Names of Figures and Tropes in Literary Scholarship, 1918–1940

ASTA MITKEVIČIENĖ

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

KEYWORDS: terms of literary scholarship, figures, tropes, hyperonyms, synonymous terms, synonym series, root-related synonyms, working synonyms

INTRODUCTORY NOTES

Names of figures and tropes belong to the broader semantic group of names for artistic means of expression. These terms are not the exclusive property of literary scholarship—they derive from rhetoric and belong not only to literary but also to linguistic stylistics. Stylistics adopted the entire science of figures from rhetoric (VLE XIX 791).

The first half of the 20th century is a crucial period in the history of Lithuanian literary scholarship: it was then that the foundations of this modern scholarly discipline were laid (Viliūnas 2003: 261). At that time, the terminology of Lithuanian literary scholarship as it is known today was being created and developed. After independence was declared, work began within Lithuania’s education system, and literature later became one of the most important humanities subjects taught in Lithuanian schools. Literature was taught at the Higher Courses in Kaunas (operating from 1920 to 1922), which had a humanities section, and at teacher-training seminaries. From 1922, literature could be studied at two faculties of the Lithuanian University founded that year (renamed Vytautas Magnus University in 1930)—the Faculty of Humanities and the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy. Teaching and studying literature required not only Lithuanian-language teaching materials but also a standardized Lithuanian terminology for literary scholarship. During the interwar period, the first specialized books on literary theory appeared; these were also the first Lithuanian teaching materials on stylistics and important sources for Lithuanian stylistics terminology¹.

¹ Names of figures and tropes had also been used earlier in Lithuanian texts on literary topics (for more detail, see Mitkevičienė 2007).

176 Asta Mitkevičienė | Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

This article analyzes 77 one-word names of figures and tropes collected from works on literary theory, Lithuanian literature, and the history of world and foreign literatures published between 1918 and 1940 (see the list of sources). The article draws on the following sources: 1) all interwar textbooks on literary theory: two different editions (1918, 1922) of the first Lithuanian textbook on literary theory, written by Kazys Bizauskas; works on literary theory by Stasys Čėšūnas (1925), Motiejus Gustaitis (1927), Jonas Norkus (1930), and Juozas Ambrazevičius (1938); 2) works on the history of Lithuanian literature: textbooks on literary history by Albinas and Marija Iešmantai (1923), Vincas Zajančkauskas (1928), Zigmas Kuzmickis (5 vols., 1931–1934), and Motiejus Miškinis (1939); works by lecturers at the University of Lithuania (VDU)—two editions of Mykolas Biržiška’s literary history (1920, 1925), three booklets of Juozas Tumas-Vaižgantas’s lectures on literary history (1924, 1925), and Vincas Mykolaitis-Putinas’s work on the history of Lithuanian literature (1936). Also included is a textbook on folklore, M. Biržiška’s Dainų literatūros vadovėlis (1923), which complements the author’s works on literary history examined here (as he himself notes); 3) textbooks on the history of world literature: works by Gabrielė Petkevičaitė-Bitė (2 vols., 1922, 1924), Vladas Dubas (two editions, 1923, 1927), J. Norkus (1931), and J. Ambrazevičius and co-authors Juozas Grinius (vols. 1–2) and Antanas Vaičiulaitis (vol. 2) (1938, 1939); 4) works on the history of foreign literatures: V. Dubas’s history of French literature (2 vols., 1929, 1930), Juozas Eretas’s history of German literature (1931), Balys Sruoga’s history of Russian literature (2 vols., 1931, 1933), and Vladimir Šilkarskis’s history of Greek literature (1938)². The article aims to discuss the origins and synonymy of one-word names of figures and tropes, to show how the terms changed, and to identify the established terms. The research methods are descriptive-analytical and comparative.

Conceptions of figures and tropes

The concepts of figures and tropes and their earliest classifications date back to antiquity and ancient rhetoric. Yet since antiquity, tropes and figures have been understood in different ways. For some, tropes are one type of figure; others distinguish figures from tropes—the defining feature of tropes is vividness, whereas figures are considered a syntactic phenomenon (Zaborskaitė 1982: 97). The textbooks on literary theory from 1918 to 1940

²Editions of the same book are treated as separate sources in this article, whereas separately published parts of the same work are treated as a single source.

Terminologija | 2014 | 21 177

do not treat tropes as a type of figure (hence the title of this article, “Names of Figures and Tropes”), so the sources do not establish a hierarchical relationship between the terms denoting these two concepts. In his 1918 textbook, K. Bizauskas defined tropes as follows: “words and expressions used in a transferred sense” BizR 39. J. Ambrazevičius’s definition, written twenty years later (1938), is narrower: “a word used in a non-literal sense is called a trope” Am 43. In 1918, K. Bizauskas explained rather vaguely that “figures are expressions in which a writer, carried away by emotions, departs from ordinary ways of expression” BizR 47 (a similar formulation appears in the later 1922 edition). In 1938, J. Ambrazevičius provided a more terminologically precise definition of figures: “Stylistic devices arising from the construction of sentences and their combination are called figures.” In the Lithuanian Encyclopedia (1940), Juozas Žiugžda explains the concept of “figure” in a way similar to that of J. Ambrazevičius in his textbook.

