V. Dubo visuotinės literatūros vadovėlio terminų variantai

Asta MITKEVIČIENĖ Institute of Lithuanian Language V. DUBO UNIVERSAL LITERATURE TERMINOLOGY MANUAL TERMINOLOGY VARIANTS One of the sources of terminology in any field of science is the past works of that field. The terms of V. Dubo universal literature textbook are important for understanding the history of the terminology of literary science. It contains the current terms of this and related fields, which were widely created in the 1920s. Vladas Dubas (1887-1937) — interwar Lithuanian literary scholar, novelist, publicist, writer. He was highly educated — he studied in Warsaw, Paris, Rome, graduated from Moscow University, spoke many languages — Latin, French, German, Italian, Polish, Russian (Bartkus 1987: 57). He was one of the first interwar people to work in a Lithuanian higher education bar. From 1920 V. Dubas lectured on Western European literature at the Higher Courses, and in 1922 he began working at the University of Lithuania, where he taught Romance studies. The written legacy of this scientist (extraordinary professor since 1928) includes the textbook Introduction to General Literature! (1923, the other two editions — 1927 and 1931* — are called Introduction to Literature), a two-volume history of French literature (1929-1930), studies on Chateaubriand (1925), Anatole France (1928), Voltaire (1932) and others. These works are published on the basis of lectures (Bartkus 1987: 56-57; LLE 2001; VLE V 2004). Dubas relied on the principles of the cultural-historical school and its supporters — he paid more attention to the biographies of the creators, the cultural environment, rather than to the artistic analysis of the works (LLE 2001). This led to the abundance of terms from other fields (not only literary) in his works. In some encyclopedias, such as VLE V 2004 and others, the title is "Introduction to General Literature". * The year of the third edition is not given in the textbook, but the bibliographic publications indicate that it was published in 1931. Source of this article ~ V. Dubo universal literature textbook (for secondary schools), —as mentioned, was published three times (with corrections and additions): in 1923 appeared the Introduction to general literature (it is possible that the 1931 m. 119 Introduction to general literature was written in 1920, as this year is indicated at the end of the talk), 0 in 1927 and 1931 —Introduction to literature. Therefore, the first edition is separated from the last by almost a decade. The introduction to general literature is based on lectures given by V. Dubas at the Higher Courses in 1920 (Dubas 1923: XIII). The 1927 Introduction to Literature is a reworking of the 1923 edition of the book, and the third edition of the textbook is a revised and supplemented Introduction to Literature. At once it should be noted that the first edition is very different from the other editions of the textbook (not only in content, volume, but also in language). The introduction to general literature was heavily criticized by A. Voldemaras in a review published in 1923 in Educational Work. The reviewer evaluated this work as follows: “We regret Mr. Dubo’s work, we regret the wasted time, but we still have to admit that the work is inappropriate, so inappropriate that it cannot be corrected” (Voldemaras 1923: 266). A. Voldemar was struck by the structure, content and language of the textbook. First of all, the reviewer did not like the title of the book, because the textbook is an overview of the literature of seven nations, not some kind of introduction to universal literature (Voldemaras 1923: 254-255). In addition, the presentation of the material by genres (the textbook consists of four parts — Epic, Lyric, Drama and Novel), the theory of the emergence of literature, the limitation only to certain works and authors were criticized. A. Voldemar found a number of factual errors, incorrect quotations (both in the original language and translated). The reviewer concludes that "Mr. The dub is not so much mistaken as his sources are” (Voldemaras 1923: 260). He described the language of the textbook as follows: "Reading his book, one feels as if one is walking through a covered deck" (Voldemaras 1923: 268). It can be added that this edition is very rich in various proofreading errors. From the introduction to Literatūra (1927) it is clear that V. Dubas took into account some of the critics’ remarks, but not all. For example, the title of the textbook was changed, interpretations of the literary origin were abandoned, but the structure remained the same (by the way, the arrangement of the material by genres was criticized by B. Sruoga in the review of the second edition (Sruoga 1927: 3)). However, it can be said that the 1927 edition is very different from the first one. 120 First, it is larger (more than 100 pages, 382 pages in total). Secondly, it is much better in terms of language. This was emphasized in