Tradicija ir naujovės „Kalbos kultūroje“

R. VladaRskienė. Tradition and Innovation in Language Culture 9 RASUOLĖ VLADARSKIENĖ Lithuanian Language Institute TRADITION AND INNOVATION Language Culture is described in linguistics and information literature as a continuing publication of the Lithuanian Language Institute, which examines both theoretical and practical issues of language culture and usage (lke 2008: 253; Pupkis 2005: 364–365; Vle iX 172). since 1961, 80 Language Culture notebooks have been published. The article dedicated to this occasion tries to look back, summarize the work done and reflect on the starting point for the future. The preface of the first workbook states that the purpose and task of the publication is to improve and enrich the mother tongue so that it can best meet the needs of society. Language culture determined and consolidated the direction of the post-war normalization of Lithuanian common language and the nature of language culture work. It was the first post-war periodical published in Lithuania dedicated to language practice. In recent decades, the work on the standardization of the Lithuanian language has turned in the direction initiated and consistently continued by this publication. from a textbook for language practice Language Culture has gradually become a solid scientific publication, in which theory and practice go hand in hand. The organizer of the language culture publication and the creator of the direction is the academician kazys Ulvydas. He was the editor of the journal for 30 years (1961-1991), and until 1996 he was a member of the editorial board. Kazys Ulvydas foresaw the direction and tasks of the publication, created theoretical principles, indicated the bars of work and himself published 45 publications in this publication. He was followed by another editor of the publication, Pranas kniūkšta. From 1971 to 1994 he worked as a consultant (member of the editorial board), then as a compiler, and from 1994 to 2003 he was the editor-in-chief. He is currently a member of the editorial board. individual stages of the development of the publication are highlighted in specially dedicated articles: firstly, the article by kazio Ulvydas reviewed the first 10 10 kalbOs kUlTūRa | 81 embroideries (kk 10, 1966, 3–8)*, the 51st notebook discusses 50 embroideries in detail. A conference was held to mark the 25th anniversary of the publication (two notebooks were published each year), the thoughts of its participants were printed in the 52nd notebook. The subsequent 25 notebooks were thoroughly examined by Pranas kniūkšta in his article „Language policy, theory and practice in ‘language culture’“ (pp. 75, 76). The submitted articles are peer-reviewed and carefully edited, because the publication provides language norms, any articles written in any way may not be published in it. Initially, 2002, 9–30). the contributors of the publication were not even named as an editorial board, only as consultants. long-time members of the editorial board were Jonas krupas, Vytautas ambrazas, Juozas Pikčilingis, Vitas labutis, Vincentas drotvinas, Pranas kniūkšta, Kazimieras Gaivenis. The current editorial board consists of: Gintautas Akelaitis, angelė kaulakienė, Pranas kniūkšta, Vitalija Maciejauskienė, Rita Miliūnaitė, Gertrūda naktinienė, Rasuolė Vladarskienė (editor), Marija Zavjalova, Kazimieras Župerka. From the 67th issue onwards, the language culture notebooks are carefully prepared for printing, and from the 68th issue onwards, they are composed by an albino girl. The responsible editors and compilers of the booklets have managed to gather a large group of authors, more than 300 authors have published articles in this publication. Most of the contributors to the publication were linguists from the Institute of Lithuanian Language and Literature (since 1991 the Lithuanian Language Institute), but representatives of other scientific fields have also written about terminology: physicists, astronomers, mathematicians, engineers. During the nearly five decades of the publication’s existence, a whole generation of linguists has changed. Pranas kniūkšta has published more than 90 publications in Language Culture, Kazimieras Gaivenis, Jonas Klimavičius, Nijolė Sližienė have published more than 50, and Antenė Kučinskaitė, Stasys Keinys, Marija Razmukaitė, kazys Ulvydas, Elena Valiulytė, Vytautas Vitkauskas have published more than 30 articles. The most faithful authors of the publication, who have written since the first notebooks and who are still reading, are Vincentas drotvinas, Vitas labutis, Vitalija Maciejauskienė, Marija Razmukaitė, algirdas sabaliauskas, nijolė sližienė, Vytautas Vitkauskas. Other institutions also publish articles in the publication – mainly Gintautas akelaitis (Mykolas Romeris University), Regina koženiauskienė (Vilnius University), irena smetonienė (Vilnius University), Rūta ∗ in parentheses indicating publications of Language Culture, the abbreviation of the publication is written first, followed