Teisės terminai su šaknimi „teis-“ 1918–1940 m. Lietuvos kodeksuose

Legal terms with the root teis in the Lithuanian Codes of 1918–1940 ALVYDAS UMBRASAS Institute of the Lithuanian Language The word teisė (law) may be considered the most important term for the field it names. There are also many other derivationally related terms in law with the root teis-. Terms containing this root are the subject of this article. The material for the study was collected from unofficial Lithuanian translations of Russian codes that were in force in Lithuania between 1918 and 1940. Before beginning to collect the material, it was expected that there would be quite a large number of terms containing the root teis- in the codes under study, and this expectation was amply confirmed: more than 600 terms were found (26 were single-word terms; the rest were compounds, i.e. at least one of their words contained the aforementioned root). This amounts to approximately one ninth of all the legal terms used in the codes. All terms or their constituents used in the system under discussion that contain the root teis- are derivatives either of the adjective teisus (‘just, fair’) or of the verb teisti (‘to judge’), although not necessarily directly; that is, there may be several derivational stages, the first (structurally lowest) of which begins with the words mentioned above. There are, however, cases in which the derivational chain is not entirely clear. In the article, the terms are divided into groups, formed mainly on the basis of particular derivatives or their base words, while also taking account of lower derivational stages. 1. THE ADJECTIVE TEISUS AND ITS DERIVATIVES Just and justice The adjective teisus (‘just, fair’) is the derivational basis for a large group of legal terms, but it was itself rarely used as a constituent of a term in the codes under study, and then with more than one meaning. Abstract nouns formed from this adjective were found: teisumas CP₃₁ᵥ 811 and its negative counterpart neteisumas CP₃₁ᵥ 811. In the instances cited, they are used with the meanings ‘correctness’ and ‘incorrectness’ (in the original: правильность, неправильность; incidentally, in CT₃₈ the equivalents are taisyklingumas and netaisyklingumas), but there were also other uses: in the terms teisus reikalavimas BS₁₉ Terminologija | 2006 | 13 97 165, BS31 165, unlawful obligation BS19 46, BS31 46, unlawfulness of possession CĮ33 530, according to current understanding, what is meant is “lawfulness” or “unlawfulness”; cf. also usage in the senses “acquitted,” “accused”: the rightful party CTĮ38 133 T, the wrongful party CTĮ38 133 T. The aforementioned terms in BS19 and BS31 had already been appropriately replaced in BS34 with unlawful claim, unlawful obligation. In present-day codes, right, rightness are not used at all. Perhaps it is not important to designate rightness in codes, especially since this concept is also partly assigned to the field of ethics. Just and justice Only one compound term was found with the adjective right, formed from the adjective just: false accusation BPI33 32. There was some fluctuation in translating the original неправильное обвинение, as earlier translations contain the inaccurate-in-this-context unlawful accusation BPI24 32, BPI30 32. The codes also used the single-word term justice CTĮ38 1460/32, BS34 4 R, and the compound terms resistance to justice BS34 616 P, statutory justice BS34 57 T, Minister of Justice CĮ33 379. Justice is an important legal term. Both formerly and today, it is not unambiguous, that is, it is understood both as a criterion for evaluating people's conduct based on morality (cf. the principle of justice alongside the principle of good faith and the principle of reasonableness used in present-day codes) and as the activity of courts (cf. to administer justice). Law The adjective right should be considered the basis for the formation of the word for law. From the earliest written records, teisė was used as the name of a quality, with the meanings “rightness,” “justice,” and “truth” (LKŽ; Palionis 2004: 484; Ambrazas 2000: 38), and acquired the meaning we understand today considerably later. From a synchronic perspective, possible derivational links between the term under discussion and the verb teisti (“to judge”) should not be ruled out (cf. Pakerys 1994: 214). It is precisely the relationship between these concepts that legal scholars draw attention to. It is argued that law arose from the administration of justice and is linked to the word teisti (“to judge”); it is said that “a judge—the person empowered to judge—is the principal and true interpreter of the essence of law” (Vaišvila 2000: 111). As early as the old written sources, for example K. Sirvydas, the modern meaning of “law” was expressed by the word tiesa (which also had the meanings “case,” “statute,” “court”— 1 Interestingly, according to current understanding, the meanings of law and truth were opposites: teisė meant “truth” (prawda, veritas), whereas tiesa meant “law” (prawo, ius) (SD₁: 139; see also Palionis 2004: 484, 488). 98 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... mes; SD₁: 139, 172, 208). Historically, the word teisė ‘law’ is associated with tiesus ‘straight’ (Būga 1958: 110). In many languages, teisė ‘law’ is expressed by the same words that also mean straightness or a straight line; cf. Russian правый, Latin rectus, German recht, English right, French droit, Spanish derecho, Greek orthos (Maksimaitis 1988: 21). The very concept of law is associated with straightness: “L a w i s a s t r a i g h t p a t h, leading individuals and society to perfection and happiness” (Maliauskis 1924: 29). In the opinion of legal scholar A. Vaišvila, teisė ‘law’ began to be used only at the beginning of the 20th century, after the lifting of the press ban. He links the appearance of the root teis- instead of ties- to the history textbook Istorija abelna, published in America in 1904 (where t e i s d a r i š k a įstatymas ‘legal law’ was used), although this book also contains traditional usage: instead of civilinė teisė ‘civil law’, it uses civiliškos tiesos ‘civil truths’ (Vaišvila 2000: 107). Yet as early as the mid-19th century S. Daukantas used teisidarys in the sense of ‘judge’ (as was later also done in “Aušra”), whereas K. Sirvydas still had tiesadarys (LKŽ; Skardžius 1996: 592, 593). Thus, the root teis- appeared earlier in a compound relevant to law, although K. Būga wrote of teisė itself in 1907: “teisė was introduced into the written language only three years ago” (Būga 