S. Čėšūnas (1925) tropus priskiria prie poezijos, o figūras – prie kalbos priemonių, M. Gustaitis (1927) tropus apibūdina kaip kalbos lytis, o figūras – kaip retoriškus posakius. Tropais tiriamuose šaltiniuose laikoma metafora, alegorija, prozopopėja, metonimija, sinekdocha, antonomazija, hiperbolė, litotė, ironija, sarkazmas, perifrazė, simbolis, o figūromis – apostrofa, pakartojimas, paralelizmas, laipsniavimas, antitezė, nutylėjimas, elipsė, retorinis klausimas ir retorinis sušukimas, korekcija (S. Čėšūnas prie figūrų skiria hiperbolę ir litotę). Ne visi šaltinių autoriai juos visus išvardija, vieni nurodo jų tarpusavio ryšį, kiti – ne. Kai kurie autoriai tropais laiko epitetą (BiržD, Nor) ir palyginimą (BiržD, Birž₂, Nor). Pastarosios sąvokos dabar literatūros moksle priskiriamos prie tropų (žr. Zaborskaitė 1982: 105–106; LTA 96; LEM 391), nors pažymima, kad jas „iš tropo sferos linkstama išbraukti“ (LTA 96). Į paralelizmą, gradaciją J. Ambrazevičiaus ir J. Griniaus vadovėlyje žvelgiama plačiau – jie laikomi kompozicijos priemonėmis.

In classical Lithuanian literary studies, tropes are generally classified as figures (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 104; LEM: 391). In Lithuanian linguistics, tropes are likewise considered a type of stylistic (linguistic) figure (see KTŽ; Župerka 2001: 57; Vaskelienė 2007: 19). Rhetoric distinguishes between tropes and rhetorical figures. Like tropes, several rhetorical figures of thought (semantic figures) rely on transference, but they are tropes of thought rather than of words. These include the extended metaphors allegory and parable, as well as figures designated by the same terms as tropes: hyperbole, irony, litotes, and emphasis (Koženiauskienė 1999: 206). Literary-

178

Asta Mitkevičienė

Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

in literary studies, prosopopoeia is classified as a trope, whereas in rhetoric it is classified as a rhetorical figure of thought (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 108; LŽ; LEM 247; Koženiauskienė 1999: 334).

The literary histories from the period under study also contain names of figures, but they generally do not provide classifications of figures and tropes, making it unclear in some cases what is classified as a figure and what is considered a trope. For this reason, it was decided to discuss figures and tropes together in this article. In collecting terms for this article, current encyclopedias and dictionaries, as well as works on literary studies, linguistics, and rhetoric, were also taken into account. Accordingly, drawing on current classifications of figures and tropes, the article also analyzes terms for allusion, euphemism, enumeration, pun, paradox, parallelism, pleonasm, and period, although the authors of the sources under study who used these terms did not call them figures or tropes. For example, textbooks on literary theory of that period state that pleonasm is a flaw in some texts and a stylistic device in others. In an early twentieth-century Russian encyclopedic dictionary that some of the authors may have consulted, euphemism, pleonasm, and paradox are discussed in the entry on figures (see ЭС 1902: 649).

BORROWINGS

There are fewer borrowed one-word names of figures and tropes than Lithuanian ones. They make up 40.3% (out of 77) of the one-word terms.

Hypernyms figure and trope

The term tropa BizR 39 / tropas BizR 44, BizL 59, BiržD 79, Birž₂ 38, Češ 25, Gus 79, Zaj 53, Nor 25, NorV 248, Kuz I 24, Put 257, Am 43, AG 14, Miš 63³ is of Greek origin (but cf. TŽŽe Gr., VTŽŽe Lat. < Gr., ЛЭТП Gr.), whereas figūra BizR 47, BizL 70, BiržD 93, Birž₂ 136, Češ 26, Gus 31, Zaj 53, Nor 33, NorV 193, Kuz I 24, Put 253, Am 53, Miš 65 is of Latin origin⁴. J. Norkus (1930) added a Lithuanian tropo substitute, but used only the international term. It therefore remains unclear whether that substitute should be regarded as a term or merely an explanation. K. Bizauskas (1922) used compound-

³ Sources are cited after the term in chronological order. A slash separates term variants—different forms of the same term. Variants of the same term (phonetic and spelling, morphological) are treated as one term.

⁴ The concept of figure arose in ancient Greece (VLE XIX 791), but the international term itself figūra is of Latin origin.

Terminologija | 2014 | 21

179

term figūrinis posakis BizL 173. There are more compound terms that compete with the term figūra in textbooks, for example: synonyms retoriškasis posakis Gus 31 / retoriškas posakis Gus 33 and retorikos posakis Gus 37, Zaj 89; synonyms retorinis papuošimas BizL 174, retorinis pagražinimas DubB 157, Sr II 182 and retorinė puošmena Put 500; synonyms retoriška priemonė Kuz V 111 and retorinė priemonė Šil 116, etc.

Borrowed names of types of figures and tropes that came from other languages are international terms. Among them, terms of Greek origin⁵ predominate, for example: антономазіја BizL 68, Gus 85, антропоморфизmas AGV 52, autoironija Birž₂ 133, chiazmas Er 16, epitetas BizR 34, BizL 53, DubB 35, BiržD 80, Birž₂ 38, Češ 28, Gus 79, DubL 29, DubP I 313, Nor 27, NorV 14, Kuz I 24, Sr I 87, Put 35, Šil 183, Am 38, AG 14, Miš 6, eufemizmas Gus 11, ironija⁶ BizR 46, BizL 69, DubB 98, BiržD 80, Pet II 60, VžgV 62, Birž₂ 38, Gus 86, DubL 102, DubP I 112, Nor 32, NorV 179, Er 81, Sr I 162, Kuz II 130, Put 19, Am 48, AGV 211, Miš 148, metonimija BizR 44, BizL 60, Birž₂ 38, BiržD 80, Češ 21, Gus 85, Nor 29, Kuz II 129, Put 257, Am 47, perifraze Gus 10, DubP II 99, Nor 31, Kuz II 145, Miš 269, pleonazmas BizR 24, BizL 40, Gus 13, Nor 21, sarkazmas BizR 46, BizL 69, Gus 86, DubP I 275, Nor 33, NorV 250, Sr II 37, simbolis BizR 42, BizL 63, DubB 117, Ieš 133, Pet II 5, Češ 75, Gus 84, DubL 56, DubP I 73, NorV 25, Er 84, Sr I 151, Kuz II 143, Put 142, Am 46, AG 14, Miš 82. Instead of антропоморфizmo, another form of the international term has become established in literary studies today: антропоморfizacija (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 108; LEM 247); cf. the term of Latin origin personifikacija.

