Mintys apie didelį kalbininką ir terminologą Joną Jablonskį 150-tų gimimo metinių proga

8 0 S. Keinys | thoughts about the great linguist and terminologist Jonas Jablonskis in the 150-ies... Thoughts on the great linguist and terminologist Jonas Jablonskis 150th anniversary of birth StaSySkEINyS Institute of Lithuanian Language At the very end of the 1930s, Vytautas the Great’s year, on December 30, the shait, Rygiškių Jonas) was celebrated without the anniversary person himself – on the evening of Sunday, February 23 of the same seventy years old. However, this anniversary, perhaps a turning point in the life of people, had to be year, “the greatest creator of our common language”, “the great man of language”1 passed away. 1 This is how J. Jablonski was described in the first issue (p. 5) of the newly launched journal of common language, Kalba, by the editor of the publication, Pr. Coffins. Photo from the Jablonski family archive. After all, if it were not for Jablonski’s textbooks, for his constant and clever corrections, it would be hard to imagine what literary language we would have now and how it would sound in school and in public life. Jonas Palionis Terminology | 2010 | 17 8 1, and on the eve of February 25, after being awakened for a day in Kaunas Basilica, his body lay in the pantheon graves of Vytautas Prospekt near Kazimieras Jaunius, Kazimieras Bogus and other great people of the nation2. J. Jablonski’s contributions to our language and linguistics are so great that, while still alive, he was called the father of the written Lithuanian language (that is how the common language was called at that time). This is how he was named in a 1922 proposal handwritten by K. Būga and signed with Vincas Krėve-Mickevičius and Eduardas Volteris for the promotion of J. Jablonskis to honorary professor of the University of Lithuania (Piročkinas 1978: 145). This honourable name is also used in the memoirs of his former pupil, the President of the Republic Antanas Smetona, which are included in the second notebook of the journal Kalba dedicated to the memory of the late. It says: "J. Jablonskis is not only the father of our common written language, but also the most famous reviver of the Lithuanian nation. Therefore, his life is interesting not only for a linguist, but also for a politician, a researcher of our revival. When he started his work, he found very few Lithuanians who understood the nation, and even fewer bright people – intelligents. Where-no-where3 they shone, as in the dark night of St. "John's Bugs" (Smetona 1930: 37). There is not the slightest doubt that J. Jablonskis was, is and will remain a friend of those people who have done the most in the times of the National Revival, each in his own bar and all with common determination, dedication, work and sacrifice of life. It is not by chance that he is mentioned together and always compared with the greats of the Revival. Dr. Viktoras Vaičiūnas, a neuropathologist and father of poet Judita Vaičiūnaitė, began his memoirs by mentioning that in 1927, when he was brought to the Nerve Diseases Clinic of the Military Hospital for the first time, J. Jablonskis “was placed in the same ward where he had been in 1924. "John Bates (1966)". Perhaps it was not by chance that the prelate John Mačiulis, the great Revival singer Maironis, had to hold mourning services for the deceased. And in the graves, among many other prominent speakers, the farewell speech was given by the President of the Republic "President" (Merkelis 1930: 36). J. Jablonskis is one of our most prominent educators (many people in the fields of science, culture, politics and other fields of the restored independent state were proud that they were his pupils or students even after decades had passed), a collaborator of the press from the very dawn (later even an employee for some time), a member of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences and Arts, a member of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences and Arts, a member of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Later, when the cemetery was destroyed, they were moved to Petrašiūnai. The spelling and language of 3 quotes and examples in the article have not been corrected. 8 2 S. Keinys | thoughts about the great linguist and terminologist Jonas Jablonskis in the 150th anniversary of his... His great merits for our fictional literature – he devoted much of his time to the work and troubles of editing, correcting, spacing and printing of the works of Žemaitė and other writers. In 1893, he came to work as a teacher of classical languages at the Mintauja (Jelgava in Latvian) gymnasium, and soon became known as a man engaged in scientific work. The Latvian linguist Ina Druviete wrote in her monograph about Karlas Muulenbachs that the rare example of his younger collaborator J. Jablonskis in the gymnasiums of the time perhaps encouraged this Latvian teacher to speak more boldly in linguistics and that Jablonskis provided Muulenbach with