1958: 109). That same year J. Šlapelis still explained teisė ‘law’ with the word tiesa ‘truth’ (SNŽŽ 1907), while in J. Norkus’s dictionary (SNŽŽ 1924), teisė ‘law’ was still among the “unintelligible words,” though it no longer had any other equivalents. It cannot be said that tiesos ‘truths’ had completely disappeared from the 1918–1940 codes. The word was used more in the senses of ‘court’ and ‘justice’, for example: to hide a person from the t i e s o s BS₁₉ 167, t i e s o s work BS₁₉ 158 (правосудие ‘administration of justice’). In the latter instance, the two-word term as a whole means ‘justice’. Likewise, tiesa ‘truth’ occurred in fixed constructions where the original has привлечь к суду: summon to court BS₁₉ 167, bring to t i e s o n CTI₃₈ 207, CI₃₃ 677 S, BPI₃₃ 1, summon to t i e s o n CI₃₃ 168, BS₁₉ 307, drag to t i e s o n CTI₃₈ 206, BS₃₄ 156 R, BPI₃₃ 36. Here tiesa is closely related to the modern sense of ‘liability’; in some phrases tiesa is also used instead of ответственность ‘liability’: summon to disciplinary t i e s o n BS₁₉ 159, bring to criminal t i e s o n BPI₃₃ 27 S. Modern law has several established constructions with the illative case of liability (bring someone to administrative, criminal, disciplinary, or material liability); they are used in thousands of documents (Vladarskienė 2003: 50). The codes of that period also had (to) bring to liability CTI₃₈ 1309, BS₃₄ 155 T, BPI₃₀ 528; it is interesting, however, that J. Jablonskis did not like this phrase. As early as 1912, he compared bring to liability with Polish pociągnęli do odpowiedzialności and corrected it as follows: t i e s o n, t i e s o s n a g a n paėmė, paimdino, padavė, indavė (Jablonskis 1935: 95). In 1925, when assessing V. Krėvė’s Terminologija | 2006 | 13 99 Skirgaila’s language, J. Jablonskis allowed patraukti atsakomybėn teisė ‘bring to liability’ (already without tiesos ‘truth’) only į imti nagan (Jablonskis 1935: 335). The motivation was phraseological rather than terminological, and so the proposed expression did not catch on. The codes under study used terms in both singular and plural forms: teisė CT₃₈ 15/1, BP₃₃ 1194 S and teisės CT₃₃ 144, CT₃₈ 2, BS₁₉ 334. The term has the meanings ‘the system of justice and its study’ and ‘a possibility permitted by the system of justice’. Some terms can be used with either meaning, for example: autoriaus teisė CT₃₃ 695/1, CT₃₈ 217 (autoriaus teisės BS₁₉ 620, autorių teisės BP₃₃ 297 S), civilinė teisė CT₃₃ 413 S, CT₃₈ 1 S, BS₃₄ 43 S (civilinės teisės CT₃₃ 35, CT₃₈ 1 T). In this case, grammatical number distinguishes the meanings, but this is not a criterion for distinction. Terms with the same meaning were sometimes used in different numbers—here, the distinction or non-distinction between tiesos ‘truth’ and tiesų ‘truths’, inherited from earlier usage, may also have exerted an influence (cf. the phrase tiesų mokslas ‘science of truths’, cited in LKŽ from pre-war texts, and the modern teisės mokslas ‘legal science’). In some cases, the context may be too limited to make clear which meaning the term has. A great many types of legal terms were found in the codes—about 200 in all (of which approximately 120 are two-word terms). Terms with the first of the meanings mentioned above are few, for example: baudžiamoji teisė BS₃₄ 513 T, imperatyvinė teisė BS₃₄ 1 T, kanonų teisė BS₃₄ 465 R, obligacinė teisė CT₃₃ 568 (prievolių teisė CT₂₈ 568), policinė teisė BP₃₃ 1 P, procesinė teisė CT₃₈ 1 T (procedūrinė teisė CT₃₃ 1084 T, BP₃₃ 73 P), revoliucinių ir perversminių imperatyvinių precedentų teisė BS₃₄ 1 T, statutinė teisė BS₃₄ 1 T, tarptautinė teisė BS₃₄ 5 R, viešoji teisė CT₃₃ 413 S, CT₃₈ 1 S (viešosios teisės BP₃₃ 905 S), materialinė civilinė teisė CT₃₃ 531 T, CT₃₈ 29 T. The parentheses indicate terms differing in number or wording but designating essentially the same or a very similar concept in the codes. The full range of legal terms is presented below (with perhaps one or two exceptions, these are terms in the second sense). The terms are classified by the number of components: two-word (a), three-word (b), four-word (c), and longer (d): a) absolute law BS₃₄ 4 R, right of appeal CP₃₄ 778, CT₃₈ 166 (appellate law CT₃₃ 778), right of defense BP₃₃ 159 T, right of appeal BP₃₃ 277/1 T, personality rights BS₃₁ 502 (personal rights BS₃₁ 502, CT₃₃ 225 T, CT₃₈ 1368, estate rights BS₃₄ 25, citizen’s rights CP₃₄, CT₃₈ 45, BS₃₄ 4 R, civil rights CT₃₈ 45, CP₃₄ 77), right of rejection BP₃₃ 238/1 P, CT₃₈ 69, right of recourse CP₃₄ 128/1 (right of recourse CP₃₄ 128/1), right of withdrawal CT₃₃ 555 T, right to stand CT₃₃ 1123 (right of standing CT₃₃ 156, right of representation CT₃₃ 1127 T), autonomous right CT₃₃ 420 T, common right CT₃₃ 555 100 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su saknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... T. right of the indigent BPI₃₈ 976 P, right of emphyteusis CĮ₃₈ 514 S, CTĮ₃₈ 409 T (rights of emphyteusis CTĮ₃₈ 81 T), right in rem CĮ₃₈ 387 S, economic rights BS₃₄ 58 T, right of extraterritoriality CTĮ₃₈ 225 S, BS₁₉ 5/4, BPI₃₈ 361, rights of honor BPI₃₈ 6 S, kinship rights CĮ₃₃ 144 S, right of defense BS₃₄ 45 T, rights to life BPI₃₃ 6 S, right of action CPI₃₁₇ 7, CTĮ₃₈ 4 S, pledge right CTĮ₃₈ 1201/1, pledgee’s rights CĮ₃₈ 1642 S, inventory right CTĮ₃₈ 1750, inheritance rights CĮ₃₈ 132 T, CTĮ₃₈ 161/3, BPI₃₈ 3 S, mortgage rights CTĮ₃₈ 1097, law of evidence BPI₃₃ 73 S, right of survivorship CĮ₂₈ 560 (prescriptive right CĮ₃₃ 560), statutory right CTĮ₃₈ 262, exclusive right CĮ₂₈ 433 (private right CĮ₃₃ 433, private rights BPI₃₃ 905 S), neighbor’s right CPI₃₁₀ 34, CTĮ₃₈ 29 T, CĮ₃₃ 442 T (rights of neighborliness CPI₃₁₇ 29, CTĮ₃₈ 34), riparian right CĮ₃₃ 428 (shore rights CĮ₃₃ 428 S, border rights CĮ₂₈ 428), guaranteed right BS₃₄ 607 T (guaranteeable right BS₃₄ 607 T), temporal right CĮ₃₃ 521 T, rights of liberty BPI₃₃ 6 S, right of permission CĮ₃₃ 695/10, substantive law CTĮ₃₈ 1273 T (substantive law CĮ₃₃ 1084 T, CTĮ₃₈ 1 T), women’s rights BS₃₄ 58 T, right of use CPI₃₁₀, CTĮ₃₈ 32/1, CĮ₃₃ 514 (right to use CPI₃₁₀ 32/1, CTĮ₃₈ 212, CĮ₃₃ 387 T), right of inability to pay BS₁₉ 161 (right of poverty CĮ₃₃ 2326 S, CTĮ₃₈ 190, BPI₃₃ 177), non-temporal right CĮ₃₃ 514 S, lease rights CTĮ₃₈ 81 T, ownership right CĮ₃₃ 387 S, CPI₃₁₇ 73, CTĮ₃₈ 73, BS₃₄ 581 R, BPI₃₃ 27 (ownership rights CTĮ₃₈ 81 T, rights of property CPI₃₁₀ 73), right of promise CĮ₂₈ 1629 S, right of inheritance CĮ₂₈ 132 S (heritable right CĮ₃₃ 1123 S, hereditary rights CĮ₃₃ 132/15), right of delegation CĮ₃₃ 2329 S, right of precedence CĮ₃₃ 1301 T (right of