Other terms of Greek origin varied during the period under study, for example: antitezė BizR 50, BizL 75, Češ 27, DubL 254, DubP II 80, Er 139, Sr I 98, Kuz II 127, Put 203, Šil 254, Am 54, AG 102 / antiteza Pet I 33 / antitezė BiržD 97 (cf. antitezė TŽŽ 1936, also antitezė LEM 353 today), hiperbolė BizR 45, Češ 27, Gus 86, Kuz I 85, Put 346, Am 49, AG 144, Miš 46 / iperbolė Birž 80, Birž₂ 38 / hiperbola BizL 68, VžgA 4, Nor 31, Sr I 77, Kuz I 66 (cf. hiperbolė TŽŽ 1936), periodas BizR 20, BizL 34, Nor 37, Kuz I 138, Sr II 255 / periodas Gus 30, DubL 121, Put 50 (cf. periodas TŽŽ 1936), litotas Češ 27 / litotė Gus 86 (cf. litotė TŽŽ 1936),

⁵ International terms in this article are classified according to their original source.

⁶ Irony belongs not only to the domain of stylistics but also to that of worldview (LTA 102; LEM 155).

180 Asta Mitkevičienė │ Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

prosopopoeia BizR 42, Am 44, Miš 107 / prosopopoeia BizL 64, BiržD 80, Ieš 124, Birž₂ 38, Gus 81, Nor 30, Kuz V 177 (cf. prosopopoeia TŽŽ 1936), synecdoche BizR 44, BizL 67, Birž₂ 38, Češ 17, Nor 30, Sr I 152, Kuz II 129, Put 257, Am 48 / synecdoche BiržD 80 / synecdoche BiržD 87 / synecdoche Gus 85 (cf. synecdoche TŽŽ 1936). The variant included in the 1936 dictionary of international words is now used.

Some variants of terms that have not become established today were used in only one of the sources studied, for example: allegory BizR 41, BizL 62, BiržD 86, DubB 41, Češ 24, Gus 81, DubL 30, DubP I 73, Nor 28, NorV 65, Er 51, Kuz I 114, Sr II 371, Put 39, Am 45, AG 119, Miš 64 / allegory Šil 280, apostrophe BizR 47, BizL 70, Kuz I 24 / apostrophe BiržD 93 (cf. apostrophe TŽŽ 1936), metaphor BizR 39, BizL 60, DubB 41, Birž₂ 38, Češ 24, Gus 80, DubL 29, DubP I 182, Nor 28, Er 156, Sr I 99, Kuz I 149, Put 35, Am 44, AG 144, Miš 63 / metaphor BiržD 80.

The variant figure name ellipsis BizR 50, BizL 76, BiržD 93, Češ 28, Kuz I 155 / ellipsis Gus 29, Am 55 / ellipsis DubP II 189 (cf. ellipsis TŽŽ 1936; TŽŽė Greek; VTŽŽė Latin < Greek; ЛЭТП Greek).

Of Latin origin are only a few figure names. They all have the formant -ija, for example: amplification Gus 11, gradation BizR 49, BizL 74, Zaj 110, AGV 190, personification Gus 81, DubP I 89, Er 123, Sr I 98, Kuz I 138, Put 348, Miš 65 (TŽŽė Latin; VTŽŽė French < Latin). The term allusion Er 155, Sr II 341, Put 414 / allusion Šil 206 is also associated with Latin or French (TŽŽė, VTŽŽė French < Latin; VLE I Middle Ages Latin; ЛЭТП French).

The only author to use the un-Lithuanianized inversio Gus 40 (cf. inversija TŽŽ 1936) for the concept denoted by this term was M. Gustaitis.

The variant term calambour DubB 63 / calembour Gus 10, DubL 99 derives from French. The term parallelism BizR 24, BizL 40, BiržD 64, Gus 14, Nor 22, Sr I 87, Put 32, Am 41, AG 13, Miš 50 / parallelism Kuz I 23 is associated either with French or with Greek (VTŽŽė French, ЛЭТП Greek).

Although these terms are single words, they are not all at the same level; for example, in J. Ambrazevičius’s (1938) classification, the term metaphor has three subcategory terms: prosopopoeia, allegory, symbol. Accordingly, the two-word term metaphorical prosopopoeia Am 45 is the expanded form of the term prosopopoeia and a subcategory term of metaphor. A hierarchical relationship links the terms irony and self-irony.

Terminologija | 2014 | 21 181

Sources from 1918–1940 use abstract nouns formed from terms denoting tropes or their derivatives, for example: hyperbolism Put 397, ironizing Put 232, the synonyms metaphoricity Iėš 6 and metaphoricalness DubP I 182, metonymicity Češ 21, and so on.