books, was a source of knowledge about Lithuanian dialects and Lithuanian life (Druviete 1990: 35). On the other hand, J. Jablonskis himself had something to learn from the much more vibrant, unrestricted by the press ban, Latvian cultural life and language standardization work. It is impossible to forget the extremely difficult circumstances in which J. Jablonski began the work of creating a common language. A language, which is denigrated, despised, pushed to destruction without any light, excluded from culture and science by its own nationals and foreigners, a nation which does not have even a primary school in its own language, is persecuted and punished for holding and reading any writing in Latin letters, with names of persons and places being polyamorous, rusified, Germanized. This was the everyday life of Lithuanian people during Jablonski’s childhood and youth. And he himself, for some Jan Jabloński, for others Иван Осипович Яблонскій [Ivan Osipovič Jablonskij], was born in the parish of Vladislavovo (that was then the official name of Naumiestis) (Piročkin 1974: 36–38). By the time of Jablonski’s work on the language, the dawn had already awakened the spirit of Lithuanianness in many readers, cultivated their love for the language, shown its importance and necessity for the whole life of the nation, but had not basically left the sociolinguistic considerations of the existence of the language. The work of J. Jablonski on linguistics and all activities related to language have a lasting value, because they begin a new, scientifically based stage of the creation and development of a common language. Although he was well acquainted with classical languages and was a pupil of Philip Fortunatov, Fyodor Korsh and others, the pioneers of Russian historical comparative linguistics of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, from whom he learned a lot and was blinded by them to study the Lithuanian language, J. Jablonskis devoted himself to synchronous language studies, to bringing the exemplary common (written) language into line or, in Arnold Pirochkine’s pictorial words, to clearing the way through the language jungle (Piročkinas 1978: 14), i.e., to the work of its composition, standardization, and development, and to bringing that language to maturity. J. Jablonskis entered the bar Terminology | 2010 | 17 8 3 There is no bar of common language where J. Jablonski has not left clearly visible footprints. By the way, he is the first and in many respects unrivalled driver of many of these bars. This was highlighted in an article published on the occasion of the first anniversary of the linguist’s death “J. Jablonskis“ Pranas Skardžius, writing that due to his penetrating sense of language and his ability to “separate the husk of language from the grain” he “was able to see many of our language laws earlier than others and to adapt them to common language; he was therefore the first to lay the foundations of our terminology, syntax and written language in general” (Skardžius 1931: 9). Thus J. Jablonski, among many other works, was the first to lay the foundations of our terminology. It is true that many would probably object, remembering that the foundations of our written terminology – both the terms themselves and their systems – were laid already in the 16th–17th centuries, and the work was also carried out by writers of later centuries. And J. Jablonskis entered this bar of language practice at the end of the 19th century, i.e., almost four and a half centuries after Martynas Mažvydas’ book, whose title page reads: “Katechismusa prasty Szadei, Makslas skaitima raschta yr giesmes del kriksczianistes bei del berneliu iaunu nauiey sugulditas Karaliavczvi VIII dena Meneses Sausia, Metu vszgimima Diewa M. D. XLVII. Soli Deo gloria”. Therefore, it is more accurate to say that Jablonski laid the foundations of the current general terminology of our language, both by creating a fundamentally unchanged understanding of what terminology should be, how it should be created, from where it should be taken, how it should be done, and by developing, arranging, if necessary, making terms of various fields himself and helping others to do so. of terminology from the very beginning of his work on the language, because when laying the foundations of the present common language, the most important means of communication that unifies the whole nation, and making it equal in its role and expression possibilities with the languages that have been developed since earlier, the work of creating and improving the technical language and its terminology cannot be left aside. Therefore, it is not surprising that already in the first heading of “Language Matters” in 1892, in an article published in the Varpa, among other things, he showed the correctness of the words and terms tardyti, tardymas and tardytojas, proposed the use of the words valdininkas, viršininkas, prekymetis, velionis, rather than the hybrid urėdninkas, the valuable term metturgis