priority CTĮ₃₈ 814/5, right of firstness CPI₃₁₇ 814/5), political rights BS₃₄ 58 T, right of passage BS₃₄ 507 T, commercial law CTĮ₃₈ 409 S, right of supervision BPI₃₃ 277 P, professional rights BS₃₄ 2 R, right of ordering CĮ₂₈ 541 (right of ranking CĮ₃₈ 541), right of claim CTĮ₃₈ 4 S, marriage rights CTĮ₃₈ 1625 (marital rights BS₁₉ 29), mutual right CTĮ₃₈ 1345/9, servitude right CĮ₃₃ 420 T (right of servitude CTĮ₃₈ 1496, rights of servitudes CĮ₃₃ 432), right of building CĮ₃₃ 542/2, sovereign right BS₃₄ 639 T, health rights BPI₃₃ 6 S, family rights CĮ₃₃ 1, CTĮ₃₈ 1625, BS₁₉ 29, service rights CTĮ₃₈ 1 T, right to dispose BS₃₄ 571 R (right to manage BS₃₄ 571 R), right to inheritance CĮ₃₃ 1104 PT, right to obtain credit CĮ₃₃ 2326 S, right to trade BS₁₉ 198 (right to engage in commerce BS₃₄ 198), right to arrest BPI₃₃ 8 P, right to marry CĮ₃₃ 12 S, right to possess CPI₃₁₇ 73, CTĮ₃₈ 73, BS₁₉ 255 (right of holding CĮ₃₃ 514 S, right of possession CPI₃₁₇ 73, CTĮ₃₈ 32/1, CĮ₃₃ 387 T, rights of possession CĮ₂₈ 1325), holder’s rights CĮ₃₃ 1325, property rights CĮ₃₃ 574 S, BS₁₉ 29, BPI₃₃ 6 S, proprietary right CĮ₃₃ 420 (property-improving right CĮ₂₈ 420), right of mortgage CĮ₃₃ 1667 S, subjects’ rights BS₁₉ 9; b) perpetual right of emphyteusis CTĮ₃₈ 333 S (perpetual rights of emphyteusis CĮ₃₃ 387 T), perpetual lease rights CĮ₃₃ 387 T, CTĮ₃₈ 1400 V, rights of personal status CPI₃₁₇ 370 (civil status rights CTĮ₃₈ 497, civic status rights CTĮ₃₈ 370, estate-status rights BPI₃₃ 975/1 V, estate-position rights BS₁₉ 25), right of separate participation CĮ₃₈ 542/2 Terminologija | 2006 | 13 101 (right of extraordinary participation C₁₂₈ 441, private participation right CT₃₈ 29, private participation right C₁₃₃ 542/2, CT₃₈ 73 S), right of separate possession CT₃₈ 1171, common indivisible right CT₃₈ 483 (common undivided right CP₃₁V 483), right of common holding C₁₃₃ 543 (right of common possession C₁₂₈ 543, common ownership rights BS₃₄ 547 R, right of common ownership C₁₃₃ 543), rights of common servitudes C₁₃₃ 434 S, owner’s right in rem C₁₃₃ 1691 T, partial right of the indigent BP₁₃₃ 976 P, rights of natural persons C₁₃₃ 698 S, statutory mortgage right CT₃₈ 1527 P, exclusive ownership right C₁₃₃ 543 T, defendant’s right of defense BP₁₃₃ 174 P, temporarily deprived rights BP₁₃₃ 975/1 P, rights of a private tutor BS₁₉ 30/7, incomplete ownership right C₁₃₃ 432, permanently deprived rights BP₁₃₃ 975/1 P, lessee’s obligatory right C₁₃₃ 1691 T, right to the last word BP₁₃₃ 748 S, civic honor rights BP₁₃₃ 975/1 P, full ownership right C₁₃₃ 463 S (full ownership right C₁₃₃ 424), purchase-and-sale rights C₁₃₃ 1642 T, right to preferential remuneration CT₃₈ 1215, right of first purchase C₁₃₃ 542/26 (right of prior purchase C₁₂₈ 542/26), presumed right of possession C₁₃₃ 531 T, private ownership right C₁₃₃ 421, rights of joint creditors C₁₃₃ 1548 S, right to enter into contracts C₁₃₃ 2102 (right to make transactions C₁₃₃ 2102), right to redeem property CT₃₈ 1442, right to litigate in court CT₃₈ 584, right to appoint a representative BP₁₃₃ 1186 S, right to obtain found property C₁₃₃ 539 S, right to defend oneself in court C₁₃₃ 543 S, right to inheritance C₁₃₃ 1104 PT, right under laws CP₃₁V 262, right to use an object C₁₃₃ 420 T, right to use amenities C₁₃₃ 464, right to file a suit CP₃₁C 7 (right to bring an action C₁₃₃ 1509 S, CT₃₈ 7), right to use a weapon BS₃₄ 45 T, right to engage in commerce BS₁₉ 218, BP₁₃₃ 34 T, judge’s right of recusal BP₁₃₃ 238/1 P, state ownership right C₁₃₃ 421, full right of the indigent BP₁₃₃ 976 P; c) right of ownership of immovable property C₁₃₃ 420, right of pardon of the President of the Republic BS₃₄ 72 V, BP₁₃₃ 945 V, right to restore the rights of a convicted person BP₁₃₃ 945 V, right to preferential remuneration CT₃₈ 1215 S, right to a life interest BP₁₃₃ 34 S, right to engage in pharmacy BS₁₉ 198, right to undertake monetary loans C₁₃₃ 186, right to practice medicine BS₁₉ 195 (right to engage in medical practice BS₃₁ 195), right to work as a pharmacist BS₁₉ 202, right to transfer property through judicial proceedings CT₃₈ 1793, ancestral and inherited right C₁₃₃ 420, right of possession and use C₁₃₃ 432 (right of holding and use C₁₂₈ 432): d) life-tenancy right of possession CT₃₈ 81 T (right of holding for life C₁₃₃ 533), right of an outsider to participate in the amenities of property, right to participate in the use and amenities of another’s property C₁₃₃ 432, right to recover one’s property from another’s possession CT₃₈ 1 T, right to undertake an obligation for monetary loans C₁₂₈ 186, right to freely arrange one’s property C₁₃₃ 2 Formal criteria are applied—prepositions and conjunctions are also considered constituents (words). As information technology becomes increasingly established in terminology, this approach is more convenient and perhaps more promising. Semantically, such a term is classified as a two-word term, since the preposition performs a grammatical function. 102 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... 542 S (the right to freely manage one’s property CTI₃₈ 1367), the right to inherit an estate in a foreign country CI₃₃ 66, the right to walk and travel on major roads and navigate waters CI₃₃ 434, the right of ownership and use of property CI₃₃ 1691 S. In almost another fifty terms, teisė (teisės) ‘right(s)’ occurs as a secondary component of the term, when a related concept is named, for example: waiver of the right to appeal BPI₃₃ 142, deprivation of marital rights CI₃₃ 50 (termination of marital rights CI₃₃ 52), mandatory rule of law BS₃₄ 1 T, infringement of a right CTI₃₈ 217, BS₃₄ 2 R, BPI₃₃ 303/1 P (violation of a right CPI₂₃IV 217, breach of a right CI₃₃ 531 S, infringement of rights BPI₃₃ 3 S), rule of law CI₃₃ 1184 T, restriction of rights BS₃₄ 28 R (narrowing of rights BPI₃₃ 961), solidarity of rights and obligations CI₃₃ 1548 S, extension of rights CI₃₃ 1113, successor in rights CPI₂₃IV 458, subject of rights CI₃₃ 698 S, transfer of the right of possession CI₃₃ 514 S, and so on. Legal A group of a dozen or so terms consists of complex terms with the component teisinis ‘legal’, derived from teisė ‘law/right’: legal protection CI₃₃ 531 T, legal expertise BPI₃₃ 193 V, legal competence CI₃₃ 698 T, legal assistance CI₃₃ 698 T, legal presumption CI₃₃ 106 T, rule of law BPI₃₃ 180/4 P, legal relations CI₃₃ 531 T, legal person CI₃₃ 698 T, CTI₃₈ 45 T, legal basis CI₃₃ 54 S, BPI₃₃ P, legal transaction CI₃₃ 967 S, legal title CI₃₃ 691 T, legal structure of the state BS₃₄ 1 T. The term legal father BS₃₄ 454 stands out; in the corresponding