pirochkin on Jablonski, we should draw attention to several things that are often almost visible with the naked eye. First of all, the abundance of collected facts is striking in the studies of Jablonski’s legacy. It seems that not a single detail of Jablonski’s life or activity could be hidden from the researcher’s attention, even the smallest detail that could have an impact on the characteristics of the great linguist’s activities or works. On the other hand, it was not limited to the facts of the life and works, but also tried to rely on the broad political, cultural and linguistic context of the time, which allows to describe many circumstances of the living time and strengthens the power of interpretations. All this is collected from all archives, old prints, memories and other sources available to the author in Lithuania and abroad. This is evidenced by Pirochkin’s two volumes of Jablonsky’s letters and works, in which many things are discovered by the author himself and published for the first time. A closer reading of the author’s books about Jablonski reveals an extraordinary respect for the authenticity of facts and sources, the correctness of citation, and the overall impeccable presentation of the scientific apparatus. Without exaggeration, it is wise to say that the sources cited by Pirochkin can be fully trusted and, if necessary, relied on without any reference to the original. Secondly, the interpretations of those abundant facts are usually not much in doubt, and only what can be firmly based on the sources is usually interpreted. Thus, for example, the sources of Jablonski’s language norming, the criteria of norm selection and evaluation are perfectly described, but all this is viewed historically, the circumstances of change of views and historical influences are shown. 288 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 the need to treat certain aspects of language differently. We must not forget that Arnold Pirochkin is a child of his own time, who cannot separate himself from the linguistic preconceptions of his time and the decisions that were acceptable at that time. I say this having in mind the fact that a personality such as Jablonski is received by each generation of linguists and historians of linguistics differently and evaluated according to the new conditions and needs dictated by the period. Perhaps, for example, now or later somebody will assess differently Jablonski’s principle of systematic (or rather, used) language norms, the criterion of the spread of linguistic facts or other things, because now the common language is already different, and the needs under investigation are new, determined by new circumstances or changed linguistic views. Nevertheless, it must be said that Pirochkin’s systematic approach to Jablonsky’s works, consistent analysis of all works and reliability of interpretations leave many statements to history as indisputable facts that cannot be subjected to any historical changes. They allow, or rather force, to look at Jablonski systematically and never lose the historical point of view on all the works and statements of this linguist. Third. Arnold Pirochkin correctly and quite rightly determined the place of Jablonski in the history of common language. Jablonskis now stands before us as the greatest normizer of the common language of that time, who was able to establish the already existing system of common language, which functioned on the basis of the dialects of the western Lithuanian language, and to determine its direction and tendencies of development. This approval of the common language system at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries was perhaps Jablonski’s greatest achievement in the history of the common Lithuanian language. He raised the very idea of a common language to a new level and showed its specificity, independent development and ability to grow and improve on its own basis. Fourth. The works of Arnold Pirochkin probably prove irrevocably that Jablonski was a great scholar, not just a language practitioner, as some of his opponents have tried to declare. He had a strong scientific theory of the common language, although he had not put it forward in a "pure" form. Thanks to Pirochkin’s efforts, we now understand it as a coherent mechanism of scientific work, which best met the needs of the normalization of the common language at that time. In addition to all this, it should be added that Arnoldas Piročkinas heatedly polemized with Jablonskis’ opponents, who called him only a simple linguistic practitioner, not a Lithuanian language scholar. The status of Jon Jablonskis as a scholar is confirmed not only by his systematic description of the structure of the Lithuanian common language in his works on grammar and syntax, but also by other works in the field of Lithuanian philology. Among them can be raised the merits of Lithuanian lexicogra- A. PUPKIS. Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas – 80 years of 289 fija or dialectology, where also Piročkinas’ efforts revealed considerable discoveries of Jablonskis in the study of Lithuanian dialects, especially the structure of the Northern Žemaitian dialect (see study published together with Aleksas Girdenis in the Kalbotyros scientific works collection in 1977). In recent years, Arnold Pirochkin has raised the issue of the attempts of the authoritative linguist of that time, Pranas Skarys, to deny Jablonskis as a scientist and has rightly shown the fruitlessness of such efforts. Furthermore, Pirochkin reviewed Jablonski’s scientific activity in the broad context of European linguistics at the time and showed that the linguist was regarded as a great scholar not only here at home, but also far abroad. In his studies of the works and activities of John Jablonskis, Arnoldas Piročkinas revealed himself as a diligent historian of language, projecting his activities into the present, in which it is appropriate to draw wisdom and tradition from the past. This connection between the past and the present, established by