Archivum Lithuanicum 10

Klaipėdos universitetas
Lietuvių kalbos institutas
Šiaulių universitetas
University of Illinois at Chicago
Vilniaus universitetas
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas

Archivum Lithuanicum

Lietuvių kalbos institutas
P. Vileišio g. 5
LT-10308, Vilnius, Lietuva
El. paštas / e-mail: subacius@uic.edu

Leidykla / Publishing House
Harrassowitz Verlag
Kreuzberger Ring 7b-d, 65205, Wiesbaden, Germany
Tel. +49 [0]611 530 999
Faksas +49 [0]611 530 999

ARCHIVUM LITHUANICUM 10 (11 MB, PDF) 

Prof. habil. dr. GIEDRIUS SUBAČIUS (filologija / philology),
(vyriausiasis redaktorius / editor),
University of Illinois at Chicago,
Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius

Habil. dr. ONA ALEKNAVIČIENĖ (filologija / philology),
Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius

Habil. dr. SAULIUS AMBRAZAS (filologija / philology),
Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius

Doc. dr. ROMA BONČKUTĖ (filologija / philology),
Klaipėdos universitetas

Prof. dr. PIETRO U. DINI (kalbotyra / linguistics),
Università di Pisa

Habil. dr. JOLANTA GELUMBECKAITĖ (filologija / philology),
Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main

Dr. REDA GRIŠKAITĖ (istorija / history),
Lietuvos istorijos institutas, Vilnius

Dr. BIRUTĖ KABAŠINSKAITĖ (filologija / philology),
Vilniaus universitetas

Prof. habil. dr. RŪTA MARCINKEVIČIENĖ (filologija / philology),
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, Kaunas

Prof. habil. dr. BRONIUS MASKULIŪNAS (filologija / philology),
Šiaulių universitetas

Doc. dr. JURGIS PAKERYS (filologija / philology),
Vilniaus universitetas,
Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius

Dr. CHRISTIANE SCHILLER (kalbotyra / linguistics),
Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg

Prof. dr. WILLIAM R. SCHMALSTIEG (kalbotyra / linguistics),
Pennsylvania State University, University College

Mgr. MINDAUGAS ŠINKŪNAS (kalbotyra / linguistics),
Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius,
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, Kaunas

Doc. dr. JANINA ŠVAMBARYTĖ-VALUŽIENĖ (filologija / philology),
Šiaulių universitetas

Dr. JURGITA VENCKIENĖ (filologija / philology),
Lietuvių kalbos institutas, Vilnius,
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, Kaunas

Archivum Lithuanicum 10

Straipsniai (Articles)

Indrė Brokartaitė-Pladienė
Laikraščio Naujasis Tilžės keleivis (1924–1940) akistata su laikmečiu ir lietuvių kalbos padėtimi Rytprūsiuose

Ona Aleknavičienė
Jono Bretkūno Postilės (1591) teksto istorija: perikopių redagavimo šaltiniai

Aleksas Girdenis
Purpuros vokalizmas

Aurimas Markevičius
XVII amžiaus Ukmergės teismų lietuviškos priesaikos ir jų kalbos santykis su dabartine širvintiškių patarme

Aurelija Tamošiūnaitė
Asmeninė kalba: laiškai šiaurės panevėžiškių patarme

Vitalija Maciejauskienė
Dėl asmenvardžių su priesaga –(i)ūnas paplitimo XVII amžiuje

William R. Schmalstieg
A similar phonological development in the Lithuanian optative and the Latin supine

Publikacijos (Publications)

Ilja Lemeškin
Prahos universiteto profesoriai prieš lietuvių spaudos draudimą: Josefo Zubato straipsnis Die Litauer in Russland (1895) ir Tomašas Garrigue Masarykas

Arvydas Pacevičius
Vincento Vilmiko iš Valmusų 1827 metų „Pranešimas“ apie dovanojamas Vilniaus universiteto bibliotekai Kantyczkas žemaytyszkas (1826)

Recenzijos (Reviews)

Jolanta Gelumbeckaitė (Hrsg.), Die litauische Wolfenbütteler Postille von 1573. Faksimile, kritische Edition und textkritischer Apparat 1, Einleitung,
Kommentar und Register
 2, 2008 (WILLIAM R. SCHMALSTIEG)