by the notebook number, year and pages. R. VladaRskienė. Tradicija ir naujovės Kalbos kultūroje 11 Marcinkevičienė (Vytauto didžiojo universitetas), Regina kvašytė (Šiaulių universitetas), kazimieras Župerka (Šiaulių universitetas), keliolika jaunų autorių iš Vytauto didžiojo universiteto, Vilniaus universiteto, kauno technologijos universiteto, Vilniaus pedagoginio universiteto. The editorial staff sometimes managed to convince one other author – not a linguist: philosophers Arvydas Juozaitis (pp. 77, 2004, 138–141) and Gintautas Mažeikis (pp. 77, 2004, 195–200), writer Paulius Subačius (pp. 80, 2007, 135–142), documentalist Bronislovas Vonsavičius (pp. 77, 2004, 10–19), sociologist Laima Nevinkaitė (pp. 81, 2008, 245–265). in the future, the editorial board intends to seek the interaction of linguistics and other closely related sciences. The main work bars of the publication were indicated by the editor-in-chief, Kazys Ulvydas: In Language Culture are printed articles on pronunciation, pronunciation, spelling, punctuation, morphology, syntax, vocabulary, nomenclature, terminology, stylistics, translation language and other issues of current Lithuanian common language practice and theory (kk 6, 1964, 3). During the first few decades, the publication was dominated by short articles on specific recommendations: cases of irregular word formation were discussed, the meanings of words and their combinations were examined, differences between words of similar meaning were discussed, equivalents of Russian words or their combinations were proposed in Lithuanian, irregular values were corrected, the Lithuanian nomenclature was normalized. special attention was paid to terminology issues. The nature of the writings was determined by one of the most important tasks of Language Culture at the time – to provide language consultations to the public in a more popular, accessible and understandable form (k. Ulvydas, kk 11, 1966, 3–11). The most prominent changes in the publication were determined by external conditions. In 1990, the magazine was restored in Lithuania, published monthly. It is devoted to practical issues of language, therefore Language Culture, established as a practical publication, has turned towards the theory of language culture, it pays more attention to the general matters of language culture, as well as the relationship between language and society. Since 1994, there has been only one annual issue of Language Culture, as the terminologists have started publishing their own separate publication, Terminology. decreased by one large work bar, since until then terminology issues were given considerable space in Language Culture. Most of the publications in the field of terminology are published by Kazimieras Gaivenis, Stasys Keinys, Jonas Klimavičius, angelė kaulakienė. However, another aspect of terminology is still being discussed in Language Culture. In 12 kUlTūRa | 81 there have been larger and more varied publications, the aim is to combine linguistic theory and language practice: in addition to broader theoretical articles, articles dealing with specific subjects of language usage are also published. In accordance with the requirements of scientific publications, abstracts in English are attached to the articles from the 70th notebook. In order to reach not only Lithuanian, but also foreign readers, the articles of the publication are referenced in the international databases of scientific information Mla international bibliography and CeeOl. changing the nature of the publication, the recipient of Language Culture has also changed. Initially, when the main focus was on discussing specific language phenomena and making recommendations, the publication was addressed to the general public, more precisely the enlightened community, who were concerned about the preservation and purification of the Lithuanian language. Currently, the scientific publication Kalbos kultūra is primarily aimed at researchers and university lecturers whose activities are related to linguistics. Politicians, journalists, translators, editors, language managers, teachers will also find theoretical support for their practical work here. More specific suggestions on language usage can be found in the section “actualities of language practice”. Discussing the notebooks 51-75, the editor Pranas knyūkšta noted that Kalbos kultūra “was founded to provide language recommendations to the public. but it was never satisfied with direct instruction and correction of errors, it was attempted to examine and explain the phenomena of language themselves, to consider broader questions of language norming and ordering. The further away, the less simple corrections were made, the ‘culture of language’ shifted towards considerations and generalizations” (pp. 75, 2002, 16). Aldonas Pupkis quite accurately identified the nature of the publications of the publication, stating that Language Culture is concerned with the investigated and considered aspect of usage (Pupkis 2005: 365). Language