article of BS₁₉ and BS₃₁ the term was father by law. Both terms are now unusual—the intended meaning here is not stepfather, but “biological, legally recognized father.” Incidentally, about as many terms also occurred with the synonymous component juridinis ‘juridical’. Some are synonyms of the terms mentioned above (legal protection BS₃₄ 47 R, legal relations CI₃₃ 1545 S, legal person CI₃₃ 415, CTI₃₈ 4 T, BS₃₄ 1 S, legal basis CI₃₃ 1539 S, legal transaction CI₃₃ 987 S, CTI₃₈ 410 S), while others name different concepts: legal analysis BS₃₄ 581 P, legal authority CI₃₃ 1529 T, legal consequences CI₃₃ 1528 T, legal act BS₃₄ 157 R, legal dispute BPI₂₄ 291 P, legal incapacity CI₃₃ 1529 S, legal principle CI₃₃ 683 S. To acquit, the acquitted person, and acquittal Only slightly more than a couple (15) terms in the codes are formed with direct and indirect derivatives of teisinti, a verb derived from teisus ‘rightful’: the single-word terms acquittal BS₃₄ 12 R, BPI₃₃ 1245, and legalization CI₃₃ 144/1 Terminologija | 2006 | 13 103 S, excuse CTI38 92, justification BS34 305 T. A specific term only – legitimation of children legitimation C33 144/1, CTI38 1460/5. The substantivized form the acquitted person is also used BPI33 21. The abstract noun occurs as a dependent constituent only twice: act of legalization CTI38 1662 S, legalization case CTI38 1460/6. In other instances, participles are needed: acquitted party CPI31v 896 (cf. exonerated party CTI38 921 T), legalized child C33 144/1, unjustified price increase BS34 242 R, exculpatory evidence CTI38 331, justifiable reason BS19 162, BPI33 868 P, justifiable circumstances BPI33 193 V. exculpatory material BPI33 249 P. Entry into force and entry into force (noun) The verb teisėti is no longer used without a prefix; it can be found in the dictionaries of J. Ryteris and A. Kuršaitis. The dictionaries mentioned, as well as those of A. Lalis and J. Šlapelis (LKŽ), also give įteisėti; today only įsiteisėti is used, meaning “to acquire legal force.” Understandably, this is a derivative of teisėti, whose derivation itself is not entirely clear—it was most likely formed from teisė (the closest in semantic terms), although a formal connection with teisus may also be considered. The abstract noun įsiteisėtientry into force is used in the codes, BS19 207. Several specific terms: entry into force of formal decisions BPI33 941 P, entry into force of special rules BS19 646, entry into force of substantive decisions BPI33 941 P, entry into force of a decision C33 1254 PT, CTI38 899, BPI33 1210 S. A participial phrase is used as a dependent constituent: decision that has entered into force BPI33 14, judgment of a foreign court that has entered into force BS19 10/2, court judgment that has entered into force BS1 177. Lawful and lawfulness About 30 terms in the codes contain the adjective teisėtas or derivatives of it. It is likely that teisėtas is a participle of the verb teisėti that has relatively recently become adjectival. A direct derivational link between the adjective teisėtas and teisė is unlikely (the formation would be atypical), although a semantic connection would be easiest to justify—it means “based on legal norms.” The research material contains the abstract nouns lawfulness C33 12 S, CTI38 1347 and its negative form unlawfulness CTI38 1352. There are only three specific terms: eventual unlawfulness C33 691 T, unlawfulness of possession C33 529 S, lawfulness of marriage C33 34 S. The adjective occurs as a dependent constituent, e.g.: restriction of a person’s lawful liberty BS34 507 R, misconduct 104 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... lawful order BS₃₄ 139, unlawful restraint of a person's liberty BP₃₃ 8 P, unlawful entry BS₃₄ 512 R, unlawful relations with a woman CĮ₃₃ 132 S, unlawful possession CĮ₃₃ 525, unlawful children CĮ₃₃ 132 S, lawful claim BS₃₄ 165, lawful act of service BS₁₉ 142, lawful acts CĮ₃₃ 531, and in only one case is an adverb used—unlawfully administered property CTĮ₃₈ 138 (the pronominal form is unnecessary). A separate group is not distinguished, since the element teisėtinis: occurs in only a pair of terms: teisėtinė sąntuoka CPĮ₃₁V 1337, teisėtinis įpėdinis CPĮ₃₁V 1352. The word is derived from the adjective lawful, which in these cases also corresponds in meaning; therefore it is unsuitable (although, judging from LKŽ, it was used by J. Jablonskis). Legal capacity and legal capacity The adjective teisgalingas was not used in compound terms; only abstract nouns occurred: teisgalingumas CĮ₃₃ 2308 S, neteisgalingumas CĮ₃₃ 1066/2 (not in LKŽ). It is based on the word law, but the derivative is unsuitable overall—it is a calque of the Russian term правоспособность (неправоспособность). Five compound terms were also found: general civil legal capacity CĮ₃₃ 146, general legal capacity to bind oneself by contracts CĮ₃₃ 2293 S, civil legal capacity CĮ₃₃ 145 S, statutory legal capacity CĮ₃₃ 702 S. In the corresponding article of CĮ₂₈, the first of these was replaced by general civil legal capacity. For this derivative, which failed to gain acceptance, and other attempts to translate the aforementioned Russian term, see below (in the section Legal capacity and legal capacity). There are also individual terms whose component words have a derivational chain beginning with just. These are compounds formed with the word law: full-rights heir CĮ₃₃ 566 S, the parties’ equal rights BS₃₄ 482 R. Both show the influence of Russian (cf. полноправный, равноправие); the latter should be corrected morphologically to equal legal status. Although they do not occur in the codes, it is worth mentioning derivatives from law: teisynas given in a handwritten legal-terms dictionary (syn. collection of laws; сводъ законовъ), teisiadarys (syn. lawgiver; праводатель) (TTTŽP: 78, 96). The latter is an unmistakably unsuitable calque and did not enter wider usage. The term legislator is used today and was also used at the time: CĮ₃₃ 570 T, CTĮ₃₈ 1163 T, BS₃₄ 53 S (the unsuitable įstatymleidys BS₃₄ 4 R also occurs). Terminologija | 2006 | 13 105 2. THE VERB TO JUDGE AND ITS DERIVATIVES To judge, the accused, the convicted person, and judgment Another part of the terms under consideration is based on the verb to judge. Terms formed from the verb to judge and its forms and abstract nouns (often prefixed) are not numerous (nearly 30). Only pritiesimas CT₃₈ 1168 T and teisimas BS₁₉ 600, BP₃₃ 249 P were found among the single-word terms, along with the substantivized forms nuteistasis BP₂₄ 791, BP₃₀ 948, BS₃₄ 522 T and teisiamasis