Kai kurie morfologijos norminimo bruožai 1858 m. Evangelijose

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XXXVIII (1997) Milda LUČINSKIENĖ SOME FEATURES OF MORPHOLOGICAL STANDARDIZATION IN THE 1858 GOSPELS One of the religious books most frequently published and revised up until the 20th century was “Ewangelie polskie i litewskie.” They were translated in the 17th century by Jonas Jaknavičius into the East Highlander interdialect. They were later reissued several times, but their linguistic basis remained as it had been until 1705, when they were rewritten in the interdialect of the middle written language (Zinkevičius 1988: 268–2690). Their language changed little in the 18th century. In the 1858 edition of the Gospels, entitled “Ewangelje polskie i žmudzkie na niedziele i wszystkie święta całego roku,” more archaic language forms were replaced by newer ones characteristic of the Middle Highlander dialect of that time. This article reviews several of the more important morphological features. The 1858 edition of the Gospels was compared with the 1856 edition (a third of these texts was examined systematically: 1856—pp. 4–98, 244–253; 1858—pp. 7–136). The most numerous group of revisions among the changes observed is the editing of the dative plural of nominal words (114 instances). Next are changes to postpositional locatives (62 instances) and athematic verbs (17 instances). 1. The plural dative ending of nouns and adjectives -mis is consistently changed to -ms (mis → ms 108 instances), and -mus is changed to -ms (mus → ms; e.g., iemis → iems (47 instances), įumis → įums (45 instances), mum is → mums (6 instances), tiemis → tiems (3 instances), židamis → židams (1 instance), iemus → iems (2 instances), žmonemus → žmoniems (1 instance). The examples show that pronoun forms were changed most often. Longer pronoun endings were retained much better in the 1856 Gospels, although a marked shortening of these forms had already been noticeable in the 17th century: even then, alongside forms ending in -mus (found in all known 16th–17th-century texts), there were also neighboring shortened forms ending in -ms (Palionis 1967: 117–118; Zinkevičius 1980: 193). The grammars of D. Klein and other Lithuanian writings of the period suggest that this shortening proceeded more rapidly in nouns and more slowly in adjectives and pronouns. This is also reflected in the 1856 Gospels, where pronouns more often retained the longer ending. Nouns, by contrast, had it very rarely. The 1858 Gospels’ editor treated the ending -mus in both pronouns and nouns as an archaism. These old singular dative forms are no longer found in present-day dialects either (Zinkevičius 1966: 232–233, 303). Linguistic literature most often mentions the ending -mus and, less often, -mis 88 trumpėjimas. Jau Pr. Skardžius (1930: 117), palyginęs Evangelijų ir Universiteto kalbą, pastebėjo, kad ir Universitete, ir Evangelijose dgs. naudininkas dažniausiai turėjo galūnę -mis, rečiau -ms ir -mus. Panaši situacija buvo ir 1856 m. Evangelijose, o 1858 m. leidimo redaktorius vengė formų ir su -mis, ir su -mus. The ending -mis is the old full instrumental plural ending, which also came to be used with the meaning of the dative plural (Kazlauskas 1968: 166–170). The Atlas of the Lithuanian Language (Lietuvių 1991: 80, map no. 75) notes that dative plural forms coinciding with instrumental plural forms mumìs, jumìs are found in a few Western Aukštaitian dialects (around Kėdainiai and Kaunas). They are also attested in some sixteenth- and seventeenth-century texts based on the Central Aukštaitian dialect (e.g., Morkūnas’s Postil, and the writings of M. Daukša and M. Petkevičius), as well as in the anonymous grammar of 1737 (Universitetas 1981: 73–74) and in the writings of A. Tatarė, who came from Grįškabūdis. It should be noted, however, that alongside -mis, the anonymous grammar already gives the shortened ending -ms (kalbomìs, kalboms). Thus, in the 1856 Gospels, the dative plural form -mis could reflect a dialectal feature preserved from earlier times. It is clear, however, that in the mid-nineteenth century the editor regarded forms with both -mus and -mis as archaisms. Thus, the adoption of the new forms was fairly consistent and uniform. 