ECHOES OF THE PAST

M. DAUKŠA’S “CATECHISM” – 400 YEARS

During the period when Lithuanian writing was taking shape, almost half a century after M. Mažvydas’s “Catechism,” there appeared Jokūbas Ledesma’s “Kathechizmas Arba Mokslas kiekvienam krikszczioni privalus... Iżguldīta iz Lėżuwio Łankiszko... per Kunigą Mikalojų Daukszą Kanoniką Zemaiċiu” [“Catechism, or the Instruction Required of Every Christian... Translated from the Polish Language... by the Priest Mikalojus Daukša, Canon of Samogitia”]. This first Lithuanian Catholic publication was printed in Vilnius in 1595 at the Jesuit printing house (the printing house is not identified in the publication). Only a small number of copies of this catechism were printed, since M. Daukša himself does not mention it in the preface to his 1599 “Postil” and says that he wishes to offer the postil as “a beginning and an encouragement to love the language of one’s parents.” One part of the catechism is “Trumpas Budas Pasisakimo arba Ižpažinimo Nūdemiu Drin tu kurie dažnai wartoją tuo Sakramentu” [“A Brief Method of Confessing or Acknowledging Sins for Those Who Often Receive This Sacrament”]. This section is especially interesting because it contains the first two known Lithuanian Catholic hymns: “Malda S. Tamožiaus izą Aquino” [“Prayer of St. Thomas Aquinas”] and “Salve Regina (Sვეika Karalyczia)” [“Hail, Queen”]¹.

This catechism is the first Lithuanian book in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

At that time, ecclesiastical style predominated in the system of written Lithuanian, whose development was based on texts with religious content. M. Daukša’s catechism is of interest to terminologists because it contains a considerable amount of religious vocabulary and vocabulary from related fields.

Here we present several quotations about M. Daukša’s catechism from the works of Lithuanian scholars.

Much more frequently than the earliest writers of Lithuania Minor, M. Daukša uses Lithuanian words in his translations, gathering them from the living language of the time or adapting them in his own way to translate foreign words. <...> He uses far fewer special neologisms, coined by himself or borrowed from elsewhere

¹ Biržiška V. Senųjų lietuviškų knygų istorija. Chicago, 1953. D. 1. P. 168-169.

53

.

Skardžius Pr. Lietuvių kalbos žodžių daryba. V., 1943. P. 590–591.

The shortage of terms and new words was very great, and Daukša devoted himself to finding Lithuanian equivalents. Several words are sometimes offered to name the same thing, for example: išgelbėtojas, išgelbėjas and gelbėtojas; niekaniekė and tuškinas; nuodėmė, nusidėjimas, kaltė, pražengimas and skola; nuomon ia and pajautimas; nužeminimas, nusižeminimas and pasižeminimas; padūtrinimas and pastiprinimas; pagalba, pašalpa and padėjimas; paprotys and papunkimas; paskandinimas, pasmerkimas, prapuolimas and prapultis; perman ymas and supratimas, and so on. This hindered the stabilization of literary vocabulary, but lexical variation was inevitable at the beginning of Lithuanian writing.

Kruopas J. Lexical Parallelisms in the Language of Daukša’s Catechism// In: Questions of Lithuanian Linguistics. V., 1960. Vol. 3. P. 243.

The numerous and varied lexical parallelisms in DK testify to the author’s immense creative efforts to translate Ledesma’s Catechism from Polish as accurately, clearly, and idiomatically as possible, and to make it accessible in a popular, expressive language to the widest possible readership of Lithuanian speakers. To this end, the rich and inexhaustible treasures of folk vocabulary are extensively drawn upon. Many old Lithuanian words are given new meanings, acquiring new religious content. For example, in the Catholic DK, dievas, dangus, kaltė, nuodėmė, pragaras, siela, šventas, viešpats and other words take on new meanings. This enabled Daukša to avoid unnecessary loanwords, used by careless translators or introduced later as Polish influence increased through the Church, the estates, and other channels, in vulgar religious texts (e.g., griekas, pekla, dūšia, ponas, viera, vieryti, and so on). Daukša boldly incorporated words from the people’s spoken language into literary language, often giving them

54

figurative, more abstract meanings, thereby enriching the semantics of the literary language’s lexicon. To express new religious and various abstract concepts, Daukša coined many neologisms, which substantially increased the number of lexical parallels in the DK. Some of Daukša’s neologisms (e.g., doubt, inspiration, humility, obligatory, condemned, understanding) were skillfully formed and became firmly established in the literary language.

Ibid. P. 253–254.