CT₃₃ 574 S, CT₃₈ 111, BS₃₄ 1 S, BP₃₃ 748. Specific terms: conditional conviction BS₃₄ 53 V, extrajudicial conviction BP₃₃ 180/4 P, mandatory judgment BP₃₃ 180/4 P, police administrative conviction BP₃₃ 180/4 P, judgment by court orders BP₃₃ 180/4 P. Most often, words of the type under discussion occur as secondary components of compound terms: general procedure for adjudication BP₃₃ 180/8 P, the case’s trial hearing CP₃₁V 199, time spent in custody before trial BS₃₄ 54, convicted person BS₃₄ 53 V, convicted party CP₃₁V 136, decision on preliminary examination CT₃₈ 136, trial hearing CP₃₁V 575, BP₁₃ 636, trial panel BP₂₄ 578, guilt of the accused BP₃₃ 761, statement of the accused BP₃₃ 736, decision of the trial panel BP₃₃ 995, trial panel CT₃₈ 802/2, BP₃₃ 925/1 (trial panel CT₃₈ 804/1), hearing of the trial panel BP₃₃ 916/3 (hearing of the trial panel BP₃₃ 916/1), judgment in absentia decision of conviction CP₃₁V 150. Court In the material under study, the most typical and most frequently used derivative of teisti – teismas was CT₃₃ 38, CT₃₈ 2, BS₁₉ 21. This word denotes an institution administering justice. Some classify it as a derivative with the suffix -mas (Keinys 1975: 18), others as one with the suffix -smas³ (Pakerys 1994: 195). These are essentially morphonological variants of the same suffix. It should be noted that the term teismas, especially relevant to law, probably became widespread only in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (LKŽ). In older writings, the Slavicism sūdas was often used for this purpose (cf. Bel. cyd; LKŽ). In K. Būga’s view, sūdas entered Lithuanian through church terminology—initially as Dievo sūdas (‘God’s judgment’). In K. Sirvydas’s “Punktai sakymų” (1629), he found the loanword sūdas and the Lithuanian word tiesa used with the same meaning. The latter word had been used for this purpose since ancient times, from before Lithuanian and Latvian had separated, cf. 3 Dėl priesagos dėmens -s – žr. Ambrazas 1993: 14, 61. 106 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... Latv. tiesa ‘court’, tiesāt ‘to judge’. In 1907, K. Būga regarded Teismą as a neologism (Būga 1958: 109–111). According to P. Skardžius and A. Piročkinas, its author was J. Jablonskis (Skardžius 1997: 79; Piročkinas 2000 12: 9). Approximately 170 compound terms containing the word teismas were found in the 1918–1940 codes. Of these, there are just over 50 specific terms for teismo—mostly two-word terms (a), more than 10 three-word terms (b), and a single four-word term (c): a) court of appeal⁴ BPI₃₃ 180/9 (appellate court BPI₃₃ 36 S), district court BS₃₄ 363/1 T, CT₃₃ 531 T, BPI₃₃ 37, local court CT₃₈ 29, supreme court BPI₃₃ 1071, higher court BS₃₄ 54 T, BPI₃₃ 205, CPI₃IV 675 (higher court CT₃₈ 12, BPI₃₃ 205/1), autonomous court BPI₃₃ 84 P, criminal court CT₃₈ 8 S (criminal court C₃₃ 132 S, CT₃₈ 5, BPI₃₃ 7), church court BPI₃₃ 1013 P (ecclesiastical court CPI₃IV 45, BS₁₉ 71, BPI₃₃ 218, clergy court CT₃₈ 45, spiritual court C₃₃ 24, CT₃₈ 1338, BPI₃₃ 1013 P, clerical court BS₃₄ 412 T, ecclesiastical court CPI₃₁C 45, CT₃₈ 86), general court BPI₃₃ 4, CT₃₈ 80, civil court C₃₃ 647 S, CT₃₈ 5, BS₁₉ 71, BPI₃₃ 7, military court BPI₃₃ 219 (court-martial BPI₃₃ 1034/1), court of cassation CPI₃IV 804 (cassation court BS₃₄ 1 S), BPI₃₃ 119 S, commercial court C₂₄ 1238 P, CPI₃IV 1511 (commercial court C₃₃ 1238 P, CT₃₈ 1400, CPI₃IV 28, trading court CPI₃₁C 28, CT₃₈ 28, court of commerce BS₁₉ 600), criminal court CT₃₈ 5 S, criminal court CT₃₈ 10/1 T, world court C₃₃ 24, BPI₃₃ 218, court of lay assessors BPI₃₃ 33 P (lay-assessor court BPI₃₃ 33 P), jury court BPI₃₃ 33 P, court of review BPI₃₃ 174 P, court of peace BPI₃₃ 64/1, third-party court C₃₃ 2138, CPI₃IV 1385, CT₃₈ 48, district-level court CT₃₈ 10/1 T, BPI₃₃ 33 P, local court BS₁₉ 7, lower court BPI₃₃ 205 (lower court CT₃₈ 12, BPI₃₃ 207); b) court of second instance BPI₃₃ 33 P, higher criminal court BPI₃₃ 1076 T, higher-degree court CPI₃₁C 12, civil administration court BPI₃₃ 1252, civil criminal court BPI₃₃ 221, formal spiritual court C₃₃ 45, naval court BPI₃₃ 1034/1, court of first instance C₃₃ 1530, BS₃₄ 158 S (court of first instance CT₃₈ 1213/2, BS₃₄ 158 S, BPI₃₃ 33 P), court of lay assessors and jurors BPI₃₃ 80/1 P, lower-degree court CPI₃₁C 12; c) civil administration criminal court BPI₃₃ 1244. Most often, teismas was used as the dependent element of compound terms. There are more than 40 two-word terms with this word in the genitive (a), and even more longer terms (b), e.g.: 4 The names of some courts are written with capital letters in the codes, e.g.: District Court, Supreme Court, Commercial Court, Jury Court, Court of Peace, etc. Some names are written with a capital letter in some codes and a lowercase letter in others. Here, they have all been standardized and are written in lowercase. Terminologija | 2006 | 13 107 a) court bailiff C₃₃ 1558 S, CT₃₈ 158, BS₃₄ 142 R, BPI₃₃ 157 T, court district BS₁₉ 161, BPI₃₃ 246, court area CT₃₈ 33 (court precinct CPI₃₁V 33), court protection C₃₃ 1528 S, court case CT₃₈ 14, court deposit CT₃₈ 1129, court physician BS₁₉ 171, BPI₃₃ 337, court instance CT₃₈ 11, court order BPI₃₃ 180/7, CT₃₈ 1150, court institution CT₃₈ 237, BPI₃₃ 42 (court organ C₃₃ 531 T, CPI₃₁V 237, CT₃₈ 1 S), court expenses CPI₃₁V 145, CT₃₈ 304, BPI₃₃ 52/1, court finding CT₃₈ 804/2, C₃₃ 1539 S, contempt of court BS₃₄ 155 T, court jurisdiction BS₃₄ 53 V, court chamber BPI₃₃ 22 S, court error BPI₃₃ 25, court complement BPI₂₄ 610, forensic medicine BS₃₄ 465 R, court fees BPI₃₃ 193 P (court fee CPI₃₁C 161/6, BS₁₉ 161, court fee CPI₃₁V 161/6, CT₃₈ 161/6, BS₃₄ 161), court member BPI₃₃ 767, court ruling BS₁₉ 306 (court decision C₃₃ 34 S, CT₃₈ 45, BS₃₁ 306, BPI₃₃ 16), court resolution C₃₃ 1539 S, CT₃₈ 468, BS₁₉ 306, BPI₃₃ 16, court scattering BS₁₉ 55, court messenger CT₃₈ 967/11, court adviser CT₃₈ 1681, court hearing CT₃₁ 575, BS₁₉ 305, BPI₃₃ 692, court proceedings C₃₃ 1147, court ruling BPI₃₃ 788, CT₃₈ 701, court building BPI₃₃ 879/1 S, court contest BPI₃₃ 632, court session BS₁₉ 659 (court session BS₃₄ 659, BPI₂₄ 504), court composition BPI₃₃ 174 P, court composition BPI₃₃ 788, court investigation BPI₃₃ 625, court investigator BS₃₄ 68 S, BPI₃₃ 39, court department CT₃₈ 1 S, courts’ jurisdiction CPI₃₁V 24; b) closing argument at the court investigation BPI₃₃ 795, time spent in custody before trial BS₃₄ 54 R, imprisonment until trial BS₃₄ 54 P. court decision not subject to appeal CT₃₈ 1364, expedited court proceedings BPI₃₃ 180/4 P, possessory court institution CT₃₈ 29 T, progressive court fees BPI₃₃ 193 