a review of the textbook published in Lithuania in 1927 by J. Jablonskis: “Their [errors — A.M.] are relatively few, the author’s language is almost everywhere fluent, correct and as human as possible” (Jablonskis 1959: 446), and by B. Kantvydis: “It is rare to find such school and non-school prints, whose language is so perfect: The author of the Introduction, apparently, worked in that regard and consulted with others” (Kantvydis 1927: 3). The introduction to literature in 1927 was generally positively evaluated by the reviewers (B. Kantvydis, J. Jablonskis, B. Sruoga). Both B. Kantvydis (1927: 3) and B. Sruoga (1927: 2) considered it the best Lithuanian textbook of universal literature of that period. The second and third editions differ relatively little. Most often, not only whole sentences, paragraphs, but also chapters completely coincide in both books. The third edition is slightly thicker than the second (408 pp.). Dubas expanded the third edition with an overview of Slavic literature, but dropped some subsections or paragraphs of the second edition (which usually explain the context of the work). In the words of V. Dubas himself, “when editing this third edition of the Introduction, the author, in general, tried to take into account the measured demands of criticism” (Dubas 1931: 3). However, although V. Dubas claimed to have taken into account the critics’ demands, he did not pay attention to J. Jablonski’s corrections (the same errors of the second edition are found in the third edition). It is noted that the third edition no longer contains some of the proofreading errors of the second edition. The difference in content and language between the first and subsequent editions of the textbook, the similarity between the second and third editions, can be said, determines the use of the same or different terms. Therefore, the second and third editions usually contain the same terms, while some of them are missing in the first edition. This article examines the variants of terms found in all three editions of V. Dubo textbook: phonetic and spelling, morphological, constructive, syntactic. Before examining the variants of terms in V. Dubo universal literature textbook, it is necessary to discuss the concept of 121 variant. In Lithuanian linguistics, instead of the late-appeared term variant were and sometimes still are used the parallel forms (lytis), gretimybė, gretybė, etc., and the pair of variants was called grute (e.g.: Būga 1961: 81; Skardžius 1999: 273)*. The dictionary of linguistic terms states that a variant is "a difference in the same unit of language- ", emphasizing that variants "usually have the same function and differ only in expression, therefore they are often said to be different realizations of the same individual unit of language" (KTŽ 1990). Similarly, this term is defined in foreign linguistic dictionaries and encyclopedias (STJ 1968; KWST 1975; OCDL 1997; P51B 1998 and others), although it is often limited only to its concept in phonology (CJIT 1960; LST 1988; LE 2004 et al. ). Variants — not only a matter of language standardization (Pupkis 1980; Miliūnaite 1995, 2003 and others). In Lithuanian linguistics, variants in dialects are examined (V. Vitkauskas's habilitation thesis Morphonomic phenomena of Lithuanian dialects and their fluctuation, 1999), variation is studied from a sociolinguistic perspective (L. Grumadiene's doctoral dissertation Ilpo6JE Ma couua HOU 00yCcaos- .ae HHoCmu peue8020 6apsuposanus, 1982). Variation in language units is relevant to lexicography. The LKZ presents various types of words and variants of phraseologisms (writing and dialects) (LKZ I 1968: VII, XI, XIV-XV; LKZ instruction 1980: 6, 8-9, 11-12, 15, 19-20, 26, 80, 92, 94, 95, 102-103, 106). The DŽ includes variants of pronunciation of the current common language, more common grammatical, lexical variants, more common dialect variants (DŽ, 2003: 20, 21, 22, 39). In the view of stylistic specialists, there is no strict boundary between variants and synonyms (Zuperka 1983: 29; Pikčilingis 1988: 46-47). In Russian language, there are several variants of the word. The problem of variation and the limit of synonymy is discussed in detail here. K. Gorbachevits considers as word variants the regular variants of one and the same word, whose morphological and constructive structure, lexical and grammatical meaning are identical, and differ only in their phonetic side or form-creating affixes (l'op6auesuu 1978: 17). On the other hand, gruté has also been used in linguistics in a non-terminal sense: it refers to any pair of singulars in a language (e.g.: Būga 1961: 47; Skardžius 1941: 323). 