Gina Kavaliūnaitė (par.), Samuelio Boguslavo Chylinskio Biblija. Senasis Testamentas, I tomas: Lietuviško vertimo ir olandiško originalo faksimilės, 2008 ( INGĖ LUKŠAITĖ)

Dainora Pociūtė, Maištininkų katedros. Ankstyvoji Reformacija ir lietuvių–italų evangelikų ryšiai, 2008 (EUGENIJA ULČINAITĖ)

Jolanta Gelumbeckaitė, Jost Gippert (Hrsg.), Das Baltikum im sprachgeschichtlichen Kontext der europäischen Reformation. Internationales Arbeitsgespräch. Bibliotheca Archivi Lithuanici 4, 2005 (BONIFACAS STUNDŽIA)

Eglė Bukantytė, Martino Lutherio Naujojo Testamento (1522–1546) įtaka Jono Bretkūno Naujojo Testamento vertimui (1579–1580) sintaksės aspektu, 2007 (ARTŪRAS JUDŽENTIS)

Žavinta Sidabraitė, Kristijonas Gotlybas Milkus. Gyvenimas ir literatūrinė veikla. Senosios literatūros studijos, 2006 (JURGIS MALIŠAUSKAS)

Irena Buckley, Retorikos tradicija XIX amžiaus lietuvių literatūroje, 2006 (ROMA BONČKUTĖ)

Mathias Niendorf, Das Großfürstentum Litauen. Studien zur Nationsbildung
in der Frühen Neuzeit (1569–1795)
, 2006 (KĘSTUTIS DAUGIRDAS)

Darius Staliūnas, Making Russians. Meaning and Practice of Russification in Lithuania and Belarus after 1863, 2007 (GIEDRIUS SUBAČIUS)

Brigitte Merta, Andrea Sommerlechner, Herwig Weigl (Hrsg.), Vom Nutzen des Edierens. Akten des internationalen Kongresses zum 150-jährigen Bestehen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung Wien, 3.–5. Juni 2004, 2005 (JOLANTA GELUMBECKAITĖ)

Birutė Triškaitė, Rankraštinio Mažosios Lietuvos žodyno Clavis Germanico-Lithvana genezė, 2008 (SAULIUS AMBRAZAS)

Apžvalgos (Surveys)

Ona Aleknavičienė
Senoji lietuvių raštija internete

Kristina Sakalavičiūtė
Tekstologijos šventė Vilniuje: (ne)įveikiamų tvirtovių šturmas

Giedrius Subačius
Šiaurės Amerikos kalbos mokslų istorijos asociacijos konferencija Čikagoje (2008 m. sausio 4–5 d.)

Žavinta Sidabraitė
Tarptautinė mokslo konferencija „Lingvistinės minties raida XVI–XXI amžiuje“

Jurgita Venckienė
Ką reiškia santrumpa ALt antrajame Lietuvių kalbos enciklopedijos leidime (2008)

Indrė Brokartaitė-Pladienė
DIE AUSEINANDERSET ZUNG DER ZEITUNG NAUJASIS TILŽĖS KELEIVIS (1924–1940) MIT DEM ZEIT GESCHEHEN UND MIT DER SITUATION DES LITAUISCHEN IN OSTPREUSSEN