LITHUANIAN TERMS

The sources from 1918–1940 under study contain 46 Lithuanian one-word names for figures and tropes. First of all, these are the only designations of concepts used at the time that have no one-word synonyms—even Lithuanian ones: doubling Sr II 182 “anadiplosis?” (cf. Latin anadiplosis “doubling, duplication” (Koženiauskienė 1999: 266)), enumeration Kuz I 74, Put 33 (now enumeration (see Župerka 2001: 73; Vaskelienė 2007: 28)), ellipsis BizR 50, BizL 76, BiržD 93, Čėš 28, Gus 37, Nor 35, Kuz III 269, exhortation Er 77 “a form of rhetorical address—adhortation?” (cf. Latin adhortatio “encouragement, exhortation” (Koženiauskienė 1999: 332)), correction (correctio) Gus 37 (now correction (see Koženiauskienė 1999: 282; Župerka 2001: 74; Vaskelienė 2007: 29)). Other Lithuanian one-word terms have synonyms—Lithuanian (sharing a root or not) and international (not sharing a root).

Lithuanian synonyms

A three-member series of synonymous one-word terms consists of the Lithuanian synonyms sharing a root repetition BizR 47, BizL 71, DubB 82, Birž₂ 38, DubL 125, Er 35, Sr I 152, Put 37, Am 54, AG 144, Miš 51 (but cf. figure of repetition Am 76), repeating⁷ DubB 9, BiržD 93, Čėš 26, Gus 33, Nor 33, Kuz I 24, Miš 48, and reiteration Kuz I 54. The prefixed term repetition became established (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 114; LTA 111; LEM 352), and was also the most popular during the period under study. It should be noted that in language such prefixed words are not synonyms of words without prefixes, but when they are used to designate the same concept, the differences in their meanings are neutralized.

The four-member series of Lithuanian synonyms sharing a root—comparison BizR 35, BizL 54, Pet I 25, DubB 41, VžgA 43, Čėš 22, Gus 79, DubL 8, DubP I 182, Nor 17, NorV 14, Er 124, Sr I 87, Kuz II 145, Put 35, Šil 27,

⁷ The term repetition NorV 189 was also used to designate one of the shortcomings of a literary work. In this sense, it belongs to the semantic group of action names.

182

Asta Mitkevičienė

Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

Am 41, AG 14, Miš 61, likening BiržD 80, Birž₂ 38, Nor 26, NorV 14, Kuz I 23, equating Birž₂ 96, AGV 210, and equalization DubP I 242, Kuz II 140. The prefixed term comparison, used in most of the sources, became established (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 106; LTA 96; LEM 391).

The four-member series of synonymous one-word terms includes the terms interrogation BizR 51, questioning BizL 77, Kuz II 70, inquiry BiržD 93 (cf. exclamation BiržD 99), question Birž₂ 38, Er 77, Kuz I 47, Put 253, Am 55. Only M. Biržiška’s neologism inquiry is unusual. The non-prefixed term question became established—the most popular at the time (cf. (rhetorical question, see Zaborskaitė 1982: 114; LTA 114; LEM 353).

A five-member series of synonymous one-word terms consists of terms sharing a root: call BizR 51, Birž₂ 38, exclamation BizL 77, Gus 32, Kuz I 134, Put 253, Miš 175, exclamation BiržD 93, shout BizL 71, Sr I 147, cry Kuz III 219⁸. As with other cases of synonyms sharing a root, the most popular term during the period under study became established: exclamation (cf. (rhetorical exclamation, see Zaborskaitė 1982: 114; LTA 114; LEM 353).

The concept “rhetorical question” is also designated by the complex terms rhetorical question Češ 28, Gus 3 / rhetorical question Kuz III 107 / rhetorical question Kuz III 238, while “rhetorical exclamation” is designated by rhetorical exclamation Kuz IV 39. In the context of the terms in this semantic group, the secondary component of such complex terms is not taxonomic: rhetorical question and question, rhetorical exclamation and exclamation compete as long and short forms of the terms. Accordingly, in the three-word term bookish rhetorical address Put 19, only bookish is the taxonomic component in the terminology system.

Almost all the Lithuanian terms listed belong to the derivational category of action names (verbal abstracts). The only exception is B. Sruoga’s non-systematic term doubling—a name for a property formed by analogy.

Lithuanian and international synonyms

Already in the 19th century, when scholarly works on literature began to be written in Lithuanian, Lithuanian terms were sought for some international concepts of figures and tropes. This continued in 1918–1940. Thus, the sources under study use

⁸ The term šūkis was used by B. Sruoga in Sr I 160 with a different meaning, that of “devizo”.

Terminologija | 2014 | 21 183

Lithuanian and international synonymous terms. The same concept is also named by an international term and more than one Lithuanian term, resulting in multi-member synonym series.

Synonyms of different origins are the Lithuanian term išleidimas BizR 50, BizL 76, BiržD 93 and the varying international term elipsė, which form a two-member synonym series. These synonyms competed only at the beginning of the period under study: in both editions of his textbook, K. Bizauskas added the Lithuanian synonym after the international term, whereas M. Biržiška (1923) did the opposite. J. Am-brazevičius (1938) conflated the concepts of “ellipsis” and “omission,” so as a synonym for elipsės he gave not the term išleidimas, but nutylėjimą Am 55 (today literary studies use elipsė, see Zaborskaitė 1982: 113; LEM 353).