2. The 1858 Gospels seek to dispense with the old postpositional locatives. The illative is very often replaced by a preposition with the accusative (34 instances), and rarely by the genitive, for example: awinicion → ing awiniczia (1 instance), namosna → ing namus (2 instances), piedosna → ing piedus (1 instance), weidon → in weidą (1 instance), garbien → ing garbę (1 instance), szonan → ing szoną (2 instances), winiczion → ing winiczia (4 instances), erszkiecziosna → tarp erkiecziu (1 instance), Jerycho → prie Jericho (1 instance). The extensive editing of the illative shows that it was already disappearing from the Aukštaitian dialect of the mid-nineteenth century. It was widespread in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century texts (Palionis 1967: 121), but much rarer in Universitetas (1981). Today, the illative, as a living case, survives only in the Eastern and Southern Aukštaitian dialects; elsewhere it is usually replaced by the preposition į with the accusative (Lietuvių 1991: 54–55, 76, map no. 48). The allative was most often replaced by a preposition with the accusative and by the genitive (20 instances), dative, and locative, for example: Diewop → pas Diewą (1 instance), grabop → pas grabą (3 instances), Tiewop → pas Tiewą(ą) (6 instances), iop → pas jį (1 instance), Kaifosiump → nuog Kajifosziaus (1 instance), Diewop → Diewuje (1 instance), Jezusop → Jezuj (1 instance), minium[p] → miniomis (1 instance), musump → mumise (1 instance). The examples show that in the 1858 Gospels the singular allative was edited most extensively (only 3 examples of the plural allative were changed: jusump, minium[p], musump), which had been better preserved in the earlier edition of the Gospels. 89 Lietuvių kalbos atlase (Lietuvių 1991: 55–56, žemėl. Nr. 48) nurodoma, kad kaip linksnis vns. aliatyvas vartojamas pačiame pietrytiniame lietuvių kalbos ploto pakraštyje – Dieveniškių apylinkių ir Gervėčių, Lazūnų, Žietelos šnektose. Kitose tarmėse vns. aliatyvas dabar vartojamas retai ir užfiksuota tik aliatyvo kilmės prielinksnių. Tuo tarpu dgs. aliatyvas šiandien jau iš viso išnykęs (Laigonaitė 1957: 31–32). Three examples of editing the adesive have been found: manimp → maniej(e) (2×), sawimp → pas sawe (1×). In old writings, there were several types of adesive forms of non-gendered pronouns: a) manip, tavip, savip and b) manimp, tavimp, savimp. The second variant is used in the 1856 Gospels. Although the nominal adesive began to disappear from our writings quite early (already in the 17th century), forms of the personal pronoun adesive survived much longer (Zinkevičius 1982: 25). This is also reflected in the 1856 Gospels, whereas the 1858 edition no longer contains any adesive forms. They are almost absent from contemporary dialects as well, except only in the southeastern fringe of the Lithuanian-language area around Žietela, Lazūnai, and Gervėčiai; elsewhere, prepositional constructions are systematically used in their place (Lietuvių 1991: 55–56, 77–78). The examples presented here show that in the early 19th century postpositional locatives had become markedly rare in the Central Aukštaitian dialect, were regarded by the editor of the 1858 Gospels as archaisms, and were therefore replaced with forms more characteristic of the spoken language of the time. 3. The replacement of the form eimi with einu (7×) would indicate the decline of athematic forms. However, another type of editing was also observed: the form esmu was changed to esmi (10×). J. Senkus (1958: 82) wrote: “The present-tense forms of the verb būti in the Kapsai and Zanavykai regions are quite varied, namely: aš esu, esu (esmu), esmi ir būnu, buvu.” The form esmi is rare and occurs in the speech of elderly people in the Ukmergė district around Šešikai, in the Panevėžys district around Raguva and Karšakiškis, and in the vicinity of Maišiagala, Kybartai, and Naujoji Ūta, as well as in