Knyga iš medicinos žodyno praeities

A Book from the Past of the Medical Dictionary Palmira Zemlevičiūtė, TERMINOLOGICAL MEDICAL LEXICON IN SEVENTEENTH- AND EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY DICTIONARIES OF LITHUANIA MINOR. MONOGRAPH. – Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language, 2016. – 517 pp. ISBN 978-609-411-181-5 STASYS KEINYS This review discusses a book1 that is Palmira Zemlevičiūtė’s second major work on the history of the Lithuanian lexicon of healing and medicine. The first was her 2009 doctoral dissertation in the humanities (philology), The Development of Lithuanian Medical Terminology in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries, covering the period of the National Revival up to the establishment of a Lithuanian institution of higher education in Kaunas, shortly after the independent state was restored in 1918. In addition, a study of the development of written Lithuanian medical terminology in Lithuania Minor can be found in the article published in the scholarly journal Archivum Lithuanicum in 2007, entitled 1 Zemlevičiūtė P. Terminological Medical Lexicon in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Dictionaries of Lithuania Minor. Monograph, Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language, 2016. – 517 pp., illustrations. 188 Stasys Keinys | Knyga iš medicinos žodyno praeities a study entitled “Terminological Medical Lexicon in Lithuanian Edicts of the Prussian Authorities, 1738–1831” (the 12 surviving edicts concerning health are considered among the earliest printed Lithuanian publications in this field). A highly commendable feature of P. Zemlevičiūtė’s research into the language of medicine is the thoroughness of its analysis and the comprehensiveness with which the collected material is presented. There is no doubt that this enhances its value. The subject of the monograph (that is, what it investigates) consists of the nouns and noun phrases denoting concepts related to the treatment of people, extracted from six seventeenth- and eighteenth-century bilingual German–Lithuanian and Lithuanian–German dictionaries (three manuscript and three printed), and referred to in the study chiefly as terminological medical lexicon. These are the anonymous manuscript works Lexicon Lithuanicum, Clavis Germanico–Lithvana and the surviving part of Jokūbas Brodovskis’s Lexicon Germanico–Lithvanicum et Lithuanico–Germanicum (these dictionaries were scientifically edited by Professor Vincentas Drotvinas and published in Vilnius between 1987 and 2009 in eight substantial volumes), as well as the Lithuanian–German and German–Lithuanian dictionaries published at the time by Frydrichas Vilhelmas Hakas, Pilypas Ruigys and Kristijonas Gotlybas Milkus. In all, these sources yielded, in the author’s words, over 700 distinct anatomical and medical words and word combinations; in addition, the study provides a detailed account of the numerous spelling and grammatical variants of these terms, which are not included in that count (p. 16). In addition to the usual components of scholarly works (a preface, lists of sources, literature and abbreviations, an index of personal names, and a German summary), the monograph comprises a brief introduction (pp. 12–36), two major parts describing the medical semantics (pp. 37–279) and expression (pp. 280–402) of the terms under study, concluding findings (pp. 403–409), and a comprehensive index of terms and their variants (pp. 435–504). Both parts are based on a very fine-grained classification of the terms under study, in terms of both meaning and expression, and, as noted, present them all. This, together with the author’s dedication, patience, and diligence, provides grounds for believing that the book offers a reliable picture of the lexicon used for healing in the land of the Lithuanian-speaking inhabitants some four to five hundred years ago and recorded in the dictionaries under study. The monograph’s introduction recalls the Lithuanian physicians, linguists, and specialists from other fields who wrote on the history of medicine and on the language of scholarship and terminology in this field in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. It also mentions several works on medical terminology by scholars from Slovakia, France, and Germany (incidentally, it would be Terminologija | 2017 | 24 189 it would have been appropriate at least to glance at the work in this field by our nearest neighbours, especially Latvians and Poles—after all, the people of Latvia and parts of Poland lived for many centuries in circumstances similar to those of our Lithuanian compatriots). The main sources and aims of the monograph are then described at some length, the research methods are outlined, a brief survey of the medical vocabulary in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century writings is provided, and studies of the period investigated in the book are recalled. The first part of the book, “The Semantics of Terminological Medical Vocabulary in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Dictionaries of Lithuania Minor,” examines all the material in these eight chapters, drawing on specialist medical literature and textbooks (the bibliography lists three dozen books in this field): 1) Names of body parts, organs, and their systems; 2) Names of diseases and pathological conditions; 3) Names of treatments; 4) Names of persons; 5) Names of treatment facilities; 6) Names of actions, processes, and states; 7) Names of qualities; and 8) Names of branches of medical science and related sciences. Most chapters are further divided into subchapters (the chapter on disease names has the most, as many as twenty), while the largest chapter, on names of body parts, organs, and their systems, is divided into sections, some of which are further subdivided. For example, the section on the musculoskeletal system in the subsection on organs and their systems has two subdivisions: the skeletal system and the muscular system (this fine-grained anatomical classification was clearly prompted by the complexity of the human body and the abundance of its many parts and components). Given that the entry for each individual name consists of a current Lithuanian headword, followed by a Latin term, all the variants of the Lithuanian names from that period in their original spelling, and their German equivalents with page references from all