theory, the issues of organization were initially mainly investigated by Ulvydas, later – Vytautas ambrazas, Pranas kniūkšta. In recent years, Rita Miliūnaitė has been working in this bar. In this series of articles, the author systemizes the decades-long work on language standardization, proposes innovations (for example, to divide the variants of usage of linguistic phenomena into normative and non-normative), investigates the relationship between codification and usage in order to establish the perspective of codification, considers the need for a revision of codification (kk 72, 1999, 8–16; kk 73, 2000, 24–35; kk 74, 2001, 27–34; kk 75, 2002, 35–47; kk 76, 2003, 17–29; kk 79, 2006, 9–28; kk 80, 2007, 7–23). The tasks of language culture education are one of the key issues that constantly concern the editors of the publication, because this determines the direction of language culture. as R. VladaRskienė. 13 The need to raise the culture of language, kazys Ulvydas discussed in several articles (kk 1, 1961, 5–11; kk 14, 1968, 3–6; kk 15, 1968, 7–16; kk 32, 1977, 3–21). Over time, the conditions of life in society changed, and the attitude to language and the status of language itself changed. danguolė Mikulėnienė pointed out the current tasks of language education: the Lithuanian language, having become the state language, had to be established in all areas of state life, especially in information technologies (kk 75, 2002, 31–34). Rita Miliūnaitė believes that at present “the true concept of language culture – as a cultural language – is becoming distorted in our society, when the learning of general language becomes learning of language errors and, unfortunately, dissolves the last remains of language sense and destroys confidence in one’s own language” (kk 81, 2008, 152). the old methods of teaching and developing language culture are no longer as effective, and new effective ways have not yet been proposed. This topic should be discussed further, especially welcome to share their experience with language subjects teachers. Some of the issues raised and discussed in Language Culture in the first decades of its publication were rejected as inappropriate for the language, while others were accepted and established in language usage as normative. now no one fights children (a. kučinskaitė, kk 8, 1965, 34–35), no one uses roman numerals (d. lukšys, kk 16, 1969, 67), we have long been accustomed to bus stops (P. kniūkšta, kk 22, 1972, 17– 18), and the aim defended by antanas lyberis (kk 38, 1980, 42–43) has become a common, sometimes perhaps too often used word, especially in the business language. There are many such recommendations that are no longer being considered, but there are also those that remain sensitive to this day, for example, the differences in the meanings of some words: there are still mistakes in the use of the words correct, correct and appropriate; uniform and unified; especially and particularly (a. kučinskaitė, kk 2, 1962, 42–44; kk 10, 1966, 16–17; J. Paulauskas, kk 3, 1962, 31–32). The nature and impact of language culture corrections has been discussed in detail by Pranas kniūkšta in his article “on the principles, methodology and impact of ‘language culture’ proposals” (kk 51, 1986, 12–37). some of the language phenomena discussed in the publication remain relevant today. As early as 1966, Kazys Ulvydas wrote: “with the extraordinary pace of development of all branches of culture, science, technology and national economy, there is undoubtedly a continuous movement in language. The users of the Lithuanian literary language are constantly faced with various questions and uncertainties regarding vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, pronunciation, spelling, punctuation and transcription. Since new words and terms are constantly needed to name new objects, things, phenomena and concepts, the issues of vocabulary and terminology are particularly relevant” (kk 10, 1966, 3). These ideas can also be applied to the current problems of language. 14 kalbOs kUlTūRa | 81 The identification of new realities is a constant source of concern, only the direction of their penetration into the Lithuanian language has changed. Language culture prevented the spread of foreign words borrowed from the Russian language – Lithuanian equivalents of Russian words or their combinations were proposed, and a number of articles began similarly: How to translate... Since 66 aps. (1994) there has been talk about the spread of foreign words from Western European languages in the Lithuanian language: the use and norm of new foreign words, the relationship between normative and non-normative foreign words, the search for and selection of equivalents, the grammar are discussed (V. Rudaitienė, n. Jonas Paulauskas (kk 27, 1974, 40–49; kk 37, 1979, 77–80) and Gertrūda naktinienė (kk 73, 2000, 12–24; kk 75, 2002, 47–56; kk 78, 2005, 191–204) discussed the current general problems of lexical standardization. There are plenty of specific recommendations