„Clavis Germanico-Lithvana“

The soldier will use 9096 statutes written today, various military manuals, dictionaries terms. Therefore, today probably rarely succeeds to see the results of their normative work in life, and not in articles. I can both boast and be ashamed that today I hear in the speech of soldiers and volunteers the past term that I released three or four years ago and some ill-considered word. Such dictionaries should be expanded, updated and repeated every five to eight years. This is especially relevant in these times, when life is changing so quickly. At the time of writing the dictionary, neither dragons nor jégeriy were yet in the Lithuanian army, so they are not in the dictionary, but should be included. It seems that we have decided to march towards NATO with sufficient determination, which means that weapons, war theory and practice will change, and that means new phenomena, concepts, terms. All this needs to be managed, standardized and implemented without delay. Antanas Smetona LITERATURE Kratkij... 1986: Kparkni pyccK0-JIIHTOBCKHĖ pa3IOBODHHK OyKkyLuKero BoHHa.—Short Russian-Lithuanian conversations of a future soldier, BunsHroc: T'oc. rporipoM. Come on. Juer. CCP. Laurinaitis J. M. 1938: The maturation of the military language. —The Sword 10. Laurinaitis J. M. 1938: Foreignness and military language. —Your native language. 1941. pp. 31. "C.S. Lewis". Pyccko-J7rtrToBckHū c/roBaps, Mocksa: T 'ocyJiapCTBEHHOE H3)ATEJIbCTBO VHHOCTpaHHbIX H HALIHMOHAJIbHEIX CJIOBapeXH. Smetona A. 1995: Karybos žodynas, Vilnius: Lithuanian Military Academy. Shebalin D. (red.) 1944: llle6amun JĮ. B. (pen.) KparkHii pyccKO-JIHTOBCKHĖ pa3roBOpHHK, Mocksa: Boenuanar HKO. CLAVIS GERMANICO-LITHVANA. LITHUANIAN-GERMAN DICTIONARY OF THE 17TH CENTURY, PART 1 A-E. VILNIUS: MOKSLO IR ENCIKLOPEDLJU LEIDYKLA, XIII + 629 P, 1995 (BIBLIOTHECA BALTICA). Professor V. Drotvinas of Vilnius Pedagogical University is currently the most famous researcher of the 17th-18th century manuscript dictionaries of Lesser Lithuania, determined to publish these more difficult to access linguistic works of the time. The first fruit of Prof. V. Drotvinas’s endeavour was the Lexicon Lithuanicum, published in 1987 by Mokslo publishing house, which for a long time, according to J. Gerulis, was considered to be a copy of D. Klein’s lost manuscript dictionary. In preparing this dictionary for publication and after careful studying it, Prof. V. Drotvinas convincingly proved that this is not the case, because “both the critical interpretation of previous facts and the comparison of some linguistic data do not allow the Lexicon Lithuanicum to be identified with D. Klein’s dictionary, i.e. to be considered as a copy of D. Klein’s dictionary” (Lexicon Lithuanicum, p. 15). 270 Ready “Lexicon Lithuanicum", prof. V. Drotvin took another job began — to prepare for the press several times larger už “Lexicon Lithuanicum" The 17th a. century manuscript dictionary “Clavis Germanico-Lithvana- ”, which also differs significantly from the “Lexicon Lithuanicum” in terms of the principles of compilation. Unfortunately, due to the unfavorable conditions for the publication of such books, the first half of “Clavis...”, which had been prepared a long time ago, was published in 1995 in the “Bibliotheca Baltica” series by the “Science and Encyclopedias” publishing house. In his remarks on the dictionary of Friedrich Pretorius, “Clavis Germanico-Lithvana”, which begins this publication after “Pratarmés”, Prof. V. Drotvinas emphasizes that “neither on the cover nor in the text of the dictionary is the name of the author or the year of writing of the dictionary. For a long time, the age of the authors and the dictionary was determined by the names. In the first volume, page 9, it is written in Latin: "I belong to Kristijonas Frydrichas Štimeri, a Prussian from Želviškis, a priest from Gerviškėnai". At the top of the last unnumbered page and the first numbered page there is written in German: “This book belongs to the preceptor Wilhelm Theodor Schimmelpenning in Ziliai, Ragainese district.” These records greatly mislead earlier researchers: the author of the dictionary was considered to be one of its owners — Stimer” (p. XIII). Thus, in some respects, both the authorship and the time of writing of this dictionary are very close to the history of the Lexicon Lithuanicum, although Prof. J. Lebedys had already stated in 1956 that “Clavis Germanico-Lithvana” is the work of Friedrich Pretorius and that it was finished about 1674, at the latest about 1675 (see: Smulkioji lietuvių tautosaka XVII-XVIII a. Paruošė J.Lebedys, Vilnius, 1956, 509-512). However, later research by Prof. V. Drotvin showed that this dictionary was "written