the dictionaries, followed in turn by the relevant medical entry in the electronic version of the major Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language (LKŽ), together with abbreviations indicating written sources and dialect locations, the book also identifies words, word combinations, or meanings that are not included in that dictionary. Incidentally, it must be difficult to draw precise conclusions from the Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language—based essentially on data from present-day Lithuanian dialects of the twentieth century—about the spread and vitality of some of the names under study in the dialects of Lithuania Minor at that time, because of the lack of dialect data from that region and the several-century gap. Nevertheless, the LKŽ data presented are interesting and useful insofar as they show the use of the names under study from the earliest monuments of our writing, as well as their survival and, in part, their spread in twentieth-century dialects—that is, the vitality of those names. Broadly speaking, this part of the monograph could be regarded as a historical 190 Stasys Keinys | Knyga iš medicinos žodyno praeities comparative ideographic glossary (compendium) of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century medical vocabulary (as presented in the sources under study). The second part, on the expression of the names under study, likewise uses a hierarchical classification, but one based on linguistic criteria. Its first level is the broadest: the origin of words and word combinations—native formations (called native names in the study), borrowings, and hybrids, or mixed formations. The second level distinguishes names by the number of words they contain (single-word and compound); the third level classifies single-word names (fashionably called “simplex” in the monograph) as simple formations (in terms of word formation), substantivized adjectives and participles, or derivatives, while compound names are classified by the number of their constituents. Borrowed names (only single-word ones were found) are classified according to whether they were borrowed directly or indirectly (through intermediaries), and then by the languages from which they were borrowed or derived. Hybrid derivatives are classified according to the origin of their word-forming components, and compound hybrids according to the origin of their constituents. First, purely Lithuanian simple single-word names are described, grouped in the same categories as in the semantic part. Within the groups, words entered in dictionaries with primary and secondary meanings are distinguished from words set apart on another basis, whose meanings in the sources are not included in the LKŽ. For example, in the subsection on names of body parts, the word kiška appears in the section on primary meanings, with the meaning “leg (from the torso to the foot), knee” (p. 281; in the table on p. 289, back of the knee is also added under the primary meaning); in the section on secondary meanings, with the meaning “4. thigh” (p. 286); and in the section on meanings absent from the LKŽ, with the meaning “loins” (p. 287). Derivatives, as is customary since the work of Professor Vincas Urbutis, are described and classified by their method of formation, categories, and types. It is not surprising that, when studying words from more distant periods of the past, difficulties may arise in determining derivatives and their base words. To minimize these, it is important first of all to clarify the orthographic conventions of each source. For example, verbal nouns are written only with the suffix -imas (the dictionaries also have gydymas, p. 314, gimdimas, p. 313, and it is unclear whether this reflects the pronunciation of those times or whether the long vowel is simply written as y in certain cases), and it is unclear what the character ǔ means, since in Clavio’s dictionary, for example, alongside kosulys, skaudulys, sopulys, one finds alpūlys and priepūlis (all are listed on p. 316 as derivatives formed with the suffix -ulis/-ulys; the latter, undoubtedly through oversight, has ended up in the wrong group). Apparently, for the same reason (oversight), in one or two cases the base form or word is given inaccurately, e.g.: pilvavimas (: pilvojo), pp. 313–314, įbgydijimas (: išgydė), p. 314; who can now say why, besides dusawimo, there is also dusaujimas, p. 313, which cannot be connected with dūsavo. Inaccurate— Terminologija | 2017 | 24 191 rately analyzed is J. Brodovskis’s word įβ-perauga (: išaugti), p. 339. Other inaccuracies or oversights occur occasionally; for example, the name of a disease, raup­lės, is treated as a derivative of the verb rupti, but if so, it cannot be a name for a bearer of a nominal quality, pp. 320–321. If the disease name is spelled in such varied ways as nūmirrulis / numirrulis / nūmirrulys... (: numirti), it would have made sense to list it with other verbal abstracts formed with that suffix (pp. 315–317), rather than among agent nouns and names for bearers of verbal properties (p. 322). Those who enjoy picking over such slips or questionable points would find a few more. Incidentally, the book hardly discusses the possibility of alternative analyses or the reasons for choices that depart from the usual approach—for example, why nesveikata is considered a derivative with the suffix -ata (p. 325), rather than a derivative with the prefix ne-, as Prof. V. Urbutis analyzed it in The Grammar of the Lithuanian Language (vol. I, p. 428). There are also editorial oversights: apgamas (p. 337) is mistakenly identified as a prefix derivative, although just a little later (p. 338) it is correctly presented, together with pagamas and priegamas, as a derivative with the ending –as. In concluding the discussion of word formation, I would like to make a few general observations about research methodology (not just that of this book). First, texts from every period contain obscure words, words formed in unusual ways, words read inaccurately, as well as spelling or transcription errors (in manuscripts), printing errors, and other slips. Inconsistencies in spelling have already been mentioned. It would be useful to discuss such matters separately. Second, one should not strive at all costs to provide a definitive word-formation analysis of obscure words. For example, the only word in the book regarded as a derivative with the