P, preparatory court investigation BPI₃₃ 249 P, deciding court panel BPI₂₄ 237, BPI₃₃ 201, obstruction of court work BS₃₄ 174 T, conflict of court jurisdiction BPI₂₄ 37 P (competition of court jurisdiction BPI₃₃ 37 P), forensic medical examination BPI₃₃ 350, forensic medical expert report BPI₃₃ 349 P, closed court hearing BPI₃₃ 621, court hearing record BPI₃₃ 142/1, limitation period for enforcement of a court decision CT₃₈ 161/10. principle of public court proceedings BPI₃₃ 174 P, time limit for appealing a court decision BPI₃₃ 147 S, closed court hearing BPI₃₃ 1054, evasion of enforcement of a court decision BS₃₄ 167 S, public court hearing CPI₃₁V 385, BPI₃₃ 1054 (public court hearing CT₃₈ 385), enforceable court resolution CT₃₈ 950. Only a few terms use another case of “court,” for example: absolute obligation to appear in court BPI₃₃ 69 P, chamber for surrender to the court BPI₃₃ 549 T, resolution to refer to the court BPI₃₃ 852/13, summons to appear in court CT₃₈ 67/2, BPI₃₃ 57, right to litigate in court CT₃₈ 584, right to defend oneself in court C₃₃ 543 S. 108 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... Judicial In several compound terms, a derivative of the noun court, judicial, serves as the subordinate component: non-judicial conviction BPĮ₃₃ 180/4 P, judicial partition CĮ₃₃ 1315 S, right to transfer judicial property CTĮ₃₈ 1793, judicial surety CTĮ₃₈ 1537. The term scientific judicial expert examination CPĮ₃LV 109/8 clearly shows the negative influence of Russian, but there were also better designations for the same concept: scientific court expert examination CTĮ₃₈ 109/8, scientific court expert examination BPĮ₃₃ 691. Court competence and jurisdiction From court was formed the adjective court-competent, “falling within the jurisdiction of a particular court.” The terms lack of court competence CTĮ₃₈ 1643, court competence CĮ₃₃ 531 T, CPĮ₃₁₀ 24, CTĮ₃₈ 15/1, BPĮ₃₃ 34 T were used. A type is case jurisdiction CPĮ₃₁₀ 15/1, CTĮ₃₈ 587. This equivalent of the Russian term подсудность was already provided in the manuscript legal dictionary (TTTŽP: 50, 72) and became established—it is used today (it is also found in DŽ₅, 2003), although lawyers themselves claimed that the term was introduced by “lawyers with a weak feel for language” (Masiulis 1954: 2). B. Masiulis criticized it in a review of a legal terminology dictionary published in the Soviet period (Masiulis 1957: 36), but later, in “Gimtoji kalba,” he attempted an interesting justification of the term by comparing it with adjectives expressing a certain relation, hospitable, necessary: “Taking those examples as the appropriate analogy, I reach the conclusion that a case is court-competent if it requires a court decision, that is, a relation to the judicial function; a case is not court-competent if by its nature or by law it cannot have a relation to a court. Here ‘court-competent’ or ‘not court-competent’ are grammatical attributes of a case, indicating its kind in terms of its relation to a court in general; this is one aspect of ‘court-competent.’ The further conclusion is this: just as a hostess is hospitable to someone or a thing is necessary to someone, so a court-competent case is competent for a particular court—it is court-competent with respect to the specific court to which it is connected by a relation of subordination. This is the second aspect of ‘court-competent.’”⁵ (Masiulis 1960: 31). Later, by analogy with court competence, administrative competence was also formed (it was not yet present in the codes or TTTŽP). In the codes under study, court competence was also used in compound terms: dispute over the jurisdiction of a case CPĮ₃₁₀ 40 (dispute over jurisdiction CTĮ₃₈ 43, jurisdictional dispute CPĮ₃₁₀ 43), commercial jurisdiction case CTĮ₃₈ 1487, limits of jurisdiction CPĮ₃₁₀ 186. By the way, Russian 5 Original unchanged. Terminologija | 2006 | 13 109 nodсудность in one of the codes also corresponds to the jurisdiction of courts CPl₃₁ᵥ 24, the competence-based assignment of a case CPl₃₁ᵥ 15/1. Legal capacity and legal-capacity status The terms teislumas CTI₃₈ 1460/24 and neteislumas CTI₃₈ 1460/15 (compounds: general civil legal capacity Cl₂₈ 702 S, proceedings for restoration of legal capacity CTI₃₈ 1460/26) deserve somewhat more attention, since they are morphologically distinctive. The Lithuanian equivalent of the Russian term правоспособность (meaning “the possession of rights and duties prescribed by law”) became established with considerable difficulty. In the manuscript TTŽP, teisėtingumas was proposed; in the glossary appended to Cl₂₈, alongside teislumas, teisnumas was also included. The previously mentioned teisgalin-gumas appears in Cl₃₃ 2308 S as well. Only TŽ 1954 gives teisnumas, the term used today. B. Masiulis states that the Terminology Commission of the State Council rejected the term teismus (правоспособный) and proposed teisinas, teisnumas (Masiulis 1957: 36). That these terms were proposed is also evident from the list published by P. Stravinskas (TTP 1940: 73). Another problem arose: an equivalent was also needed for the Russian term подсудность. Since TTTŽP, teismingumas had been used for this purpose (as in TŽ 1954). It was criticized, and after the State Council Terminology Commission rejected teisnumas (as an equivalent of правоспособность), it was proposed that this term be used instead of подсудность. This was done in the draft of the first book of the original Lithuanian Criminal Code then being prepared⁶ (Masiulis 1957: 36). B. Masiulis supported this, but later apparently changed his mind, since he sought arguments to justify teismingumas (Masiulis 1960: 31). His opinion may also have been influenced by P. Skardžius’s view that the adjective teisinas proposed by the aforementioned Terminology Commission was not the most suitable, and that teisnus was possible, although morphologically irregular, because semantically it is related not to teisti ‘to judge’, but to teisė ‘law, right’. P. Skardžius justified this adjective as an exception arising under the influence of the example of term pairs in other languages: just as in German handlungsfähig (wirkungsfähig) is paired with rechtsfähig, and in Russian дееспособный is paired with правоспособный, so in Lithuanian veiksnus came to be paired with teisnus (Skardžius 1958: 15). Similarly, teislus would, following the pattern of derivatives with the suffix –lus, seem to have to be considered a derivative of teisti, but ⁶ In this draft, instead of the now standard pakaltinamas, the fairly apt kals-nus was proposed by analogy with teisnus (Masiulis 1957: 36), but it did not become widespread (it is not in LKŽ). Incidentally, the equivalent of the currently used term veiksnus (дееспособный) was not found in the codes in TŽ 1954; veikslus BS₃₄ 498 S and veiksmingas Cl₃₈ 381 T were used for this purpose. 