and the borrowed nabašninkas, proposed the substitution of the impossible vedic writer with the correctly made words of different meanings writer and raštininkas, defended the borrowed terms redaktorius and gubernija, cursing the use of the allegedly Lithuanian rėdytojas, rėdyba, and 8 4 S. Keinys | thoughts about the great linguist and terminologist Jonas Jablonskis in the 150-ties... etc. (JR IV 12–18). The great educator of language has made meaningful changes in terms, even correcting not vocabulary at all, but other things. For example, in an article published in 1927 about the language of the Farmer’s Adviser’s newspaper („Ir vėl laikraštinės kalbos dalykai“), in the syntax correction part of the sentence importuoti veisliniai paukščiai he replaced the participant with the Lithuanian adjective atvežtiniai, and the term of beekeeping magazine frames he made clearer and more Lithuanian – sėndėliniai hielio rėmai (JR V 165–167), thus at the same time showing that rural people and not only them need to write as understandable as possible, and therefore more Lithuanian. Many terms were corrected in the last article, published in the first Language Notebook in 1930, entitled „Materials of Newspaper Language”, e.g.: duchosiškija, duchosiškiai (= clergymen), kariškiai (= soldiers), canonical rights (= canons, canonical rights), the completion of the concordat (= the execution of the concordat), charitable society (= charitable society, lãbdaros society), patriotic education (= patriotic education), abstention from voting (= not voting), etc. (JR V 223–225). In his articles and short articles on language, in his reviews of textbooks and other publications over almost four decades, J. Jablonskis has corrected more than a thousand terms, removing from our terminology barbarisms and other unnecessary borrowings, hybrids and values, vague, opaque and therefore inappropriate for terms used words or new creations, as well as incorrectly made constructions. On the other hand, he proposed no fewer terms in the aforementioned writings and other works, and it seems that most of these proposals have firmly grown into our terminology, in many cases forming its nucleus. By means of the terms proposed at the same time, and not so rare (as is often said) as the jackets, but in places even with flattering remarks and explanations, if necessary, the readers of the articles are taught to take terms primarily from people, i.e. living language, or if necessary to do as those same people are used to doing with words. And how many and what terms were corrected and offered in a live word to people working in various fields who asked for his advice or help, no one will ever count. A very valuable part of our great terminologist’s legacy is the friend’s school of work. For serious and fruitful work on terminology is not possible without knowledge of the subject, even a good knowledge of it, and without a perfect mastery of the language, a sense of its spirit. As a result, there is usually little that a single person can do here. In addition, it is very useful to discuss the proposed terms more broadly, to consider that they are suitable not only for selectors or compilers. J. Jablonski will be happy to consult with specialists in other fields and with linguists on the issue of terms. Terminology | 2010 | 17 8 5 ninkais. This is evidenced by the meetings held at the beginning of the 20th century on the language, syntax and other terms of faith. During the First World War (then called the Great War), Lithuanian teachers of Lithuanian war refugee schools in the Russian city of Voronež (they taught in Russian) discussed and adopted terms for various school subjects, prepared Lithuanian textbooks (and Jablonskis urged them to do this, having himself prepared a reading book for the Vargo school, our dictionary, written the Lithuanian language grammar published in Vilnius in 1919, translated the arithmetic textbook), preparing the way for future Lithuanian schools. From the memories of the participants in those discussions it is clear that the most important person and leader was the teacher J. Jablonskis (see Mašiotas 1930: 48, Žemaitis 1956: 34–36; for more details see Piročkinas 1978: 136–139). The work on terminology carried out in Voronezh, and perhaps earlier, is to some extent shown by the aforementioned dictionary published in that city in 1918. Vargo mokyklos4 supplement, which was composed (written in the dictionary collected) by Rygiškių Jonas (this is the favorite pseudonym of J. Jablonskis after the recovery of the press). This glossary contains, among other words, a good range of terms from various fields. Most of these terms have firmly grown into our common language and are known since school days and used when necessary by practically all Lithuanian people. By the way, many of these terms have taken the place of so-called international words (and terms). Here are a handful of such dictionary terms, the earliest or one of the earliest sources of which are