Die der litauischen Sprachminderheit in Ostpreußen gewidmete Zeitung Naujasis Tilžės keleivis (Naujaſis Tilês Keleiwis) wurde 1924–1940 im Verlag „Lituania“ in Tilsit herausgegeben. Diese Zeitung informierte zu Themen des politischen, sozialen und kulturellen Lebens der Region und richtete Appelle an die Litauer Ostpreußens, ihr Volkstum und ihre Sprache zu pflegen. Insofern kann sie als patriotisch bzw. liberal eingestuft werden. Diese Ausrichtung verdankt die Zeitung maßgeblich den patriotisch gesinnten Herausgebern bzw. Redakteuren Enzys Jagomast, Dovas Jagomast, Ona Jagomastaitė-Wilmantienė sowie Wilhelm Storost-Wydūnas. Einfluss auf die Ausrichtung nahm auch die litauische Regierung, die diese Zeitschrift finanziell unterstützte.
Die Zeitschrift wurde trotz geringer Auflage ihrer Rolle im Kontext der historischen Situation und der Lage der litauischen Sprachminderheit gerecht. Sie zielte auf die Ausbildung einer informierten Sprachminderheit, thematisierte Fragen der nationalen Identität und regte an, das Litauertum in Ostpreußen durch soziale Aktivitäten zu unterstützen.
Obwohl die patriotischen Einstellungen zur litauischen Sprache in der Zeitung deutlich hervortraten, wurde dort auch die aktuelle Sprachsituation adäquat eingeschätzt und der sich durch Akkulturation verschlechternden Lage des Preußisch-Litauischen Rechnung getragen. Deshalb wurden die Texte des Naujasis Tilžės keleivis in der traditionellen preußischlitauischen Varietät des Litauischen unter Benutzung der Frakturschrift wiedergegeben. Daneben wurde durch den Einsatz auch des Deutschen auf die allgemeine Zweisprachigkeit Rücksicht genommen. Andererseits vermittelte die Zeitung nur moderat die lexikalischen Neuerungen des Standardlitauischen. Die idealisierten Vorstellungen über die Annäherung zur litauischen Standardsprache konnten aber keine reale Akzeptanz in der preußisch-litauischen Sprachgemeinschaft finden.

Ona Aleknavičienė
THE HISTORY OF PERICOPE TEXTS OF JONAS BRETKŪNAS’S
POSTILLA (1591): SOURCES OF THE EDITING

In this article I make an effort to determine in what way and based on what Jonas Bretkūnas edited the text of the Bible (pericopes) that he took from Baltramiejus Vilentas’s Gospels and Letters (Evangelijos bei Epistolos, 1579; EE) and inserted before the sermons in his own Postilla (1591; BP). I analyze separately the corrections of the initial lines of pericopes. All this research is important for the understanding of Bretkūnas’s work with the process of preparing the text, and for the assessment of Bretkūnas’s attitudes towards the Bible text. My analysis leads to the following conclusions:
(1) After Jonas Bretkūnas took pericopes from Baltramiejus Vilentas’s Gospels and Letters for his Postilla, he edited them in compliance with Martin Luther’s Bible (1546 or later editions; LB). Most of the additions, omissions, and changes that Bretkūnas made in BP are proof of a conscious and purposeful comparison with LB.
(2) Bretkūnas’s BP presented one more version of Lithuanian liturgical texts to society and added to the variety of Lithuanian Bible texts available at the time. The main direction of Bretkūnas’s work was to establish Luther’s Bible. Bretkūnas edited the places in the text that Vilentas had earlier translated from the Vulgate and from the Greek New Testament, and in this way diminished the number of passages of the text corresponding to those originals (he distanced his text farther from the Vulgate which was canonized by the Catholic Church).
(3) Because of the conscious and purposeful changes, the texts of BP pericopes must be considered as a new edition of EE texts. Bretkūnas critically assessed every pericope of EE, he matched the translation to LB and more seldom to the Greek New Testament, and he searched for the optimal means to express the content of the original. Bretkūnas performed a philological analysis of Vilentas’s translation. Bretkūnas’s pericopes reflect not only Vilentas’s but also Bretkūnas’s mentality, knowledge of exegesis and ability to write well.
(4) Similar parallel passages in BP and Bretkūnas’s Bible (BNT) are most often determined by the availability of synonyms in the Lithuanian language and should not be considered a result of BNT influence. I did not find any proof that Bretkūnas used other Lithuanian texts with pericopes from the Bible in editing the excerpts taken from EE. It was Vilentas who kept more to the traditional text.
(5) Bretkūnas’s correction of the initial lines of the pericopes was evidently determined not by the translation originals but by the concept of the Bible excerpt as a liturgical text. This attests to the pragmatic competence of Bretkūnas.