on word formation, meaning, and use, especially in the first 40 volumes, when the issue was mostly made up of short articles on words, their combinations or forms. Later, individual phenomena have been examined more thoroughly, for example, Pranas kniūkšta discusses in detail the meaning in word order (pp. 77, 2004, 20–25), indicates the differences in the meanings of verbs write, indicate, list (pp. 80, 2007, 107–109). The articles he wrote in the last decade are distinguished by the abundance of lexicographical and usage data and the strength of his arguments (kk 71, 1998, 16–26; kk 72, 1999, 35–47; kk 73, 2000, 47–61; kk 75, 2002, 105–120; kk 78, 2005, 90–110). almost every notebook contains articles on subjects of nomenclature standardization. Vitalija Maciejauskienė (kk 51, 1986, 43–47) reviewed in detail the articles on this topic in the 51 notebook, and she herself has published more than 20 articles on the Lithuanian nomenclature. Mainly written about place names, their genders were standardized, the pronunciation was corrected, the grammar of transcribed real names was discussed, the development of personal names and the peculiarities of their use. Recommendations for current Lithuanian names are also taken into account (V. Maciejauskienė, kk 77, Language culture constantly examines various problems of morphology and syntax. Especially relevant is the use of adverbs and prepositions. elena Valiulytė started writing about the use of prepositions and synonymy from the 5th notebook and wrote over 20 articles on this topic in the journal Language Culture. questions of the use of links were 2004, 84–95). examined by kazys Ulvydas (kk 26, 1974, 3–14), nijolė sližienė and some more specific things that have been discussed earlier and to which we return again: the use of plural nouns (k. Vosylytė, kk 11, 1966, 37–40; s. keinys, kk 32, 1977, 27–35; R. Miliūnaitė, kk 64, 1993, 28–34), the conjunction and the usage are discussed in both the 5th and 77th notebooks (d. lukšys, kk 5, 1963, 63; a. bielinskienė, kk 77, 2004, 119–123); Issues of R. VladaRskienė. Tradition and Innovation in Language Culture 15 (pp. 14, 1968, 63–64; 45, 1983, 21–24; 54, 1988, 36–38; 71, 1998, 26–28; 77, 2004, 40–45), Jonas Šukys (pp. 75, 2002, 78–84; 78, 2005, 133–143), Rita Miliūnaitė (pp. 77, 2004, 26–39) and others. Gintautas Akelaitis’ articles on the use of widespread (fashionable) but not always correct words and constructions are mentioned (kk 78, 2005, 67–78; kk 79, 2006, 51–61; kk 80, 2007, 45–54). the formation of names of people of states and countries, raised in the 4th notebook (k. aleksynas, kk 4, 1963, 39–40), remain relevant even now (d. liutkevičienė, kk 74, 2001, 60–65; kk 81, 2008, 80–102). The issues of recovery have also been discussed several times (a. Valeckienė, kk 21, 1971, 51–52; s. krinickaitė, kk 45, 1983, 53–57; J. klimavičius kk 80, 2007, 97–106). the problem of word order is also constantly examined. nors iš dalies lietuvių kalbos žodžių tvarka yra laisva, tačiau apie tuos atvejus, kai ji yra svarbi, Kalbos kultūroje rašyta ne kartą ir anksčiau, ir dabar (V. Grinaveckis, kk 1, 1961, 30–31; V. ambrazas, kk 9, 1965, 24–27; V. būda, kk 13, 1967, 37–47; l. Vaicekauskienė, kk 69, 1997, 61–63; R. Miliūnaitė, kk 79, kirčiavimo ir tarties dalykai daugiau kalbininkų dėmesio sulaukė, kol dar nebuvo išleistų pagrindinių norminamųjų veikalų (šiais klausimais aktyviai rašė antanas lyberis, Jonas klimavičius, Valerija Vaitkevičiūtė, Vytautas Vitkauskas), pastaruosiuose leidinio sąsiuviniuose straipsnių šia tema sumažėjo. Although publications appear less frequently, they are attractive in their ambition (d. Mikulėnienė, kk 63, 1992, 75–79; kk 65, 1993, 72–74; V. kavaliauskas, kk 72, 1999, 88–92; kk 78, 2005, 111–127; a. kazlauskienė, 2006, 173–196). kk 75, 2002, 131–137; kk 76, 2003, 108–114; a. Malakauskas, kk 68, 1995, 81–86; kk 76, 1997, 101–103; a. The issues of spelling were more relevant until the publication of the normative publication Lithuanian Spelling and Interpunction (1989; 2nd photographic edition, 1992). Later, the main focus was on the adaptation of real words from other languages, the spelling of the names of companies, institutions and organizations. 2003, 102–108). In 1963, Ulvydas examined the principles of punctuation in common language (semantic, grammatical and intonational) and emphasized: “since punctuation, perhaps, comes most of all from the meaning of the language, then, both in teaching and in practical writing, the greatest attention should be paid to the rapid perception of the meaning of the sentence” (kk 5, 1963, 15). His ambiguities in the punctuation of exceptional sentence parts, modal and insertive words, comparative phrases were later attempted to explain, the punctuation rules were corrected, slightly changed. The reasons for changing the divorce rules and the interpretation of the later changed rules are also historically revealed here (V. ambrazas, kk 38, 1980, 7–14; G. akelaitis, kk 45, 1983, 62–69; b. dobrovolskis, kk 