suffix -ūnas/-ūnė for names of bearers of nominal qualities is a word, like many others, spelled in various ways: alkunas, alkunė, elkunas, elkunė... (pp. 319–320). Yet, without finding the base word required for a derivational relationship, there is no basis for identifying a suffix or treating the form as a derivative. The author also considers a word of unclear formation to be a verbal abstract, apparently a disease name: tylysis, German Schlag (Krankheit), assigning it the suffix -ysis, although she herself writes that “there seems to be no suffix” (p. 317). Such cases, if one wishes to include them and considers them a matter of word formation rather than, say, morphology, should also be surveyed separately. Third, in synchronic accounts (describing a state rather than development) of the word formation of words from the past, the most accurate approach would be to seek the derivational base and explain the relationships in the language of the period and region under study, not in the present-day language. Compound names for medical concepts (unlike in present-day terminology) are considerably fewer across the two places where they are described (separately among purely Lithuanian forms and, in another chapter, those mixed in terms of the origin of their constituents), roughly 192 Stasys Keinys | Knyga iš medicinos žodyno praeities a quarter of all the names examined. The largest share consists of two-word names, while three-word and longer ones make up perhaps only one-sixth of all multiword names; moreover, it seems that the other example cannot even be considered a name for a concept (Liekořiſte kurri Wajſu numirruſi prawara, p. 401). In the book, the compounds examined that denote concepts are usually classified by the number of words they contain, their expression (by parts of speech and their forms), and the relationship between their components. In such a classification, however, function words are often not counted. The book under review follows this practice, cf. the section heading “Two-word compound names whose dependent components are expressed by prepositional constructions” (p. 365). Our author is not consistent, however: for example, both Pliewe aplink Smáginės and Skaudėjimas Pilwo nūg Tulžies (p. 367), among others, are considered three-word names. Loanwords from other languages account for only a small proportion of the names examined: there are just 41 (p. 370) out of approximately 450, i.e. less than 10% of the one-word names examined. They are described according to the languages from which they entered the language of the Lithuanian Prussians, either directly or through intermediaries. Slavic loanwords account for 61%, most of them from Belarusian and Polish (p. 383), while German loanwords make up 22% (p. 386). Given that, at the time the dictionaries under study were written, this region had already been under German rule for several hundred years (following its conquest in the 13th century), these figures may prompt various reflections and explanations. Only a small number of hybrid formations (19 names, p. 390) and compound names with components of mixed origin (49, p. 393) were also found in the sources. The scarcity of loanwords and mixed formations shows that the dictionaries examined attest to the Lithuanian character of the health-related words and compound names in the language of the Lithuanian Prussians of that period. It is true that some of these purely Lithuanian names may be calques or imitations. At the end of the monograph is an alphabetical index of names for medical concepts found in 17th–18th-century dictionaries of Lithuania Minor. Under each headword, given in modern spelling, the index provides its meaning and the Lithuanian and German names as they appear in the dictionaries, arranged in order of publication and accompanied by the dictionary abbreviation and page number. Each variant of expression and each meaning is given its own entry. For example, the word blauzda (p. 441) is listed in five entries, corresponding to the different meanings found in the dictionaries: “leg,” “tibia,” “thigh,” “part of the leg below the knee, shin,” and “waist, midriff, hips”; immediately after these comes the variant blauzdas, meaning “tibia.” This presentation of words, subdivided by meaning and form, is very convenient for readers interested in the various aspects of the old-time words and expressions for healing and medicine, which are examined and presented in detail in the book. Terminologija | 2017 | 24 193 This is an excellent idea on the part of the book’s author. Indeed, this important part of the book can quite rightly be called a dictionary, rather than an index in the narrower sense. It comprises 1,115 entries in all, spread over seventy pages. Overall, the book presents a skillful, ingenious, and multifaceted picture—both qualitative and quantitative—of the medical names found in the old dictionaries of Lithuania Minor. The picture is enhanced by 26 figures and 64 tables: the section on meanings shows the relationship between old and current terms, while the section on forms (diagrams 18–26 and tables 51–64) shows the quantities of the items described. Almost everything here is presented in precise figures and percentages; what is lacking is more summary data. Dr. P. Zemlevičiūtė’s book XVII–XVIII amžiaus Mažosios Lietuvos žodynų terminologinė medicinos leksika is valuable in many respects. It brings into circulation in Lithuanian linguistics a substantial body of carefully collected and examined from various perspectives vocabulary from old writings in a single field, revealing the diversity and durability of the vocabulary of our language in that domain. It is important for understanding the state and development of the language of specialized discourse in the early centuries of our written heritage. It may be useful to researchers in the history of medicine, since dictionaries help us understand who treated people several centuries ago, how they did so, and with what. The book will also be of use to those working on present-day medical terminology. Finally, it is fitting that this work, devoted to the lexicographic efforts of several Lutheran intellectuals, was published by the Institute of the Lithuanian Language in the five-hundredth year of the Reformation. Received 2017-10-29 Stasys Keinys Rinktinės g. 13-11 LT-09201 Vilnius, Lietuva 194 Stasys Keinys | Knyga iš medicinos žodyno praeities