Aleksas Girdenis
THE VOCALISM OF THE PURPURA

In the Purpura manuscript (approximately the middle of the nineteenth century), written in the North Lowland (Žemaičiai) dialect, all Polish vowel letters are used to denote monophthongs (except for Ó ó, so-called kreskowane): A a [a a.], [a∙]; Ą ą [∙ || ∙(N)], []; E e [e e.], [e∙]; Ę ę [∙|| ∙(N)], []; I i [i∙], [i]; Y y [ẹ ẹ.]; O o [uo], [ọ ọ.]; U u [u∙], [u u.], [] (?). Turkish style capital İ was used several times on the title page.
The graphemes A a, E e only occasionally express the long vowels [a∙], [e∙]: most often they are replaced by ai, ei or aj, ej type digraphs; hypercorrect forms are frequent in definite forms of adjectives: [a∙], [e∙] → aj, ej and so forth. The characters Ą ą, Ę ęmark both long nasal mid vowels, that originate from *, * (← *an, *en), and optional nasal allophones of /ọ/, /ẹ/ phonemes: denasalization of /∙/, /∙/ phonemes is a rather late alteration.
I i that mark the high vowel [i] in flexion were well differentiated from Y y which denote the mid vowel [ẹ] according to the tradition. In absolute word initial position, however, the letters I i are written instead of expected Y y (with certain rare exceptions): apparently graphic neutralization of ↔ → / #_ takes place; the lack of Y y in word initial position in Polish orthography explains this. The letter y [ẹ] happens to be written also in unaccentable word medial position and in unaccented endings in cases where Žyvatas (Ziwatas, 1759)very consistently had [e].
The phonetic value of the polyfunctional letter U u of Žyvatas and of many other North Lowland dialect texts was successfully divided into two: U u and O o. The attribution of new additional phonetic value to the graphemes O o (along with the main value O o [uo]) enabled separation of the mid vowels [ọ], [ọ.] from the high vowels [u], [u.], that were marked by the traditional symbols U u.
In Purpura the biphonemic diphthongs are expressed by the letters: Ai ai, Aj aj [ai]; Au au [au]; Ei ei, Ej ej [ei]; Yi yi [ẹi]; Oi oi, Oj oj [ọi]; Ou ou [ọu]. The monophonemic diphthongs or polyphthongs [ie] and [uo] were rendered as digraphs Ie ie (sometimes Je je) similarly to the above mentioned monophthong graphemes O o respectively.
A common important feature of compound diphthongs is the fact that their second component is not expressed by the letters W wand Y y (which was typical, for instance, in Žyvatas): the back component [] is written U u (except for the rare deviations); the front component [] is rendered only as I i or j. The second component of the diphthongs [au ọu] is consistently written w when it is separated from the first characters A aO o and hyphenated to the next line (e.g., apsia-wty 4v6–7 ~ àpsiautė ‘surrounded, enwrapped’, do-wnas 106v12–13 ~ dúonos ‘of bread’). And only accidentally may w [] occur in the word final position. It was noticed that there was no single case of the rendering of the diphthong [ọu] with the monophthong graphemes U u or the like.
This article presents an especially detailed analysis of the word final vocalism with respect to the diachronic origin of the final vowel.

Aurimas Markevičius
SEVENTENTH AND EIGHTENTH CENTURY LITHUANIAN OATHS OF UKMERGĖ TOWN COURTS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PRESENT ŠIRVINTIŠKIAI DIALECT

In 1937 Konstantinas Jablonskis published four Lithuanian Court oaths of Ukmergė (one oath had been written beforehand in 1634, two in 1669 and one in 1675) in the sixth volume of the journal Archivum Philologicum. The article also contains a public presentation of three oaths from the books of the Upytė Land Court (of 1624, 1642, and 1653). The files related to the court cases used to be stored in the Manuscript Department of the Vilnius University Library. Unfortunately, full files containing all the aforementioned seven oaths have been torn out of the original Ukmergė manuscript courtbooks. In 2004, Domininkas Burba published three more seventeenth century Ukmergė Court oaths (dating 1648, 1675, and 1677) including facsimiles of the originals.
The language of the Ukmergė Court oaths is variegated. Although Ukmergė belongs to the territory of the East Highland (Rytų Aukštaitija) Širvintiškiai subdialect, only two of the 1669 oaths and one oath dating 1675 were written in the East Highland dialect. The aforementioned oaths reflect the transformation of the diphthongs [an], [am], [en], [em] into the diphthongs [un], [um], [in], [im], as well as the retention of the old vowel [ā] in unstressed syllables (both oaths of 1669 contain it also in stressed syllables) and other peculiarities typical of the aforementioned dialect.
The remaining four oaths have been edited according to the standards of the middle variant of the sixteenth and seventeenth century written language, which was created by Mikalojus Daukša and other authors of the period. The number of East Highland dialectal forms is very scarce in the latter writings. Both the long time periods separating the files investigated and the language differences found in the oaths indicate that they were written by more than one actuary. Besides, some of them were written in different courts of Ukmergė.