the commemorator, is visible in many of his works, especially in the books devoted to Jablonski’s corrections. About the latter things the researcher talked a lot in the aforementioned monographs dedicated to the life and work of Jan Jablonski, and later, in 1970 and 1976, separate books of corrections of Jablonski’s lexicon and morphology were published; In 1986, a joint work, Jono Jablonskio kalbos pataisymai, was published. All these works are not repetitions of each other, but qualitatively new, accompanied by numerous scientific commentaries. These are independent studies of language culture, which have contributed greatly to the solution of current issues of Lithuanian language standardization. In these and other works, Arnoldas Piročkinas also manifested himself as a peculiar worker of language culture, sometimes a rather strict defender and evaluator of certain things. Here it is worth remembering his clear attitude to write foreign names only in Lithuanian characters and according to Lithuanian pronunciation. In this respect, he is one of the most prominent theorists of normativity in this field. Whatever he writes or speaks about language practice, Arnold Pirochkin is always a man of his nation and state, an active citizen. I have a warm memory of the impressions from the now distant 1991, when the Supreme Council was asked to review the language of the draft Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. We formed a small commission: Pranas Kniūkšta, as the most prominent specialist of administrative (office) language, Arnoldas Piročkinas, as the author of the teaching works Lawyers’ Language Culture (1980) and Administrative Language Culture (1990), and I. Each of us edited the text independently, then we worked together to coordinate opinions and make joint decisions. As far as I can remember, I don't remember 290 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 84 We would have been in great disagreement about something, we would have argued fiercely, and the common opinion would easily lie in our written statement. It was subsequently pleasant to see that the final text of the Constitution incorporated almost all of our suggestions, although I heard that other linguists had also contributed to the language. but of those discussions, perhaps the most vividly remembered was Arnold's repeated wish to add to those verbal remarks on certain articles of the Constitution the opinion of our k a i p p i l i e č i. In consultation we also wrote it, of course, separating it from the main text… Arnold Pirochkinas’ citizenship is evident in many of his works, and here it is especially worth highlighting the cycle of articles published not so long ago about the educational situation in East Prussia, history, the role of the Evangelical Church in educational affairs in the Klaipeda region, the efforts of the Germans to take the life of the region into their own hands. These articles would be a fairly solid study of the history of education in Klaipėda region. As a citizen and a patriot of his country, Arnoldas Piročkinas took on another difficult task: he compiled and edited a large book Jurbarkas. History of the World (1996). In addition to the more technical work, the book also contains several articles by the author himself: about the writer Antanas Giedraitis, other famous people of the region, evangelical Lutherans, the way of books in Lesser Lithuania, etc. For this work, as well as for significant Lithuanian studies, Arnold Piročkinas was awarded the title of Honorary Citizen of Jurbarkas in the summer of 2011. In all his extensive writings, the anniversary writer appears as a skilled historian, well acquainted with the subject of his writing, its historical circumstances of existence and broad cultural context. These characteristics of the writing of the text are particularly pronounced in Pirochkin’s book Devyneri Adam Mickevičius metai: biografinė apybraiža (1995; published in Polish in 1998), which appeared somewhat unexpectedly for our society at the time. But this surprise fades when one remembers that in 1984 Piročkinas was one of the authors of the book Science in the Old Vilnius University, published in the series Monuments of Lithuanian Science, which, of course, was written not only as a stimulus to talk about the Lithuanian years of Adam Mickevičius, but also as a result of reading a lot of material, facts and formulating new insights. Adam Mickevičius’s studies may have inspired the preparation of a large Lithuanian-Polish and Polish-Lithuanian dictionary (published in Warsaw in 2001). Thus, the panorama of Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas’ works is truly wide and impressive. His numerous teaching works on Lithuanian language and his studies on Bohemianism are not yet reviewed here. As regards the latter, it is worth mentioning that during his half-year internship in the then A. PUPKIS. Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas – 80 years 291 searched for sources of Lithuanian studies, well acquainted with the cultural and linguistic life of the Czechs. This led to the publication of articles from the correspondence of scholars in this field, a textbook of Czech language (1974) and a Czech–Lithuanian, Lithuanian–Czech dictionary (2004), as well as a number of translations of fiction and other genres of literature from Czech (to each other and from other languages). Czechoslovakia in 1971-1972, the scientist graduated from the University of Vilnius in 1973. In closing, it is necessary to emphasize once again the breadth of Professor Arnoldas Piročkinas’s scientific and cultural interests, his great erudition as a scientist, and to mention his work in linguistic science and practice, which has been carried out carefully and consistently for half a century. without his work we would be much poorer than we are now. It is a pleasure to see that Professor is successfully pursuing the same diverse work now, so we wish him good health and new discoveries for the benefit of all our culture. Received 30 November 2011