a decade later" (p. XIV). For Lithuanian language lexicographers and Lithuanian language history researchers in general, “Clavis...” is interesting in many aspects. First, it is written according to the German concordances of the Bible. Since the concordances of K. Agricola were popular in Germany in the 17th century, it can be safely said that E. Pretorius used one of the editions of the concordances by this author. But, as Prof. V. Drotvinas has established, E. Pretorius took not all the words of Luther’s Bible, but only the most significant ones and presented their Lithuanian equivalents, adding a German sentence of the Bible and its Lithuanian translation. Here immediately arises the question, to which Prof. V. Drotvinas, unfortunately, did not answer, whether Pretorias translated the Bible illustrations himself, or did he use J. Bretkūno Bible translation? Prof. V. Drotvinas is inclined to believe that E. Pretorius probably did not use J. Bretkūno Bible translation, because the illustrations do not constitute the full text of the Bible. Thus, “Clavis...” still awaits further research, because only a careful linguistic and textological analysis of the illustrations will show whether E. Pretorius worked completely independently or used previous works by J. Bretkūnas, B. Will's work. The second thing that interests the lexicographer most is the selection of words and the selection of Lithuanian equivalents. Recalling that there was almost no work of this kind at the time, one can agree with Prof. V. Drotvin's idea that E. Pretorius hardly used the anonymous manuscri271 pt of the mid-17th century "Lexicon Lithuanicum". This would be shown by the author’s handwritten additions to the dictionary, which Prof. V. Drotvinas divides into groups in terms of content: “1) new heading words with Lithuanian equivalents; 2) synonyms of those equivalents, variants of construction or substitution, and 3) illustrations of the usage of Lithuanian words (usually Bible sentences in German and Lithuanian- )" (p. XII). In addition to the author’s handwritten additions, Prof. V. Drotvinas also distinguishes in his “Notes...” notes which are also “usually added to the title words or their equivalents, otherwise some kind of grammatical notes”, but these notes are “written in a completely different handwriting than the whole dictionary, not calligraphically, but as if in haste, in smaller letters, in ink of varying brightness, usually after Lithuanian words or between lines” (p. XII). Prof. V. Drotvin counts more than two hundred such entries in the entire dictionary. Having indicated that the authors are not identified, the author of “Clavis...” speculates that part of the notes may have been written by E Pretoriaus son Eryd-rich, who inherited the parish of Žiliai after his father’s death, the other part — by Wilhelm Theodor Schimmelpennig and Christian Friedrich Stimmer, who owned this dictionary, and two or three other persons, and in closing he adds that “The content and authorship of the notes should be specially investigated” (p. XII). This is an extremely interesting and difficult task, because linguists alone are unlikely to be able to determine their authorship. We can't do without the help of graphologists. It is hardly likely that graphologists will be able to elucidate the authorship of these relatively short entries, especially since, for example, no other writings by K. E. Štimeris seem to have survived (cf. Biržiška V. Aleksandrynas 2, Vilnius: Sietynas, 1990, 111). But this can only be said by graphologists. Such doubts show how many unsolved mysteries our ancient writings, especially manuscripts, still hide, and how important they are for the history of our language and culture. Of course, each such publication is an extraordinary event. Therefore, the author of this publication, Prof. V. Drotvinas, deserves the greatest respect and thanks. The Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the IMTEC Foundation, financed the publishing house “Clavis...”, the publishing house of science and encyclopedias, which in these times of global materialization decided to publish an invaluable book for our language science. One would like to hope that the other volumes of E. Pretorius- ’s dictionary, prepared long ago by Prof. V. Drotvinas, will have a favourable fate. Joseph Karaceus EXEGIT MONUMENTUM / On March 16, 1996, Kazys Ulvydas, PhD in Humanities, Corresponding Member of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, died. One of the most brilliant Zarijy remaining from the beautifully glow-in-the-dark centre of Lithuanian science in Independent Lithuania in the interwar period, which shone with all its brightness during the long years of occupation and 272