Aurelija Tamošiūnaitė
PRIVATE LANGUAGE: PERSONAL CORRESPONDENCE IN THE NORTH PANEVĖŽIŠKIAI SUBDIALECT

Personal correspondence written by less educated or less literate people becomes a useful resource for dialect research, since it reveals usage of certain dialectal features and emerging influence of the standard language. Therefore, in this article I analyze a set of 14 personal letters written by Marijona Krivickienė between 1955 and 1968 and sent to the U.S. from Lithuania. Since the letters were written in the North Panevėžiškiai subdialect, the main focus of this article was dialectal features of the writer’s language, possible impact of the standard language, and development of an individual orthographical system.
The most salient and unique individual orthographical feature in the letters is the usage of the redundant graphemes and (rarely ) in consonant clusters to separate consonants by a vowel. Usage of the redundant graphemes is systematic. For instance, the grapheme was inserted (1) in the middle of the word (2) in the word final position instead of reduced endings, and (3) in the end of one-syllable particles, conjunctions, and adverbs after the consonants. On the other hand, the grapheme was usually inserted in front of a sonorant in word initial position. In this article I propose three possible accounts for the redundant grapheme usage: (1) palatalization of consonants, (2) anaptyxis, and (3) generalization of the most common syllable type CV to avoid consonant clusters.
Since the author could not write in the standard language, she created her own orthographical system (combination of letters) for the dialect she spoke. Although her letters were written in North Panevėžiškiai dialect, I could trace down certain instances of standard language influence: (1) the appearance of in gen. sg. and 3 praet. endings, (2) nonmonophtongized diphthongs in the endings, (3) non-reduced endings, and (4) diminishing usage of the redundant . After I traced certain developments in the author’s individual orthography I could establish the approximate time writing of two undated letters, and the content of the letters supported the linguistic arguments.

Vitalija Maciejauskienė
ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONAL NAMES WITH THE SUFFIX –(I)ŪNAS IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

The object of this article is to supplement the seventeenth century data on the distribution of personal names with the patronymic suffix –(i)ūnas. Such a possibility emerged after the surnames in one church source were investigated—the book of the wedding records of Lankeliškės parish in 1617–1692.
After describing the source and explaining the principles of personal name selection (an attempt to make the analysis and especially the statistical treatment as precise as possible) I note that this article covers around 2800 historical personal names. They name one party in wedding records of the source—the grooms.
The personal names under investigation in regard to word formation do not stand out in the context of the seventeenth century surnames. Patronymics formed mostly with the Lithuanian patronymic suffixes predominate. The personal names under investigation were divided into three groups: (1) derivatives of Lithuanian patronymic suffixes, (2) names with Slavic patronymic or -sk- type suffixes, and (3) names without the suffixes mentioned in the first two groups. I conclude that the personal names of the first group constitute about 72.46%, the second group about 9.9%, and the third one about 17.63% of all personal names.
Personal names of the first group (derivatives with Lithuanian patronymic suffixes) have five Lithuanian patronymic suffixes. They can be listed in the following order according to productivity: -aitis (its derivatives constitute about 49.43% of all analyzed personal names), –(i)ūnas (about 14.93%), –(i)onis (about 5.92%), -ynas (about 1.98%), and -ėnas (0.17%). The abundance of patronymics and frequency of Lithuanian suffixes have helped to trace a great number of derivatives with the suffix -(i)ūnas in this part of Lithuania—in today’s Vilkaviškis district.
So far research on the personal name distribution and usage in the seventeenth century did not yield any data about derivatives with the suffix –(i)ūnas in the territory of today‘s Vilkaviškis district. The structure of the recent surnames in the area attests that the suffix –(i)ūnas was used for the derivation of patronymics there; it is because the surnames with this suffix are derived from the derivatives with it. Still, such surnames are scarce in the locations of this district that were researched: in Kybartai only about 3.7%, in Virbalis about 3%, in Vištytis about 2.89%, and in Bartninkai about 2.6% of all surnames in those places.
There were around 30 different localities in Lithuania researched and the results demonstrated that the highest concentration of personal names with the suffix –(i)ūnas is in Pasvalys (there such surnames constitute about 9.5% of all local surnames), in Pandėlys (Rokiškis district) about 7.57%, in Želva (Ukmergė district) about 6.39%, in Ramygala (Panevėžys district) 6.22%, in Utena about 5.49%, in Tauragnai (Utena district) about 5.3%, and in Molėtai about 4.9%. Other locations that were researched have even fewer such surnames. These results agree with the conclusions of an earlier research on the seventeenth century personal names with the suffix –(i)ūnas.
In this article the derivatives with the suffix –(i)ūnas, that constitute 14.93% of all researched surnames in the seventeenth century book of Lankeliškės parish, were evaluated as new, supplementing results of earlier surname research. This article not only demonstrates seventeenth century usage of personal names with the suffix -(i)ūnas in the present territory of the Vilkaviškis district, but also shows that the historical personal names with this suffix were much more frequent than today’s surnames with the same suffix (cf. 14.93% and 3.7%–2.6%).