recorded in the Great Lithuanian Dictionary: akhratas „горизонтъ“, ūdntspaudas „печать“, apskaitė „отчетъ“ (Now I am writing the account of income and expenses), ašaggalis „poliusъ (земли)“, atėminỹs „вы читаете мое“, atėmtės „вычитаніе (action)“, atógrąža „тропикъ“, atóstogos „отпускъ (для отдыха), каникулы“, ãtšvaitas „рефлекторъ“, ãtvaizdas „portretъ“, bendrovė „tovarištė, visuomenė“, braižýba „черченіе (art)“, brėžinỹs „čertežy“, dabità „franтъ“, daigýnas „pitomnikė“, dalýba „dѣленіе (action)“, dalytoja „dѣлитель (action number)“, dalinytoja „dѣлимое“, dalmuõ „частное (action number)“, daugyba „умножение (action number)“, dauginỹs „множимое“, deguonės (oxygen) „кислородъ“, dienóvidinis „меридіанъ“, dùjos „gazy, gazъ“, eilėraštis „стихотвореніе“, esm „суть, сущность“, grýnanglis „karbonas“, ėstaiga „užsiėmimas“ (science, work activity), kainų lentelė „preiskurantė“, kūryba „(art) making; 4 for the Vargo school.The collection of camp teachers for the purpose of language science is published in two books, composed by J. Jablonski. The first edition was published in 1916 in Petrozavodsk. 8 6 S. Keinys | thoughts about the great linguist and terminologue Jonas Jablonskis 150-ties... творчество“ (nations, lithuanian k ū r ý b a ), ledýnas „глетчеръ“, liemẽnė „жилетъ“, lyginamasis svoris „удѣльный вѣсъ“, lyginỹs „половина уравненія“, mãstas „масштабъ“, núovada „участокъ“, pasakčia „басня“, patvarà „выдержка, стойкость“, piešinỹs „рисунокъ; очеркъ (Drawing; charcoal pen ỹ s )”, pencil “карандашъ”, pen “пеналъ”, phrase “оборотъ, конструкція (statement)”, equator “экваторъ”, letter “письменный знак”, phenomenon “явленіе, выраженіе (Language, electric field not everybody notices. algebra r e i š k i n ỹ s )”, sentence “про изве деніе (number of actions)”, notebook “тетрадь”, number “счетъ”, sa vival dýbė “самоуправленіе”, concept “понятіе”, numerator “числителъ” (fraction number), digit “цыфра”, print “printed publication”, mirror “полярный кругъ”, composition “сложіе”; со ставъ“, tapatybė „тождество“, tapýba „живопись“, tapinỹs „kas tapoma, nutapyta“, teptùkas „кисточка, кисть“, trùpmena „дробь“ (trupmenos p à pr a s to s i o s ir d e š i mt a esten n ė s), tvarkyklis „регуляторъ“, vadýba „вѣ домство“ (Kelių v a d ý b o j e tarnavo), vaizduõtė „воображение“, vandenën lis „во дородъ“, vardėklis „denominatorius“ (trupmenos v a r d ė k l i s ), žemynas „ма teriкъ“ and žiedinỹs „гончарное издѣліе“. Soon this term was included in many textbooks, dictionaries and collections of terms in mathematics and other fields published in Lithuania. The glossary included in Samuel Smails’s translation booklet Duty and Straightness, published in 1924, is also important for the rise of our current terminology. It explains “about two hundred words and expressions of language not always easy for the reader, used in this and other writings of this kind” (p. 34). These are mainly terms and words of ethics. And from this dictionary, as from our dictionary, a selection of terms is presented here, e.g.: asmenỹbė (asmenýbė) „Persönlichkeit; ličnost’“, beýdis, -dė and beýdiškas, -ka „without flaws, without defects, without meaning“ (He is a beidís, a beidís and all his life), dorópročiai, -čių „the habits of virtue (virtue)“, doróvė „Sittlichkeit; morality; nravstvennost’, honour-seeking (and honour-loving) “honorable (ga r b a n õr is), - r ė, a man who seeks honour; honour, desire for honor; ambitious man, ambition; čestoliubivec, -liubije“5, ättaiga “whispers, inspiration; vnušenije (confirmation)“, nedoróvė „unsittlichkeit; immorality; beznravstvennost’“, núotaika „Gemütsstimmung; 5 By the way, in the Lithuanian dictionary the word garbianõris, -rė with the distinction garbanõris is not included at the very beginning of the explanation of the desire for honor and in the examples of use; in both editions of the first volume the first pronunciation difference presented in this dictionary is not included asmenỹbė. Terminology | 2010 | 17 8 7 raspoloženije ducha“, “a person who is able (and will continue) to perform his duties” (Pa r e g i n i n k a s sees to it that others will also perform their duties duly)6, patvarà „the ability to endure for a long time“, pótroškis „a great desire for something (a desire to do something)“, preposition „Anhänglichkeit; priviazannost’”, sjenntūra, sjenntūris “Enthaltsamkeit; vozderžanije, vozderžnost’, vozderžannost’ (abstinencija)“, ssuntvarka „Verfassung, Ordnung; stroj, ustrojstvo“, savujstaba „Selbstbeobachtung; samonabliudenije“, tėvyniẽtis, -tė „Landsmann...