There are also many points in common with M. Mažvydas’s later works and B. Vilentas’s “Enchiridion” in M. Daukša’s text of the “I Believe” (DK 23, 24, VE 14–17), but there are considerably more differences. M. Daukša removed foreign words and sought Lithuanian equivalents: he replaced poną with viešpats, paną with merga, Ponską Pilotą with Pontiškis Pilotų, peklą with pragaras, griekus with nuodėmės, živatą with gyvata, and so on. The text of the Decalogue differs even more (the Protestant version contains many foreign words and non-Lithuanian constructions), and here the similarities are no longer immediately apparent. It is noteworthy that M. Daukša’s translation of the Decalogue also differs considerably from the Polish original, which is much shorter and more concise. Characteristically, in the tenth commandment M. Daukša replaces the donkey mentioned alongside the ox with a horse (DK 74 20).

We find commonalities not only in the text of the prayers, but elsewhere as well. M. Daukša needed many terms and words for new concepts and, naturally, could draw on Protestant works and their neologisms if he considered them suitable and acceptable. A considerable number of such shared words and terms could be identified. However, shedding light on this complex question—determining what M. Daukša actually took from Lithuanian Protestant writers—would require a dedicated study. There is no doubt that he himself coined and introduced far more words into the literary language than he found in the works of his predecessors.

Lebedys J. Mikalojaus Daukša. V., 1963. P. 213.

M. Daukša introduced many important words needed for cultural life. He took many of them from everyday speech, giving them new content and reinterpreting them. He coined others himself and adopted still others from

55

earlier writers (for example, teacher, reader), helping them become established. It is difficult at present to determine which words were truly coined by M. Daukša. Naturally, only some of his neologisms took hold. For example, prabilis—a preface, an introduction—and išspausas (already used by M. Mažvydas)—printed—did not become established.

J. Kruopas argues that the following words, now firmly established in the literary language, are neologisms coined by M. Daukša: doubt, inspiration, calmness, obligatory, condemnation, understanding. There are, undoubtedly, quite a number of neologisms he introduced. Without pursuing this question further or attempting to establish whether these words were coined by M. Daukša himself or borrowed from elsewhere, it is worth mentioning the psychological terms found in the catechism translation—the names of sensations (sensations): seeing (also vyzius), hearing, tasting, smelling, touching (also feeling); and the names of properties of mental faculties, processes, feelings, and moods: wisdom (=reason), memory (=memory), will, acquaintance (=knowledge), love, joy, patience, goodness (=kindness), mildness, self-control, and so forth. To make clearer the significance of M. Daukša’s translation for the formation of the literary language, at least a few more words from various fields should be mentioned: towel, wage, dwelling (house), worker, being, beggar, physician, lover, servant, local.

Ibid. P. 219–220.

The characteristic feature of M. Daukša’s catechism—its lexical richness, manifested in abundant synonymy, the parallel use of different words from various dialects, the removal of foreign words, and the coining of neologisms—was connected with his aim to appeal to speakers of different dialects, reach as wide an area as possible, and create and cultivate a literary language.

The use of lexical parallels is most striking. M. Daukša places them side by side, linking them with the conjunctions or, and, with linking phrases that is, and also adds them in the margins. In addition, lexical parallels also occur in different places throughout the text. No earlier or later Lithuanian publication, apart from M. Daukša’s postil, contains so many lexical parallels assembled in this way.

Ibid. P. 214.

56

M. Daukša made a great contribution as a creator of literary language, greatly enriching its lexicon by introducing many words from spoken language, partly reinterpreting and adapting them to new, abstract concepts, and also coining new words, some of which are still in use today. <...> The richness of the lexicon, abundance of synonyms, literary style and, in part, the beginnings of imaginative prose are enduring, long-lasting values in M. Daukša’s literary legacy. Other writers drew on it, even centuries later, cultivating and enriching the literary language, impoverished and degraded during the period of decline.

Ibid. P. 359.

Of the 1,670 words in M. Daukša’s 1595 catechism, about 220 are loanwords, i.e. approximately 13%. <...> As can already be seen from the statistical data presented, authors of Catholic texts of that time used the fewest loanwords, especially M. Daukša and K. Sirvydas, who were greatly concerned with the purity and vernacular character of the language.

P a l i o n i s J. History of the Lithuanian Literary Language. V., 1979. P. 79–80.

M. Daukša coined new words not only out of necessity, but also with a view to purifying and diversifying the language. Seeking to make the language of his translations more varied and expressive, he sometimes turned to neologisms alongside the vernacular words he himself used. For example, alongside kalinio he coined saitinį (więzień), alongside sandaros – nuobvli (umowa), alongside vietininko – antvietį (namiastek), and so on. Other neologisms by M. Daukša worth mentioning include: atskalūnis “renegade,” būstimas “being, substance,” įuodaknygis “sorcerer,” malonėrišdas “merciful,” pirmamžinumas “eternity (przedwieczność),” svetimvyre “a woman who loves other men,” vyr moteris “a married man (mażonek),” visaujimas “universality”...

Ibid. P. 77.

Prepared by Jolanta GAIVENYTĖ

57