Working synonyms⁹ priešprieša BizR 50, BiržD 93, Birž₂ 38, Nor 35 and priešpriešis Gus 37, along with the varying international term antitezė, make up a three-member synonym series. In the first edition of K. Bizauskas’s textbook (1918) and M. Biržiška’s song textbook (1923), in which these terms of different origins are used synonymously, preference is given to the Lithuanian priešpriešai; later, however, K. Bizauskas (1922) used only the international term, while M. Biržiška (1925) did the opposite, using only the Lithuanian term (cf. the compound subtype term laipsniuojama priešprieša BiržD 97). M. Gustaitis (1927) likewise preferred the Lithuanian term—the working synonym priešpriešos, prieš-priešis. In J. Norkus’s textbook (1930), we find only the Lithuanian synonym. The sources from the fourth decade of the 20th century examined here use only the international term (today antitezė, see Zaborskaitė 1982: 112; LTA 112; LEM 353).

A three-member synonym series consists of the Lithuanian cognate synonyms kreipima-sis BizR 47, BizL 70, BiržD 93, Birž₂ 38, Gus 33, Nor 35, Kuz II 90, Put 253, Am 55, atsikreipimas BiržD 99 and the varying international term ter-minas apostrofa. The Lithuanian synonym kreipimasis is even more popular than the international one—it is used in a larger share of the sources. K. Bizauskas (1918 and 1922), who used both synonyms of different origins, and M. Gustaitis (1927) preferred the Lithuanian term, while Z. Kuzmickis (1931, 1932) preferred the international one. In M. Biržiška’s textbook (1923), the designations for this concept form a three-member synonym series (kreipimasis, atsikreipimas ir apostropė), whose dominant is kreipimasis. Today, in rhetoric, apostrophe is one variant of rhetorical address (see Koženiauskienė 1999: 331).

⁹ Working synonyms are distinguished from working variants according to the criteria described by Jolanta Vaskelienė (see Vaskelienė 2013: 207–210).

184

Asta Mitkevičienė

Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

Lithuanian non-cognate synonyms perdėjimas BizR 45, BizL 68, Gus 86, DubL 257, DubP I 313, Nor 31, NorV 68, Er 137, Sr II 342, padidinimas NorV 68, Šil 108, and the variable international term hiperbolė also form a three-member synonym series. These terms of Lithuanian and international origin competed throughout the period under study. K. Bizauskas (1918, 1922), M. Gustaitis (1927), and J. Norkus (1930) preferred the international term, but in another textbook (1931) J. Norkus used only Lithuanian terms—the lexical synonyms perdėjimas, padidinimas NorV 68 (cf. TŽŽė Greek hyperbolē ‘throwing beyond, enlargement’). V. Šilkar skis (1938) used only the latter synonym. The international term appears in the first volume of B. Sruoga’s textbook (1931), while the second volume (1933) has perdėjimas. It is noteworthy that M. Biržiška did not offer any Lithuanian synonym for iperbolei, although he tended to Lithuanianize terms. The international term became established (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 111; LTA 101; LEM 248).

The three-member synonym series comprises the Lithuanian synonyms sugretinimas BiržD 65, Miš 59, lygiagret ybė Nor 22, and the international term paralelizmas. M. Biržiška (1923) used both the systematic Lithuanian term sugretinimas and the international term paralelizmas; presenting them side by side, he preferred the Lithuanian term. J. Norkus’s textbook (1930) predominantly uses the Lithuanian neologism lygiagret ybė, distinctive in that it is a nominal rather than a verbal abstract noun, unlike the other Lithuanian terms in this semantic group. Most other sources use only the international term. Today, the term paralelizmas has become established (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 114; LTA 112; LEM 353).

In his textbook, B. Sruoga used the term combination palyginimai ir prilyginimai Sr II 182. It is possible that the second term denotes the concept ‘parallelism’. In that case, the meanings of these general-vocabulary synonyms would be differentiated in literary terminology.

A four-member synonym series consists of the Lithuanian terms laipsniavimas BizR 49, BizL 74, BiržD 93, Birž₂ 38, Gus 38, Nor 34, Er 56, Kuz I 74, Put 253, Am 54, AG 32, sutvirtinimas BizR 49, sustiprinimas Sr II 182 (?) and the international term gradacija. In 1918, K. Bizauskas used three synonyms, sutvirtinimas arba laipsniavimas (gradacija) BizR 51, but in another edition of the same textbook (1922) he retained only two—laipsniavimas (gradacija) BizL 74. Later, B. Sruoga (1933) used the term sustiprinimas; unfortunately, it is difficult to tell precisely from the context whether it denotes ‘gradation’ or some other figure (in B. Sruoga’s words, retorinis pagražinimas Sr II 182). The Lithuanian term laipsniavimas was more popular in sources from the 1930s than its international synonym.

Terminologija | 2014 | 21

185

(only J. Ambrazevičius and co-authors (1938, 1939) used the two synonymously). Laipsniavimas is an obvious calque of the international term, which is probably why it became established. Both the lexical meaning of the word sutvirtinimas and that of its synonym sustiprinimas are too narrow; cf. laipsniavimas ‘the enumeration of homogeneous sentence parts or homogeneous sentences, in which the enumerated concepts proceed in descending or ascending order of intensity’ (LEM 353) (emphasis mine – A. M.). Of the sources examined, only V. Zajančkauskas’s textbook restricts itself to the international term (today, only laipsniavimas, see Zaborskaitė 1982: 114; LTA 113; LEM 353).

The concepts ‘personification’, ‘prosopopoeia’, and ‘anthropomorphization’ are interrelated, so it is appropriate to discuss their designations together.