William R. Schmalstieg
PANAŠI FONOLOGINĖ RAIDA LIETUVIŲ KALBOS TARIAMOJOJE NUOSAKOJE IR LOTYNŲ KALBOS SUPINE

Indoeuropiečių prokalbėje žodžio gale **-um prieš tuoj po jos einantį kito žodžio balsį išliko nepakitusi, o **-um prieš kito žodžio priebalsį virto į *. Laikui bėgant susiformavo nauja galūnė *-umprieš aptariamosios pozicijos priebalsį ir atsirado naujas kontrastas tarp *-um ir *, pavyzdžiui, lotynų kalboje yra du supinai dictum ir dictū. Vadinasi, šiuo atveju nebeveikia senesnė sandhi fonologinė taisyklė. Daug vėliau ir dėl kitų aplinkybių lietuvių kalboje atsirado panašus kontrastas tarp suktųsùktum. Taip atsitiko, nes formose sùktumeisùktumi (sùktumbeisùktumbi [Mažvydas]) išnyko paskutinis skiemuo.

Ona Aleknavičienė
THE OLD LITHUANIAN WRITINGS ON THE INTERNET

This article deals with the state of digitalization of the old Lithuanian writings throughout the world. Attention is focused on the database of old Lithuanian writings in the Institute of the Lithuanian Language in Vilnius. The first writings transferred to electronic files were of the sixteenth and seventeenth century.
These are the aims of the database of old Lithuanian writings in the Institute of the Lithuanian Language: (1) to preserve linguistic, cultural, and historical information of old sources in different electronic formats; (2) to make valuable printed works and manuscripts easily accessible to the research community and to contribute to the development and promotion of Lithuanian studies; (3) to promote up-to-date research of seventeenth through eighteenth century written Lithuanian and to disseminate its results in traditional and electronic formats; (4) to involve scholars in Lithuania and elsewhere in research projects related to old Lithuanian.
The database of old Lithuanian writings consists of: (1) transcribed texts, (2) concordances, (3) indices, (4) facsimiles. The texts are transcribed using the Lithuanian Unicode font Palemonas (http://www.vlkk.lt/palemonas.html). They serve as the basis for generating word-form concordances: the texts are processed with the help of systems of software modules. In the concordances, word-forms are given in alphabetic order with references to the source (abbreviation, page and line number); then follows the excerpt of the text with the relevant word-form.
There are three types of concordances: (1) direct, (2) reverse (a tergo), and (3) descriptive. Descriptive concordances constitute the basis for the word indices and the computerized database of old writings.
The electronic texts and concordances of the database are available on the website of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language at: http://www.lki.lt/seniejirastai.