Apie iškalbos ydą – tuštumą (pagal Antaną Baranauską ir Kazimierą Jaunių)

R. KoženiausKienė. about the defect of speech – emptiness (according to Antanas Baranauskas REGINA KOŽENIAUSKIENĖ Vilniaus universitetas and Kazimieras Jaunius) 283 aPie iŠKaLBos YDĄ – TUŠTuMĄ (by Antanas Baranauskas and Kazimieras Jaunius) The Latin Scriptural saying vanitas vanitatum et omnia vanitas (‘the vanity of vanities and everything is vanity’) applies to all circumstances of life: to describe the poverty of both earthly and spiritual life, false values. Emptiness, or emptiness, is also suitable for describing the lack of internal content of language, its meaninglessness, hollowness, talkative language (such a talkative, talkative), emptiness is called human arrogance, pride, the desire to brag about their eloquence. It must be said that the emptyness as a defect of speech is almost not mentioned in the current books of stylistics and rhetoric, although this does not mean that it was not mentioned in earlier times. Therefore, it is worth remembering the authors of this article, Antanas Baranauskas and Kazimieras Jaunius, who are better known to us for other fields of activity, rather than as theorists and practitioners of speech. Their thoughts1 on the requirements of the style of speech and the greatest defects based on the classical secular tradition are relevant, outdated and have a lasting value for language culture in the broad sense. This article will allow you to look at these authors with a new eye. A little history at the beginning. During the period of the ban on the Lithuanian press, when the teaching of oratory in Polish was prohibited at the Kaunas seminary, Bishop Motiejus Valančius ordered that this science be taught in “Lithuanian or Samogitian and 1 This is set out in their abstracts, which were published in separate books. The article is quoted everywhere from the following publications: Dvasiškoji iškalba, surašytoji iš Kun. Dr. K. Jauniaus išguldinimų. seinai, Laukaitis and Bvė printing house, 1909. (the article is marked KJ and the page of the book is indicated after the abbreviation.); a. Baranauskas. Homiletics, or the Science of Holy Speech. Vilnius: Institute of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore, 2005. It should be recalled that the abstracts of K. Jaunius were published earlier than those of his teacher A. Baranauskas – his booklet appeared in 1909, and A. Baranausko – in 1910. In 2005, only 96 years later. 284 KaLBos KuLTūRa | 81 teach pupils to preach in that language”2 to the author of the “anykščių šilelis” a. Baranauskas (1835–1902) – he taught in this seminary in 1866–1884. His pupil K. Jaunius (1848–1908), who studied at the Kaunas seminary and attended lectures by A. Baranauskas on moral theology, Lithuanian language and “Homilies, or the Holy Speech of Science”, later taught the same subjects himself. After studying at the Catholic Spiritual Academy in St. Petersburg, K. Jaunius returned to the Kaunas Seminary and taught there from 1880 to 1892 (as a professor from 1885). K. Jaunius continued the work of his teacher A. Baranauskas, who had been appointed as vicar-bishop of the diocese of Telšiai since 1885, and as bishop of Seinai since 1897, teaching oratory (but he did not copy, he prepared completely new oratory concepts). Like his famous predecessor, K. Jaunius improved the knowledge of Lithuanian language of future preachers. Without knowledge of Lithuanian grammar, it was not possible to teach speech, so it is understandable why these priests, at first for purely practical purposes, and later for true vocation and “aquavity”, were immersed in the Lithuanian linguistics science and, among other merits, are known as scholars. They still amaze linguists with their extensive linguistic erudition, volatile scientific imagination, good command of their mother tongue, its richness, fluency and clarity, and knowledge of dialects3. Both authors’ works as linguists have been studied by Lithuanian and foreign scholars, but they are little known from that area of linguistic activity which Baranauskas calls “holy” and K. Jaunius – “spiritual” eloquence. These creators of Lithuanian speech theory and practice are also deserved as pioneers of the Lithuanian language style science. a. Baranauskas’ abstracts are much wider, they contain more theory, but they remained unprinted for a long time (the text printed in 2005 is 297 pp.). K. Jaunius’ booklet (40 pp.) – although small, it was printed much earlier (years after his death). systematically laid out speech practice4 course, concise and clearly formulated requirements for a good speaker written like a compendium by K. Jaunius. For the first time in Lithuanian terms (emptyness is also its term), in addition to the methodically written paragraphs of good eloquence, the Institute of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore holds this extremely important document of support and promotion of Lithuanianness – the letter of Bishop M. Valančius to A. Baranauskas, dated 31 December 1870 (F.1–176). Thus, from 1871 (the year in which K. Jaunius entered the Kaunas seminary) speech began to be taught in Lithuanian. 