A four-member synonym series comprises the Lithuanian non-cognate synonyms gyvinimas Gus 81, sužmoninimas Kuz I 138, įasmeninimas Put 348, and the international term personifikacija. M. Gustaitis’s textbook (1927) uses the Lithuanian term gyvinimas, but the international term predominates. Z. Kuzmickis (1931) preferred the Lithuanian term sužmoninimas, while V. Mykolaitis-Putinas (1936) preferred įasmeninimas (cf. TŽŽe personifikacija – Latin persona ‘person’ + facio ‘I make’). Other sources from the 1930s record only the international term. Today, the synonym for the term personifikacija is the term used by V. Mykolaitis-Putinas, įasmeninimas (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 108; LEM 247).

The four-member synonym series also includes the Lithuanian synonyms įasmeninimas BizR 42, BizL 64, įgyvinėlis BiržD 80, įgyvinimėlis Nor 30 (cf. TŽŽe Greek prosōpopoiia ‘personification’) and the variable international term prozopopėja. M. Gustaitis regards prosopopoeia as ‘a higher degree of personification’ Gus 81. Most sources contain only the international term; no instances of exclusive use of a Lithuanian term were found. Of the authors who used either the international term or one of its Lithuanian synonyms, M. Biržiška (1923) and J. Norkus (1930) were the only ones to prefer the Lithuanian term. None of the three Lithuanian synonyms took hold (today, prozopopėja, see Zaborskaitė 1982: 108; LEM 247). Įasmeninimas, whose international synonym has an etymological meaning similar to that of personifikacijos, differs only in the origins of the terms (one Greek, the other Latin), became the designation for ‘personification’. The neologism įgyvinėlis is not the name of an action, unlike the other terms in this semantic group; moreover, its suffix gives it a diminutive, disparaging meaning, while įgyvinimėlis is also formed incorrectly.

186

Asta Mitkevičienė

Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

Thus, the term personification in the terminology of 1918–1940 is ambiguous, whereas in individual sources it is unambiguous.

The two-member synonym series includes the Lithuanian term humanization AGV 52 and the international term anthropomorphism. The concept designated by these terms is used only in the textbook by J. Ambrazevičius, J. Grinius and A. Vaičiulaitis (1939), where preference is given to the international term. Today, the international term anthropomorphization has become established in literary studies (see Zaborskaitė 1982: 108; LEM 247). Incidentally, it should be noted that during the period under study the variants humanization and humanizing designated different concepts: humanization (AGV), “anthropomorphism,” and humanizing (Kuz), “personification.” These concepts are quite close.

One or another author went even further in the direction of Lithuanianization. For example, in M. Biržiška’s textbook (1923), the terms metonymy and substituter BiržD 80 are used interchangeably, while J. Norkus’s textbook (1930), although dominated by metonymy, also gives the Lithuanian substitution Nor 29 (cf. TŽŽe Greek metonymia ‘name substitution’). J. Norkus’s Lithuanian synonym for the international term is formed systematically, but would be too vague for literary studies. M. Biržiška’s substituter is connotative and seems unsystematic in the collected material (on the other hand, this author may have tried to create his own system; cf. vivifier and others). In a later textbook (1925), M. Biržiška used only the term metonymy.

S. Čėšūnas (1925) greta termino metafora skliaustuose pateikė pernaša, priematas Čėš 24 (vyrauja tarptautinis). Abu lietuviški galūnių vediniai įtraukti į LKŽe (pavyzdžiai iš raštų): pernaša „3. perkėlimas, metafora“, priematas „2. primestas, prikergtas dalykas“, nors prirašytame pavyzdyje „Kiekvieną daiktą pristatykime mokinio akims tokį, koks jis yra, nepagražintą priematais, hiperbolėmis“ galime įžvelgti metaforos reikšmę.

M. Biržiškos vadovėlyje (1923) konkuruoja epitetas ir bendrašakniai sinonimai prievardėlis BiržD 84 ir prievardis BiržD 80, vyrauja diminutyvas. Šiuo atveju mažybinė diminutyvo reikšmė yra neutralizuota. J. Norkus (1930), nors ir teikė pirmenybę tarptautiniam terminui epitetas, kelis kartus taip pat pavartojo M. Biržiškos termino variantą prievardėlė Nor 27. Vėliau tiek M. Biržiška (1925), tiek J. Norkus (1931) vartojo tik tarptautinį terminą.

M. Gustaitis (1927) prie termino sinekdochė prirašė aprėpimas Gus 85, bet toliau vartojo tarptautinį terminą (plg. gr. synekdochē „sutalpinimas, vartojimas ne pagal apimtį“ (Koženiauskienė 1999: 225)).

Terminologija | 2014 | 21

187

J. Norkaus vadovėlyje (1930) tarptautinio termino ironija sinonimas yra patyčios Nor 32, kuris nėra tikslus, turi neigiamą konotaciją.

Concepts designated by established Lithuanian terms also have national equivalents of international terms in some other languages, for example, Russian повторение, сравнение, восклицание, олицетворение, and so on. This probably also influenced Lithuanian terminology.

In the sources under study, corresponding multi-word terms containing the component figure compete with single-word Lithuanian and international terms, e.g.: figure of apostrophe (address) Kuz I 22, figure of gradation Am 54, figure of omission BizL 76, figure of repetition BizR 47, BizL 71, Am 54 / figure of recurrence Am 76 and figure of repeating Kuz III 72, figure of calling BizR 51 and figure of exclamation BizL 77, Kuz III 63, figure of inquiry BizR 51 and figure of questioning BizL 77. The main component of these terms is, as it were, redundant and classificatory, and the two components are linked by a relation of ‘description by name’; however, it must be acknowledged that, when reading the text, the multi-word terms seem more ‘terminological’ and more conspicuous.