“; sootečestvennik, -nica; a person of the same t ė v y n ė s (one country with whom), governýsena „Regierungsform; sposob pravlenija“, visúomeninkas, -kė „social actor, -ja“, žemiẽtis, -tė „a person of the same land, of the same land with whom; Compatriot; zemliak, zemec’. There is no reason to doubt that J. Jablonskis has contributed most to the entry of all the words from both dictionaries into our common language and its terminology and acquisition. It is more difficult to determine which of these words are truly his own. However, for a person well acquainted with the language and other writings of the linguist, it is quite clear that he was a great, and at the time the greatest, master of words. This arose from a constant desire to know the language of dialects and spoken language, folklore, the best writers really well and extensively, and therefore to have a sense of the Lithuanianness of the language, the so-called spirit of the language, which was simply exceptional not only in the circumstances of that time, but especially in the first decades of the 20th century, and at the same time, by adapting the pre-dialectal words of the textbook of Lithuanian grammar (1901) to writers and readers, to be able to distinguish many foreign words and “a considerable number of phenomena that pollute the language of our people”, in other words, to separate the garbage of the language from the grain, because “grammaticians only need to consume the grain of the language of people” (Kriaušaitis 1901: 1). The latter was greatly helped by his good philological education, knowledge of classical languages and more than one new language. The whole life of J. Jablonski as a linguist was on the path of the knowledge of the language and the recognition of its garbage. Therefore, the further, the more the words he used and gave were so suited to mark the concepts mentioned that it is not easy to say whether it is a word and term he heard somewhere, or found in the writings, or made himself. Most of them have no signs of individuality, even clear formations do not appear to be new formations. And these words are not only included in the dictionaries he himself prepared, but are also scattered in his numerous writings both on language and on other fields and matters of social life, finally this6 In this word, apparently, the meanings of “man of duty” and the current official will coincide. 8 8 S. Keinys | thoughts about the great linguist and terminologue Jonas Jablonskis in the 150-ies... pages, edited by others, or in the live words to those who listened or asked for advice. How clearly, simply and vividly J. Jablonskis wrote to people is clearly seen from his booklet Kolera artinas – pasisaugokite!7, published in 1908 as an supplement to the newspaper Viltis (Merkelis 1931: 24), two excerpts of which are included here. 1) Cholera is a terrible Asian disease. From Asia, its native land, it sometimes comes to Europe and kills its people. In fact, it is not often that the Lithuanian people have been affected by it, but it has been for quite some time. It will have been almost a hundred years since she first visited the land of ours... (p. 1). 2) How to recognize cholera? A person with cholera has diarrhea, it makes him loose. His stools are getting thinner and thicker. In addition, a person begins to vomit, the legs are pulled by feces. Sopuli goes big; a man can't stand it, screaming screaming. A few hours pass, and the patient changes completely: the eye becomes swollen, the nose becomes pointed, the whole body appears very lean; skin bluish, freezing. The sick man desires to drink, but cannot get drunk, because everything he drinks, he immediately vomits out (p. 3). Only one other thing about spelling (genders piauna, mūssų, skįstyn, akįs now written pjauna, mūsų, skystyn, akys) for someone who teaches the non-internet-telephone current “spelling”, and also the adverb senai, in the place of which almost everyone is now accustomed or taught to use seniai, shows that not everything written by the author of that booklet is written as he himself began to write a little later and is now taught. And otherwise it is the most perfect and correct language of these days, although it was written over a hundred years ago. It is a pleasure to read Jablonski’s written and edited or corrected texts – the subject is clear, easy to understand, and the language is fluent, accurate, without incomprehensible words and statements. He was well acquainted with the powers of language, knew how to use its means himself, and, while correcting the language of others, did not restrict the variety of thought expression. In his numerous articles on language education, J. Jablonskis not only corrected failed terms, but also expressed general ideas about what terms should be and how artificial terminology work should be8. First of all, these ideas arose from the pre-established general principles of language management and education, a certain ideal of a common language, in his term – written language, i.e., an understanding of what the language must be like so that, while remaining truly Lithuanian, it would best satisfy the communication needs of society in all cases of the life of the nation and later of its state. 7 Many thanks to my colleague Palmira Zemlevičiūtė, who provided the text of this publication. 8 For more details, see the article “Overview of Lithuanian terminology creation (before 1940)”, published in Kalbotyros XVIII t. (1967 m.), 21-25 p.