3 for more details. Drotvi nas V., Gr inavecki s V. Linguist Kazimieras Jaunius, Vilnius: Mintis, 1970. 4 At the beginning of his abstracts, K. Jaunius himself explains why he undertakes practical teaching of oratory: “But much easier and, in fact, more necessary are the practical laws, without which the narrator of the word of God cannot fulfil his ministry and calling” (KJ 3). R. KoženiausKienė. about the defect of eloquence – emptiness (according to Antanas Baranauskas and Kazimieras Jaunius) 285 folk characteristics (we will not talk about them in this article), style defects, as he calls them, jeibės (lat. defectus): obscuritas (obscurity of language), fucus, artificia (excessive pomp), vilitas (poorness of language), and – vanitas (emptyness of language). Emptiness, as we will see, includes both vagueness and excessive pomp of language, and many other ethical defects of the speaker’s personality. This flaw in the style of eloquence, as forgotten, but already relevant in our days, will be discussed in this article. We will rely on the works of both authors, because their ideas do not intersect, do not contradict, but also do not repeat, but only support, complement, expand each other. According to Baranauskas and Jaunius, the emptiness of the language could be described as follows: it is a polyword, excessively ornate, loud but unclear, as if covered in fog, unargued, unwise speaking of the same thing through the same thing in different words, without saying anything specific. a. Baranauskas calls the non-speaker and the multilingual gyrūn. The improper teaching of such a speaker is “gloomy and chattersome” (aB 144). After all, we too flow like a stream from a steep mountain”5 (aB 184). even if the speaker chooses a good thing patį turime galvoje, kai sakome: tušti puodai garsiai skamba. autorius mano, kad „šventiems žodžiams reikia tekėti kaip didi tyki upė negi galvą trukti (i.e., a suitable subject), “vanity will not allow him to speak it well, because the desire to boast, and vanity always builds shine above meaning [...]. If we add to this the servants of vanity: the excessive use of language in the meaning6, the gathering of excessive ornaments of eloquence, the speaking from high, the excessive use of twists and turns7, – there is nothing to be ashamed of, that all the heat, the fragrance, and the parts and all the benefit8 are wasted by the preaching of the whisperers of the preachers” (aB 105). K. Jaunius, like A. Baranauskas, calls empty speech that from which the listeners do not get any benefit. This happens when the speaker “knot empty and meaningless words and sentences”, grinds his tongue, speaks a lot and for a long time, but always the same thing through the same thing. The listeners from such a speaker "get a lot of vague impressions, hear many things and review in their theatre, but learn nothing from the whole statement and do not make any mistake" (KJ 5). Thus such “speech is vain and unfruitful” (KJ 7). 5 Some of the sounds written by a. Baranauskas are transcribed by quoting the current spelling. 6 The style of the language is called the insymum. 7 Convulsions and pronunciation – these are gestures and voice, tone, intonation, dialect. K. Jaunius calls this the mocking and all manner of behaviour (KJ 6) in preaching. 1000 BC) is a preacher, whose name is mentioned in several texts. K. Jaunius calls the preacher a narrator of the word of God. 286 Language Culture | 81 By comparing the two authors’ books of Proverbs, the reasons for the emptiness of the language could be described as follows: 1. The speaker is not prepared and has not planned his speech. 2.The speaker is self-loving, proud of himself and wants to please the listeners at all costs. 3. The speaker loves the ornaments of speech so much that he forgets the content. We will discuss these reasons for language emptiness in more detail. a. Baranauskas, based on St. Bernard, writes: Infunde ut effundas (Latin) "we must first fill what we are going to pour out". If the vessel is not filled (unprepared), speech is empty, many words, little knowledge, thoughts are unclear, things are false9, things are only in appearance10, often untrue (aB 121). both authors emphasize the importance of laboriousness (labor) – seriously preparing for sermons, gathering material, reading sources, writing, rethinking, correcting, rewriting, preparing to speak and speaking properly. Otherwise, it is difficult to achieve that the sermon is given according to the rules of good eloquence and is, as K. Jaunius writes, without “jeibių”, i.e. without defects. The authors mention both the further preparation (reading the writings of the Holy Fathers of the Church, laity classics, studying the Holy Scripture, diverse education) and the closer preparation for the sermon – its planning, selection and arrangement of arguments, composition of speech, reflection on all its parts. Diligence and good preparation are needed not only for the preacher: “Laziness of both spiritual and unspiritual workers brings poverty” (KJ 11), says K. Jaunius and urges to take the example of diligence from the secular masters of rhetoric. “Those