CONCLUSIONS

1. All borrowed names of figures and tropes used in the sources from 1918–1940 that were studied are international terms. They are mostly of Greek origin; only a few names of figures are Latin or French. More than a third of the international terms varied during the interwar period. Today, the variant of the term that was most frequent during the period under study has become established. The same variant was included in the 1936 dictionary of international words. Almost all international terms are still used today.

2. Nine concepts are designated exclusively by Lithuanian terms. Twenty-one terms are used for this purpose. The Lithuanian terms form one three-member, two four-member, and one five-member synonym series. Among the Lithuanian one-word synonyms, the term attested in the larger share of the sources spread and has survived to the present day.

3. In the sources from 1918–1940 studied, international terms had more than one Lithuanian synonym: alongside four two-member synonym series, there are six three-member and four four-member series of Lithuanian and international terms (14 synonym series in total). By formation, Lithuanian synonyms of international terms are mostly action nouns. None of the Lithuanian terms formed differently (parallelism, substituter, adverb, and others) became widespread. And, in general, of the international and

188

Asta Mitkevičienė

Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m.

literatūros mokslo darbuose

Of the Lithuanian synonyms, only the international term is generally used today, except for the established Lithuanian terms gradation and personification.

4. Although there are more Lithuanian one-word terms in this semantic group, if we proceed from the concept to the term, it becomes clear that fewer concepts are named by Lithuanian terms than by international terms (23 and 31, respectively). This is due to the abundance of synonymous Lithuanian terms. Thus, in the interwar period, Lithuanian terms were actively sought for naming certain international concepts. There were also efforts to Lithuanianize international terms more extensively (priematas, etc.), but this was characteristic of only a few source authors.

PRIMARY SOURCES

AG – Ambrazevičius J., Grinius J. Universal Literature 1. Third edition, Kaunas: Sakalas, 1938.

AGV – Ambrazevičius J., Grinius J., Vaičiulaitis A. Universal Literature 2. For secondary schools, with 62 illustrations. Second edition, Kaunas: Sakalas, 1939.

Am – Ambrazevičius J. Literary Theory. Poetics. For secondary schools. Fourth edition, Kaunas: Sakalas, 1938.

Birž – Biržiška M. History of Our Writings, 1547–1904, Kaunas: Švyturio b-vė, [1920].

Birž₂ – Biržiška M. History of Our Writings 1. Up to 1864. Second edition, Kaunas: Švietimo ministerijos knygų leidimo komisija, 1925.

BiržD – Biržiška M. A Handbook of Song Literature. 2nd, newly prepared edition, Kaunas–Vilnius: Švyturio b-vė, 1923.

BizL – Bizauskas K. Literary Theory. Textbook for higher schools. Third edition, Kaunas, 1922.

BizR – Bizauskas K. Theory of Writing and Literature 1, Kaunas: Ateities leidinys, 1918.

Čėš – Čėšunas S. Theory of Poetry and Prose. Textbook for secondary schools, Šiauliai: Kultūros b-vė, 1925.

DubB – Dubas V. Introduction to General Literature. A course of lectures delivered at the Higher Courses in Kaunas during the spring semester of 1920, Kaunas–Marijampolė: Dirvos b-vė, 1923.

DubL – Dubas V. Introduction to Literature. Second revised edition, Kaunas–Marijampolė: Dirvos b-vė, 1927.

DubP I, II – Dubas V. History of French Literature 1, 1929; 2, 1930, Kaunas: Publication of the Faculty of Humanities.

Er – Eretas J. History of German Literature 1, Kaunas: Publication of the Faculty of Theology-Philosophy of Vytautas Magnus University, 1931.

Gus – Gustaitis M. Stylistics. A textbook on literary theory. Second revised edition, Kaunas–Marijampolė: Dirvos b-vė, 1927.

Ieš – Iešmanta A., Iešmantienė M. [MirA]. History of Lithuanian Literature. With summaries of notable works, Kaunas–Marijampolė: Dirvos b-vė, 1923.

Kuz I, II, III, IV, V – Kuzmickis Z. Lithuanian Literature. A textbook for secondary schools. 1. Folklore, 1931; 2. Early Writings, Church Literature, and the Works of Donelaitis, 1932; 3. The First Half of the 19th Century (up to the Press Ban), 1932; 4. The Period of the Press Ban, 1933; 5. The 20th Century, 1934, Kaunas: Sakalo b-vė.

Miš – Miškinis M. Lithuanian Literature 1, Kaunas: Spaudos fondas, 1939.

Nor – Norkus J. Literary Theory. Basic principles of prose and poetry. For secondary schools. Third revised edition, Kaunas: Spaudos fondas, 1930.

NorV – Norkus J. Outlines of the History of World Literature, Kaunas: Knygnešio b-vė, 1931.

Pet I, II – Petkevičaitė-Bitė G. Textbook on the History of World Literature. 1. The East, 1922; 2. The Greeks, 1924. Following Dr. Karol Busse’s history of world literature and drawing on various other sources, G. Petkevičaitė wrote this work, Kaunas: Varpo b-vė.

Put – Mykolaitis-Putinas V. New Lithuanian Literature 1, Kaunas: Publication of the Faculty of Humanities, 1936.

Terminologija | 2014 | 21

189

Sr I, II – Sruoga B. History of Russian Literature 1, 1931; 2, 1933, Kaunas: Publication of the Faculty of Humanities of Vytautas Magnus University.