1 1 0 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m.... semantically related to law/right (“having rights”), it is thus a kind of intermediate word between those based either on the adjective teisus (the lowest derivational level) or on the verb teisti. Since derivatives with the suffix mentioned above are formed from verbs, a connection between the derivative and teisėti may also be considered. Legal proceedings Another derivative of teisti – teisena is found in CPI31C 68, CTI38 80, and BS34 363/1 T. It was used quite extensively in compound terms. About 30 specific terms were found; they are two-word (a) and three-word (b) terms: a) explanatory proceedings CTI38 906, appeal proceedings CTI38 780, protective proceedings CTI38 1401, separate proceedings CTI38 1192 (special proceedings CTI38 566 S), criminal proceedings CTI38 1368 (criminal proceedings CTI38 1456), case proceedings CPI31C 78, CTI38 78, civil proceedings CTI38 897, contentious proceedings CTI38 82/2 S, claim proceedings CTI38 1215 S, special proceedings CTI38 1646, insolvency proceedings CTI38 1400 PS, division proceedings CTI38 1764, commercial proceedings CTI38 1645 (trade proceedings CTI38 1643), private proceedings CTI38 82/2 S, summary proceedings CTI38 348, closed proceedings CTI38 735, enforcement proceedings CTI38 899 S (enforcement proceedings CTI38 922); b) proceedings for the insolvency of a non-merchant CTI38 1400 P 30, proceedings for debtors’ insolvency CTI38 1400, proceedings for enforcement of a judgment CTI38 967/5, proceedings for restoration of legal capacity CTI38 1460/26, proceedings before a court of arbitration CTI38 1384, public-sale proceedings CTI38 1199. In several further instances, teisena occurs as a secondary element: costs of appeal proceedings CTI38 776/1, reopening of proceedings in a case CTI38 681, fee for proceedings in a case CTI38 839, setting aside proceedings in a case CTI38 681, suspension of proceedings in a case CTI38 681, procedural act CTI38 917, proceedings costs CTI38 776/1, costs of enforcement proceedings CTI38 913. The term teisenos is used in the title and text of CTI38. It already appeared in the CPI31C translation (in its title, procesas, but in the text, teisena). Teisena is characteristic only of these translations; other codes used the term proceso, while teisena occurred, if at all, in appendices taken from other sources. In the CPI31V translation, besides proceso, the original term bylosena was also used for this purpose. The manuscript TTTŽP did not yet contain teisenos; it used procesas and bylų da-rymas. In the first printed legal-terms dictionary (TŽ 1954), teisena and procesas were listed separately, with different specific terms—there are no cross-references. In the 1950s, teiseną also attracted attention among the émigrés; the term was criticized as “vague” and “not associating with the concept” (Stravinskas 1954: 3; Masiulis 1959: 50). Current codes are Terminologija | 2006 | 13 111 proceedings, but the Code of Civil Procedure also refers to action proceedings, special proceedings, contentious proceedings, proceedings by summons, whereas the Code of Criminal Procedure does not mention the term proceedings. Thus, in civil law, the entirety of the hearing of cases is designated as civil proceedings, while certain forms of these are called proceedings. It may be thought that these terms are no longer considered synonymous, although in reality they most likely designate concepts of different breadth, and so the generic component of the term should not change. It is difficult to say what this distinction is based on, especially since there is also another inconsistency: the Law on Administrative Proceedings is now in force. Here, proceedings is already understood as a synonym for process. In S. Šedbaras’s view, the law’s title should be amended. Comparing it with the Civil Code, he seeks to justify the claim that the process of hearing administrative cases in an administrative court consists of several independent types of proceedings (Šedbaras 2002). Thus, the terms are intended to be distinguished, although there is insufficient terminological basis for doing so. At the same time, it is evident that neither the relationship between the terms nor that between the concepts is settled in this case. Judge The derivative teisėjas ‘judge’, from teisti ‘to judge’, deserves separate mention: CĮ₃₃, 120 S, CPĮ₃₁V, 1390, CTĮ₃₈ 50, BPĮ₃₃ 10. According to LKŽ, the word is not attested in the earliest written sources, but was already used by S. Daukantas. From a word-formation perspective, it is a regular name for an agent, but its adoption as a term was not easy—in older writings the Slavicism sūdžia was used for this purpose, and various attempts were made to coin a Lithuanian term (with the roots teis- and ties-): teislys, teismadarys, teistojas, tiesadarys, tiesdarys, tiesadėja (LKŽ; Palionis 2004). Teisėjas gradually became established in legal terminology: as late as 1907, J. Šlapelis explained it using words that might be better known to some, teislys, teisdarys, sūdžia (SNŽŽ 1907). Tiesdarys appeared alongside teisėjas even in a dictionary of legal terms compiled during the period under study (TTTŽP: 107). The codes contained several specific terms for judge: district judge CTĮ₃₈ 82, criminal judge BPĮ₃₃ 119 P, mortgage judge CTĮ₃₈ 937, justice of the peace CĮ₃₃ 131, CPĮ₃₁₀ 82, BS₃₄ 68 S, BPĮ₃₃ 34, judge-rapporteur CTĮ₃₈ 906 (judge-rapporteur CPĮ₃₁V 906, CTĮ₃₈ 768), judge of third parties BS₁₉ 30/8, judge of the court of third parties CPĮ₃₁V 1370, CTĮ₃₈ 1397 S. Somewhat more often, judge was used as a dependent component in other terms: district judge’s decision CTĮ₃₈ 142, application for a judge’s recusal BPĮ₃₀ 86, BPĮ₃₃ 86 (application for a judge’s removal CTĮ₃₈ 196, BPĮ₂₄ 100), justice of the peace’s deposit CĮ₃₃ 589, convention of justices of the peace CTĮ₃₈ 95 S, judge’s dis- 112 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m. … qualification right BP₃₃ 238/1 P, judge’s impartiality BP₃₃ 238/1 P, judge’s recusal CT₃₈ 166, BP₃₀ 85 (judge’s removal BP₂₄ 99), judge’s ruling BP₃₃ 52/2. Quantitative ratio of groups of legal terms with the root -teis whose usage still presents difficulties (for example, the relationship between proceedings and