whom we exalt and love, we do not enter into them with empty or unwise words,” writes A. Baranauskas about the respect shown to the listeners by good preparation (aB 146). It should be emphasized that both authors showed great respect for the masters of classical rhetoric among the laity, emphasized their diligence, serious preparation to speak, quoted many of their thoughts in the original language, adapted them to the audience of their seminary – almost every page can be found “heads” of Aristotle, Demosthenes, Plato, Cicero, Horace, Seneca, Quintilian and other wise men’s considerations, advice, sentences. K. Jaunius writes: “Demostenes, desiring to acquire eloquence, distanced himself from the society of men, re-wrote Thucydides’ stories seven times by his own hand and spent many years of labor and exercise in the 9 Abelni – general, abstract. 10 Davadai (Polish) – arguments, conclusions. R. KoženiausKienė. about the defect of speech – emptiness (according to Antanas Baranauskas and Kazimieras Jaunius) 287 tin without rest. Cicero’s work was no less, as he himself says: “acerrimo studio tenebar”. and today all who desire to acquire the eloquence of the world are not afraid of any work, of any learning. So the question here is, is spiritual speech, which increases the glory of God and leads people to eternal salvation, worth less labor?” (KJ 11). About the second cause of emptiness – self-love – a. Baranauskas says that “climbing the goat’s lair11, provoked by vanity or self-love, is an opposition to the images of Christ the Lord and the apostles, a dishonor to God, a sin against one’s neighbor, a damage to oneself...” (aB 101–102). the author believes that self-narration, the search for self-honour is not the voice of love of God and neighbor, but the voice of vanity. Likewise, “beware of boastful wisdom and knowledge: let it be best for him to be understood by all, not to be called learned” (aB 137). It would be dishonorable for a preacher to seek empty honor for himself and to be more concerned with himself than with the spiritual salvation of his listeners. K. Jaunius imperatively emphasizes that speakers should “beware of the stubbornness of vile self-love” (KJ 17), considering self-love a great iniquity. In the chapter of the book “about the goodness and holiness of life” Baranauskas quoted the famous definition of Cato the Elder’s orator Vir bonus dicendi peritus “a good man with experience of eloquence”. It is necessary to emphasize that this definition of the orator, in which integrity is raised above and above the eloquence itself, for many centuries existed in the schools of European countries as a postulate. Both Baranauskas and Jaunius put the speaker’s integrity, the sanctity of his thoughts and behaviour in the first place. a. Baranauskas, having expanded and supported the words of Cato the Elder with verses of Virgil, commented on them and concluded with a rhetorical question: “If such should be the case of the pagans, then what kind of treasurer would teach holiness and lead people to the sanctuary?” (aB 106). The third cause of emptiness is that the speaker “does not need to appear cunning and seek to make his speech too ornate” (aB 68). a. Baranauskas compares those who speak like this to trees, with green leaves, but without fruit (aB 71). the author has extensively set out his view on overly ornate language, which “does not come out good”, but only leads to nothing. His arguments are these: the truth must be high, the thought deep, and the words simple and clear, because Christ and all the saints have spoken and given an example of such speech. Looking for glitter does not show good style or speaker’s taste. In his words, "the exaggeration, as everywhere, so also in Kozelnycia (Polish) – a sermon hall. K. Jaunius already uses the Lithuanian term. 288 KaLBos KuLTūRa | 81 news gives the example of the Roman orator Quintilian, who rebuked for gracefulness lawyers who, in defending a moksle, greit atsipriklyja“. Štai mūsų pamokslininkas iškalbingasis P. skarga12 neieškojęs gražių žodžių, nes tai prieštarautų išmintingam protui. a. Baraperson's property or even life, sometimes seek not so much to persuade and persuade judges as to boast that they can speak beautifully (aB 69). It could be added that although K. Jaunius did not blindly follow his teacher A. Baranauskas13, he was a very attentive and gifted student, who took over what he had heard in Baranauskas’ lectures and what a good speaker needs to know. Thus, K. Jaunius also associates the emptiness of language with the tricks and arts (artificia) of secular eloquence, to which the speaker resorts in order to shine, to appear, as K. Jaunius says, to “play”. The Christian truth itself is so beautiful and powerful that it does not need artificial ornaments, it is enough to convey it clearly, so it appeals to the listeners and moves their hearts. However, it is not the beauty of eloquence that should be feared, but rather the importance of the content. The beauty of language should not be for the sake of beauty, but to serve the purpose of making the listener understand the subject better, and to make the truth “enter deeply into the mind and heart” (KJ 8), and “there is no other way to the heart of man but through his mind” (KJ 18). iŠVaDos The emptiness of language, as one of the greatest shortcomings of style, should be discussed in the works of rhetoric and stylistics of today. It would be useful to familiarize not only the clergy with this defect, but also teachers, pupils, university students. even the authors of sermon books, writing about the style of sermons, nowadays do not mention the void of style – a great defect of the conciseness, clarity and content of the language. For example, in the recently published book on the preparation of sermons and rhetoric14, in the chapter “Choice of the style of preaching” (p. 54– 62), the style requirements are set out according to the author’s quotes from contemporary authors.12 Petras skarga – the first rector of Vilnius University, a great preacher, famous for his eloquence. 13 “although Jaunius is my pupil, he does not blindly believe in the teacher,” wrote A. Baranauskas in a letter to H. Weber (see Mor kūnas K. Kazimieras Jaunius. – Kalbos kultūra 14, 1968, 92). 14 see p. Vaičiūnas V. s. 2007. The Reason and the Reasonlessness, London: Routledge, 2007. R. KoženiausKienė. about the defect of eloquence – emptiness (according to Antanas Baranauskas and Kazimieras Jaunius) 289 stylists from Saulėtekis. Neither Baranauskas nor K. Jaunius are mentioned in the list of literature. Baranauskas was the first to lay the foundations of Lithuanian sermon rhetoric (albeit in manuscripts of abstracts), K. Jaunius was the first to set out the requirements for sermon style in Lithuanian printed word (and directly applied them to preachers, although they are suitable for all speakers). K. Jaunius was also the first to systematize and describe the shortcomings of the style, among them the greatest of all – the emptiness of the language. Speaking about the flaws of style conciseness, the authors of contemporary rhetoric and stylistics books15 and Lithuanian school textbooks mention empty-wording, but they understand it much more narrowly – usually only at the level of lexical semantics and grammar (morphology and syntax), as pleonasms, tautology, contradictions, excess of so-called parasitic and inserted words, unconscious stacking of service words, useless use of pronouns, verb nouns or unnecessary participle marks, repetition of the same words, etc. As we have seen, the style emptiness mentioned by A. Baranauskas and K. Jaunius differs from the empty speech perceived in this way. Emptiness is a much broader concept, encompassing all aspects of speech, including issues of the speaker’s ethics. What is dangerous is that emptiness – this frightening disease of the style of speakers of various professions – is spreading like an epidemic. not only some clergymen of our time (we will not evaluate their speech here), but also laymen – politicians, people in power, television presenters, creators of advertising texts and others, who like to speak abstractly, manipulate16 with beautiful but fruitless words, talk a lot and nicely and even brag about such gossip, could learn from the first Lithuanian creators of speech science and draw valuable ideas. Received 25 August 2008 15 see p. : Pik č iling is J. Conciseness of language. – Contemporary Lithuanian Language (collection of articles), 1961, 23–105; Pikčilin g is J. Conciseness. – Lithuanian Language Stylistics 1, 1971, 120–150; Pikči l ing i s J. Words that we use to talk. – Ūkininkas, 1990, no. 2, 22–23; župer ka K. Conciseness of language. – Stilistika, 2001, 104–105; žu perka K. stiliaus kultūra [The shortcomings of language conciseness]. – Stylistic exercises, 2005, 29; Koženiauskienė R. The principle of economics. – Rhetoric: stylistics of speech, 1999, 105; Koženiauskienė R. Conciseness. – Rhetorika: izsakybos stilistika, 1999, 191–192; Vaičiūnas as V. s. – Preaching Preparation and Rhetoric, Kaunas: Vytautas Didysis University Press, 2007, 58–60. 16 Joule Robert-Vincent and Beauvois Jean-Leon. Manipulation guide for decent citizens, Vilnius: alma littera, 2005. 290 KaLBos KuLTūRa | 81 on VaniTY, a ViCe of eLoQuenCe (after a. Baranauskas and K. Jaunius) Summary The authors of present-day textbooks in rhetoric and stylistics often discuss vices of brevity; they also mention irrelevant verbiage, which is often treated much narrower, often at the level of lexical semantics and grammar, and includes pleonasms, tautologies, bywords, an excessive use of the so-called parasitic words and parenthetical phrases, pronouns, deverbal nouns and participial attributes. a. Baranauskas and K. Jaunius in their works mention the vanity of style; However, it is different from irrelevant verbiage. The vanity of style is a broader concept including all levels of language culture, and the ethics is not the least important among them. Politicians, people in high-ranking positions, TV presenters, advertisers, who often use abstract but meaningless words, manipulate the language, should learn from the first Lithuanian rhetoricians. ReGina KoženiausKienė Vilniaus universitetas universiteto g. 5, LT-01513 Vilnius [email protected]