Šil – Šilčinskis V. History of Greek Literature 1. Classical Period: I Epic; II Lyric Poetry; III Drama, Kaunas: Publication of the Faculty of Humanities, 1938.

VžgA – Tumas-Vaižgantas J. Lectures on the Period of the Lithuanian Literature Ban. The Aušrininkai Group: J. A. Vištelis, M. D.-Silvestravičius, T. Žičkis, J. Myliusakis, Kaunas, 1924.

VžgB – Tumas J. Lectures on Lithuanian Literature. The Period of the Ban. Antanas Baranauskas, 1835–1902, Kaunas: Vaivos b-vė, 1924.

VžgV – Tumas J. Lectures on the Period of the Lithuanian Literature Ban. 1. Antanas Vienažindys; 2. Antanas Kriščiukaitis; 3. Ksaveras Sakalauskas; 4. Martynas Jankus, Kaunas, 1925.

Zaj – Zajančkauskas V. Lithuanian Literature Textbook (1400–1904). Revised edition, Vilnius, 1928.

LITERATŪRA

DLKG – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Antrasis pataisytas leidimas. Red. V. Ambrazas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 1996.

Koženiauskienė R. 1999: Retorika. Iškalbos stilistika, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.

KTŽ – Gaivenis K., Keinys S. Kalbotyros terminų žodynas, Kaunas: Šviesa, 1990.

LE 1940: Lietuviškoji enciklopedija 8, Kaunas: Spヲudos fondas.

LEM – Literatūros enciklopedija mokyklai. Sud. L. Mačianskaitė, D. Mitaitė, D. Pociūtė-Abukevičienė, D. Satkauskytė, Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas, 2011.

LKŽe – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas (I–XX, 1941–2002), elektroninis variantas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005. – www.lkz.lt

LTA – Literatūros teorijos apybraiža. Red. V. Kubilius, Vilnius: Vaga, 1982.

LTŽ 1962: Literatūros terminų žodynas. Sudarė J. Petronis, V. Vanagas, A. Zalatorius, Vilnius.

LŽ – Literatūros žinynas V–XII klasei. Parengė Č. Navakauskas, Kaunas: Šviesa, 2006.

Mitkevičienė A. 2007: Iš lietuvių literatūros mokslo terminijos istorijos: XIX amžius. – Terminologija 14, 110–124.

TŽŽ 1936: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Sud. K. Boruta, P. Čepėnas, A. Sirutytė-Čepėnienė, [Kaunas]: Spaudos fondas.

TŽŽe: Interleksis. Kompiuterinis tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Ats. red. A. Kinderys, Vilnius: Alma littera, 2002.

Vaskelienė J. 2007: Trumpas teksto lingvistikos žinynas, Šiauliai: VšĮ Šiaulių universiteto leidykla.

Vaskelienė J. 2013: Darbinių sinonimų, darbinių variantų ir paronimų panašumai bei skirtumai. – Žmogus ir žodis. Didaktinė lingvistika 15(1), 206–214.

Viliūnas G. 2003: Į žodžio meno gilumas: lietuvių literatūros mokslas XX amžiaus pirmoje pusėje. – Darbai ir dienos 36, 261–281.

VLE I – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija 1, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2001.

VLE XIX – Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija 19, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2011.

VTŽŽe – Vaitkevičiūtė V. Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas, Vilnius: Fotonija (e. leidimas), 2003.

Zaborskaitė V. 1982: Literatūros mokslo įvadas, Vilnius: Mokslas.

Župerka 2001: Stilistika. II pataisytas ir papildytas leidimas, Šiauliai: Šiaulių universitetas.

ЛЭТИ – Литературная энциклопедия терминов и понятий. Гл. ред. А. Н. Николюкин, Москва: НПК Интелвак, 2001.

ЭС 1902: Энциклопедический словарь 70. Ред. К. К. Арсеньев, О. О. Петрушевский, С.-Петербург: Типография Акц. Общ. Брокгаузъ – Ефронъ.

THE NAMES OF FIGURES AND TROPES IN THE WORKS OF LITERARY SCIENCE IN 1918–1940

The article deals with 77 one-word names of figures and tropes used in the works of the theory and history of literary science (26 in total) published in Lithuanian between 1918 and 1940 (period of independent Lithuania). Terms are analyzed in respect of origin and synonymy.

190

Asta Mitkevičienė

Figūrų ir tropų pavadinimai 1918–1940 m. literatūros mokslo darbuose

These conclusions are drawn:

1) All borrowings were international terms. More than one third of them had variants.

2) 9 concepts were named only by Lithuanian-origin terms. 21 terms were used for that purpose (they made from three to five synonymic lines) and the most popular terms are still used today.

3) International terms had from one to three Lithuanian synonyms (14 synonymic lines in total). Most Lithuanian synonyms of international terms were names of action in respect of derivation and terms of different expression were not established. From those international and Lithuanian synonyms now just the international ones are used except the Lithuanian terms laipsniavimas “gradation” and įasmeninimas “personification”.

4) Although the number of Lithuanian terms was greater than of international names of figures and tropes, the former named fewer concepts than the latter (respectively 23 and 31). That was due to numerous synonymy of Lithuanian terms which reflects attempts to name some international concepts with Lithuanian-origin terms. Some cases of excessive Lithuanianization are noticed, but that tendency was not widely spread in the sources investigated.

Gauta 2014-09-01

Asta Mitkevičienė

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius

E. paštas [email protected]

Terminologija | 2014 | 21

1 9 1