53, 1987, 15–21). recent changes in the divorce rules discussed in Language Culture by albinos drukteinis (kk 79, 2006, 197–208). In 1965, the 9th volume of Language Culture presented a series of corrections to the language of protocols, a publication entitled "Let's improve the office language". This call to focus on an important area of language use has received a strong response. questions of clerical (administrative) language have begun to be examined in a coherent and detailed manner, from correcting individual errors to examining broader problems. previously worried about the influence of Russian language on the language of documents, now – about the effect of translation of documents on the Lithuanian administrative language. Because of its influence on other common language variants, the administrative language has always been an important subject of language standardization. several linguists have written on specific topics, e.g. : Jonas Palionis (kk 2, 1962, 46), antanė kučinskaitė (kk 7, 1964, 66–67), albertas Rosinas (kk 9, 1965, 37–39), Vitas labutis (kk 11, 1966, 28–32), elena Grinaveckienė (kk 14, 1968, 29–30), nijolė sližienė (kk 16, 1969, 14–18; kk 17, 1969, 17–20; kk 35, 1978, 3–6), elena Valiulytė (kk 16, 1969, 67; kk 19, 1970, 78), Vytautas ambrazas (kk 19, 1970, 42–43), adelė Valeckienė (kk 23, 1972, 60; kk 36, 1979, 53–56). Later, this language variant has been studied systematically. Pranas kniūkšta and Rasuolė Vladarskienė are the main writers of the office (administrative) language. Language culture has always been concerned not only with correct, but also stylistic and figurative language. The issues of stylistics and eloquence have been explored in the last decade by Regina koženiauskienė (kk 71, 1998, 68–74; kk 74, 2001, 74–81; kk 77, 2004, 103–108) and Kazimieras Župerka (kk 71, 1998, 59–65; kk 78, 2005, 56–66; kk 79, 2006, 62–73). About the visuality of phraseologisms wrote klementina Vosylytė (kk 75, 2002, 121–124), the peculiarities and curiosities of the use of phrases were examined by Jolanta Zabarskaitė (kk 74, 2001, 65–69; kk 79, 2002, 121–124), and the use of phrases in the literature was examined by Vytautas Kavaliauskas (kk 74, 2001, 65–69; kk 79, 2002, 121–124). This is the editorial board’s effort to look at language culture 2006, 249–255). R. VladaRskienė. Tradition and innovation in language culture 17 After Lithuania regained its independence, the Language Culture Publication took care of ensuring the status of the state language. This topic has been addressed in Vytautas Ambraz (kk 56, 1989, 3–7) and Pranas Kniūkštas (kk 58, 1990, 21–34; 34–54). The issues of language policy under consideration change over time – earlier it was important to establish Lithuanian as a state language, now it is important to preserve the language’s specificity in a multilingual European Union, where 21 languages are recognized as official and an extremely large number of texts must be quickly translated into Lithuanian. In these circumstances, the experience of other countries, especially smaller ones, which are trying to resist the penetration of English into all areas of language use, is useful – it is shared in the 79th notebook (kk 79, 2006, 96–101, 102–111, 131–136). Rasuolė Vladarskienė (kk 79, 2006, 41–50) and lina Murinienė write about the effect of translations of ES documents on the Lithuanian administrative language (kk 81, 2008, 170–184). In language culture, various linguistic information is printed. Initially, lists of publications important for language practice were provided, later, reviews of language publications began to be printed. very useful publications that introduce the language publications being produced and discuss the principles of their preparation. We cooperate closely with the State Lithuanian Language Commission, publish its resolutions, their comments, and print the annual activity reports of this institution. more broadly: to examine not only violations of language norms, but also to investigate current phenomena of usage, the relationship between language and society, to introduce the latest sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic and other researches, to search for new topics and problems. when discussing the relationship between language and society, a sociolinguistic approach is used. R. Miliūnaitė’s article discusses how the image of a person is created by means of language at the intersection of linguistic and social factors (kk 78, 2005, 32–55); The relationship between common language and dialects is examined (l. Grumadienė, kk 74, 2001, 81–86; a. Pupkis kk 80, 2007, 64–75; M. Ramonienė kk 79, 2006, 137–148). The language of advertising is examined by dalia blažinskaitė (kk 73, 2000, 96–101; kk 75, 2002, 125–131; kk 77, 2004, 56–66; kk 78, 2005, 144–152) and irena smetonienė (kk 74, 2001, 69–73; kk 76, 2003, 126–130). with psycholinguistic studies of children’s language introduces ineta savickienė (kk 78, 2005, 231–240), laura kamandulytė (kk 79, 2006, 264–272).