folklore. The form esmu (which arose when the thematic ending u attached to the consonant m of the athematic ending) is somewhat more widespread, chiefly in the Eastern Aukštaitian dialect (Lietuvių 1991: 82, map no. 78). The editor’s replacement of the form esmu with the older, already declining form esmi may reflect the dialect of the 1858 Gospel editor, although at present it is difficult to establish its location. The common tendency behind almost all the changes noted here is to standardize and modernize—that is, to deliberately make the text uniform and, it seems, adapt the Gospels to the spoken language of the time. The title pages of the 1856 and 1858 Gospels state that they were approved by Motiejus Valančius (Mathias Wolonczewski). This may perhaps allow us to cautiously surmise that this classic of our literature, or his assistants, had a hand in correcting, editing, or compiling these texts. It should be noted here that in the mid-19th century intellectuals gathered around M. Valančius, prepared to create a standard Lithuanian language, 90 tiesa, daugiausia žemaičių tarmės pagrindu (Subačius 1993: 8 tt ir lit.). Tad Evangelijų redagavimas buvo reikšmingas tuometiniam lietuvių kalbos norminimo procesui. LITERATŪRA Ewanielie na niedziele i wszystkie święta w języku polskim i litewskim, przedrukowane Wilno, 1856. Ewangelje polskie i żmudzkie na niedziele i wszystkie święta całego roku, Wilno, 1858. Kazlauskas J. 1968: Lietuvių kalbos istorinė gramatika, Vilnius: Mintis. Laigonaitė A. 1957: Pašalio vietininkai dabartinėje lietuvių kalboje. – Kai kurie lietuvių kalbos gramatikos klausimai, Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, 21–39. Lietuvių 1991: Lietuvių kalbos atlasas 3, Vilnius: Mokslas. Palionis J. 1967: Lietuvių literatūrinė kalba XVI–XVII a. Vilnius: Mintis. Senkus J. 1958: Kai kurios kapsų ir zanavykų tarmių veiksmažodžių ypatybės. – Lietuvos TSR mokslų akademijos darbai. Ser A, 2(5). Skardžius Pr. 1930: Dėl „Universitas linguarum Litvaniae“ autoriaus. – Archivum Pholologicum 1. Subačius G. 1993: Simono Daukanto Didysis lenkų-lietuvių kalbų žodynas. – Simono Daukanto raštai. Didysis lenkų-lietuvių kalbų žodynas 1. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 8–54. Universitas 1981: Anoniminė 1737 m. gramatika: Universitas Linguarum Litvaniae. Vilnius: Mokslas. Zinkevičius Z. 1966: Lietuvių dialektologija, Vilnius: Mintis. Zinkevičius Z. 1980: Lietuvių kalbos istorinė gramatika 1, Vilnius: Mokslas. Zinkevičius Z. 1982: Lietuvių kalbos postpoziciniai vietininkai. – Baltistica 1988: 18(1), 21–38. Zinkevičius Z. 1988: Lietuvių kalbos istorija 3: Senųjų raštų kalba, Vilnius: Mokslas. EINIGE ZÜGE DER NORMIERUNG DER MORPHOLOGIE IN DEN „EVANGELIEN“ AUS DEM JAHRE 1858 Zusammenfassung „Ewangelie polskie i litewskie“ („Polnische und litauische Evangelien“) gehören zu den Büchern religiösen Gehalts, die im 19. Jahrh. am häufigsten neu herausgegeben wurden mit Verbesserungen. Der Vergleich der Ausgaben dieser „Evangelien“ von 1856 und 1858 erlaubt auffallende Besonderheiten in den morphologischen Verbesserungen festzustellen, die auf einen sprachlichen Modernisierungsprozeß hinweisen: 1. Die Flexionsendungen des Dativs Plur. -mis und -mus werden durch -ms ersetzt (-mis → -ms und -mus → -ms)(108X), vgl.: židamis → židams, žmonemus → žmoniems. 2. Der Illativ, Allativ und Adessiv werden durch präpositionale Konstruktionen ersetzt (34X), vgl.: namosna → ing namus, grabop → pas grabą, sawimp → pas sawe. 3. Auch die athematischen Verben werden verbessert (17X), vgl.: eumi → einu und esmu → esmi (in dem Ersatz von esmu durch die ältere schon aus dem Gebrauch schwindende Form esmi spiegelt sich vielleicht der Dialekt des Redakteurs wider, der jedoch vorläufig schwer zu lokalisieren ist). 91 Die Verbesserungen in den Neuausgaben weisen auf die Bestrebungen hin, den schon im Laufe 200 Jahren in mehreren Ausgaben erschienenen Text der Umgangssprache anzupassen. Die Verbesserungen in der Anordnung des Textes und der Sprache zeugen davon, daß man sich des Prozesses der Entwicklung einer Sprachnorm bewußt ist. 92