process is not entirely clear). The terms discussed reveal not only how legal concepts were designated during the period under study, but also provide material for understanding the concepts themselves. PRINCIPAL SOURCES17 BP24 – Code of Criminal Procedure. Ed. A. Kriščiaukaitis. – Law 6–10 [supplement]. Kaunas, 1924–1926. BP30 – Case I. Code of Criminal Procedure. Kaunas, 1930. BP33 – Code of Criminal Procedure with commentaries compiled from the decisions of the Russian Senate and the Supreme Tribunal of Lithuania, and other interpretations concerning criminal procedure law in Lithuania Proper and the Klaipėda Region. Ed. M. Kavolis, Kaunas, 1933. BS19 – Criminal Statute, Kaunas, 1919 // Criminal Laws, Kaunas, 1919. BS31 – Jablonskis K. Criminal Statute: with supplements, 2nd ed., Kaunas, 1930. BS34 – Criminal Statute with supplementary criminal laws and commentaries compiled from the decisions of the Russian Senate and the Supreme Tribunal of Lithuania, and other interpretations. Kaunas, 1934. CI28 – Civil Laws: Collection of Laws, vol. X, part 1. Translation, [1928]. CI33 – Šalkauskis K. Civil Laws: Volume X, Part I, Kaunas, 1933. CPL30 – Code of Civil Procedure. Lithuanianized by M. Čepas, Kaunas, 1931. CPL18 – Code of Civil Procedure with supplementary laws and a subject index-glossary. Prepared for publication by J. Viskanta, Kaunas, 1931. CT18 – Code of Civil Procedure with all amendments and supplements and with interpretations by the Supreme Tribunal and the Russian Senate. Ed. Č. Butkys, Kaunas, 1938. LITERATURE AND ADDITIONAL SOURCES Ambrazas S. 1993: Daiktavardžių darybos raida 1: Lietuvių kalbos veiksmažodžių vediniai, Vilnius. Ambrazas S. 2000: Daiktavardžių darybos raida 2: Lietuvių kalbos vardažodžių vediniai, Vilnius. Būga K. 1958: Rinktiniai raštai 1, Vilnius. DŽ. 2003: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. St. Keinys, Vilnius (e. leidimas). Jablonskis J. 1935: Jablonskio raštai 4, Kaunas. Keinys St. 1975: Priesaginė lietuviškų terminų daryba. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 16: Lietuvių terminologija 7, 7–56. LKŽ: Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 1–20, Vilnius, 1941–2002. Maksimaitis M. 1988: Teisė amžių tėkmėje. – Teisės etiudai 1: Teisė – visuomeninė vertybė, Vilnius, 8–25. Maliauskis A. 1924: Demokratija, Kaunas. Masiulis B. 1954: Kalba ir teisiningai. – Teisininkų žinios 6, 2–3; 7, 2–3. Masiulis B. 1957: Pasklaidžius teisinių terminų žodyną. – Teisininkų žinios 21–22, 34–37. Masiulis B. 1959: Teisinės terminologijos reikalai Teisininkų žiniose. – Gimtoji kalba 2–3, 49–50. Masiulis B. 1960: Teisiniais terminais besirūpinant. – Gimtoji kalba 2, 31. Pakerys A. 1994: Akcentologija 1, Kaunas. Palionis J. 2004: XVI–XVII a. lietuviškų raštų atrankinis žodynas, Vilnius. Piročkinas A. Jonas Jablonskis – creator of new words. – Gimtasis žodis 10, 2–6; 11, 14–16; 12, 7–12. SD: Senasis Konstantino Sirvydo žodynas. Parengė K. Pakalka, Vilnius, 1997. Skardžius P. 1958: Teisnus ir veiksnus. – Gimtoji kalba 1, 14–15. 2 Only the Lithuanian codes under study are presented here. To make it easier to find a term, the number indicated beside the code abbreviation is that of the article, not the page. A considerable number of terms are taken from appendices to articles that contain commentaries. In such cases, a letter is also written next to the article number to indicate the type of appendix: T – a ruling of the Supreme Tribunal of Lithuania, S – a ruling of the Senate of Russia, R – a commentary by the code editorial commission, V – another law, P – all other appendices, including those that formerly constituted the original. Some terms are taken from footnotes. In that case, the footnote number is also written beside the article number, after a slash. 114 Alvydas Umbrasas | Teisės terminai su šaknimi teis- 1918–1940 m. … Skardžius P. 1996: Rinktiniai raštai 1. Vilnius. Skardžius P. 1997: Rinktiniai raštai 2. Vilnius. SNŽŽ 1907: Svętinių ir nesuprantamų žodžių žodynėlis: Skaitytojams palengvinimas. Sudarė J. Šlapelis, Tilžė. SNŽŽ 1924: Norkus J. Svętinių ir nesuprantamų žodžių žodynėlis. Kaunas. Stravinskas P. 1954: Mūsų teisinė terminologija. – Teisininkų žinios 9. 2–4. Šedbaras S. 2002: Kai kurių administracinio proceso vidinės struktūros elementų sampratos problemos. – Jurisprudencija 32 (24), 41–53. TTP 1939, 1940: Teisinės terminijos projektas. P. Stravinskas. – Teisė 48, 384–387; 49, 475–480; 50, 73–74; 51, 184–185. TTTŽP: Draft dictionary of legal terms and other words needed by courts [manuscript], [1920]. TŽ 1954: Teisinių terminų žodynas. Sudarė A. Žiurlys, Vilnius. Vaišvila A. 2000: Teisės teorija. Vilnius. Vladarskienė R. 2003: Įiatyvo vartojimas dabartinėje lietuvių kalboje. – Kalbos kultūra 76, 47–57. LAW TERMS WITH THE ROOT TEIS- IN LITHUANIAN LEGAL CODES OF 1918–1940 This paper deals with law terms with the root teis- used in translated Lithuanian Codes of 1918–1940 (over 600 terms). They comprise a distinctive group of terms related formally and semantically, which is interesting in both aspects of the language and the law. Terms or terminological elements with this root are derivationally based on either adjective teisus (right, just, correct) or on the verb teisti (to judge). They could be derivatives from those words or derivatives of those derivatives. Mentioned words themselves are terminological elements. The most typical and plentiful derivatives from teisus and teisti are respectively teisė (law) and teismas (court). Both of these terms got spread only in the beginning of the 20th century. Complex terms with these words make up two thirds of the discussed material. Part of those combinations can be viewed as nomenclatures. Other terms with the root teis- do not make substantial groups. More varied terms were found with components teisena (proceeding), teisėtas (lawful, legitimate) and teisėjas (judge) and with forms of the verb teisti. The majority of words with the root teis- easily took root into the terminology of law and are used nowadays (but not necessarily in the same combinations – they have changed quite a lot). Only a few inappropriate derivatives were withdrawn. Some names of concepts, which caused a lot of discussions at the time, got settled, but still there are some problems with the usage of others. Analysed terms not only show the ways of naming concepts of law at the investigated period, but also present the material for the cognition of concepts. Received 2006-10-27 Alvydas Umbrasas Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected] Terminologija | 2006 | 13 115