122 riantal are variants of the same word, characterized by the same lexico-semantic function and partly different phonetic structure of the significant part of the word (I'payauna 1981: 39). In the Russian language encyclopedia, for which L. Graudina wrote an article on variants, the following characteristics of grammatical variants are mentioned: grammatical systematicity, regular substitution, functional identity of grammatical meaning, common root (PAD 1998: 62). In many of the former Soviet Union republics, terminology works do not mention the variants of terms at all. The variants are mentioned in the book of O. Akhmanova and others Terminology: Theory and Methods (Akhmanova 1974: 176-177). There are the following lexical variants of terms: phonetic, spelling and morphological. In the Dictionary of Linguistic Terms, O. Achmanova states that variants of terms must be clearly distinguished from duplicates of terms, although this problem has not yet been solved (CJIT 1966). In another important work on terminology —V. In Russian terminology —variants and synonyms are not strictly delimited, but the author emphasizes that synonyms are not suitable for some variants of short terms (Jlannjiienko 1977: 73-79, 174). She bases her opinion on the fact that part of the variants of short terms are made up of the same language material as the long ones, only it is abbreviated (anuuJekko 1977: 174). However, in Lithuanian terminology the variation of the forms of short and long terms is classified as a synonym rather than a variant phenomenon (see Keinys 1974, 1980). The Latvian terminologist V. Skujinia classifies such forms as absolute synonyms (Skujina 2002: 49). The Belarusian linguist G. Veštort in her article Types of variants in terminological lexicon relies on a broad concept of variants — the variantity of terms is here understood as the presence of phonetic, word-forming and lexical duplicates (Bemropr 1985: 39). Variants in terminology are mentioned in the General Terminology of A. Superanskaya, N. Podolskaya and N. Vasilyeva. The authors indicate that the variants of the same word give morphological, phonetic or spelling duplicates of the same root. In general terminology, synonyms and duplicates (variants) are distinguished — synonyms are considered only completely different (i.e. different roots) words, and duplicates — variants of the same word (Cyriepanckas 1989: 51-52). For S. Griniov, term variants are one of the types of absolute synonyms. Based on V. Leičik, he emphasizes, 123 that the concepts of “synonym- ”, “variant” and “duble” meant the same thing in the specialist literature, although variants were sometimes considered as variants of synonyms and dublets as lexical variants (T punes 1993: 108-109). In the Appendix 4 of the Lithuanian Standard Principles and Methods of Terminology, synonyms of terms are words of different roots, and variants are words of the same root with different endings, prefixes and suffixes (RST 1115-90: 27). The following types of variants are listed in the ISO standard International Terminology Standards — Preparation and Layout: spelling, morphological, syntactic variants (ISO 10241:1992 (E): 4). According to the varying units of language, the Dictionary of Vocabulary Terms distinguishes variants of phonemes, morphemes, words, their forms, word combinations, sentences, etc. (KTŽ 1990). Therefore, single-word terms are variants of words, and compound terms are variants of word combinations. For the purposes of this article, term variants are different forms of the same term*. The variants here are divided into 5 groups: 1) phonetic and spelling, 2) morphological, 3) constructive, 4) syntactic, 5) mixed variants. Long and short forms of terms (e.g., singers of hymns 11 8, III 12 — singers 11 10, III 14, political element 11 183 — political element 11 188*, etc.) are not considered variants. In V. Dubo universal literature textbook were found 125 lines of term variants. In the textbook, the most common are phonetic and spelling (68.8% of all variants of ciluciy) and morphological variants (16.8%). There are fewer syntactic variants (896). The rarest variants of terms are constructive and mixed (each 3.2% of all variant rows). The frequency of different types of term variants is shown in Figure 1. The textbook contains 107 (85,676) lines of foreign and hybrid terms (or terms with an international or hybrid variable focus) variants.” + This article is based on the concepts of variant and duplicate in CIL 1990 (a duplicate is a “complementary expression of a linguistic unit”; this term includes variants and synonyms of the same meaning). * Roman numerals indicate the edition, Arabic — the page (rarely — also Roman). * This figure does not include international terms whose origin has no effect on the variation of the term (e.g., syntactic variants). In this article, phonetic variants of terms are discussed together with spelling variants, as phonetic differences are usually reflected in the 124 80% 270 „M Phonetic ir spelling variants 16.8% E Morfologruat variants "£1 Syntactic variants Verb variants 68.8% AN Mixed variants Figure I. Terms variants in V. Dubo textbook Phonetic and spelling variants In terms of expression, phonetic variants of terms usually differ the least from other variants. In the Russian language encyclopedia, phonetic variants are considered to be variants that differ in the pronunciation of sounds, the composition of phonemes, the place of accent, or a combination of these features. There are variants of pronunciation, pronunciation and phonemes (GoneMarHnueckue) (PA1D 1998: 62). According to K. Gorbachev, phoneme variants appeared as language changed, and phonetic (consonant) variants are a living phenomenon (Top6auepyų 1978: 20-22, 123). spelling. Proofreading errors are not considered spelling variants of terms. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to strictly distinguish them from spelling variants. In total, the textbook contains 86 lines of phonetic and spelling variants. Most of the terms in V. Dubo universal literature textbook (almost all international) are variants that differ in vowels. Such variants are usually from different editions of the textbook, e.g.: hipotézé 1 XIV —hypothesis 11 196, III 207, pocte 1 58 —poet II 94, III 108 (and didactic poet 1 184 —didactic poet 11 26, 111 31, court poet 1 222 —court poet 11 112, III 127, epic počētas 1 41 —epic poet 11 269, 111 279, lyrical poet 1 54 — lyrical poet 11 89) (but poet 1 9 —poet 1 98 varies also in this edition). 125 in the same edition), poétika I XV —poetics 11 4, III 131 (and minesinger poctika I TT —minnezingeriy poetics 11 124, 111 138), poétiné kūryba 1 70 —poetic creation II 160, III 178, poetic genre 1 XIV —poetic genre 11 32, 111 37, poetry I XIV — poetry 11 7, 111 11 (and ancient idyllic poetry 1 220 — ancient idyllic poetry 11 313, 11 323, goliard poetry I 82 — "goliard" poetry 11 125, 111 138, lyrical poetry I 53 — lyrical poetry II 88, III 102, mel poetry I 51 — mel poetry 11 7, III 11, patron of poetry I 59 — patron of poetry II 95, 111 109, patron of poetry 1 52 — patron of poetry 11 87, 111 101, kind of poetry 1 XIV — kind of poetry II 269, III 279, rules of poetry 1 153 — rules of poetry 11 116, III 131, theory of poetry 1 153 — theory of poetry 11 237, III 247, genre of poetry 1 4 — genre of poetry 11 88, 111 102, political poetry I 89 — political poetry 1 87 — romantic poetry 11 148, III 163, trubadury poetry 1 82 — "vagabond" poetry 11 125, III 138), "trēnas" II 89, III 103 — train I 53. As can be seen from these pairs of variants, variants with ě are found in the 1923 edition of the textbook, and in later editions they are replaced. These are subjects of history, as evidenced in other literary scientific works and dictionaries of the first half of the 20th century. In 1907, in Tilžė, J. Šlapelis compiled a dictionary of foreign and incomprehensible words (hereinafter —SNŽŽ 1907), which contains the words poet and poetry. In the first Lithuanian textbook of literary theory for secondary schools, published a little earlier than the first edition of V. Dubo textbook ~ K. Bizauskas (d. 1, 1918) —the terms poetic language (17), poetry (18) are already used, and in J. Norkaus 1924 Dictionary of Foreign and Incomprehensible Words (hereinafter —SNŽŽ 1924) —poet, but poetry. According to St. Keinis, Maironis still used the terms poetry, poéta and poète in his Brief History of Universal Literature, published in 1926 (i.e. three years after V. Dubo’s Introduction to General Literature), and only occasionally7. Some of the terms or their elements are written in quotation marks in V. Dubo’s textbook. It has been noted that this is the case for uncircumscribed terms of foreign origin or their elements, Lithuanian substitutes for such terms, etc. Some terms are difficult to explain in quotation marks. 126 herein poetry, poet (see Keinys 2002: 40). In 1928 V. Kamantauskas’s Trumpas dictionary of language irregularities and barbarisms testifies to the change of poet(s) into poet(s). The Interwar International Dictionary of Words (1936, edited by J. Žiugžda) (hereinafter referred to as TŽŽ 1936) established the words hypothesis, poet, poetry, poetic, poetry. Maironis, like V. Dubas in 1923, wrote trenas (See Keinys 2002: 31). However, it is possible to find cases where terms with é and e were used at the same time. The 1923 edition contains only the term rhema, 0 in the 1927 and 1931 editions are also found in topic II 101, III 142, and topic II 40, III 45. It has been noted that in the second edition of the textbook from page 101 only the theme appears and continues to be used, while in the third edition these variants continue to compete (also cf. erotic theme 11 102, 111 284 — erotic theme 111 117, satirical theme 11 102 — satirical theme 111 117). K. Bizauskas used the term tema (6), SNŽŽ 1924 presents the theme. Maironis’ textbook has a theme, but the theme’s breadth (see Keinys 2002: 33, 35), TZZ 1936. "Tema". In addition to the already mentioned variants poéta and poeta (the second variant is less common in the first edition than the first), only in the first edition of the textbook thesis 1 152 and thesis 1 92 compete, although the terms hypothesis 1 XIV, antithesis I 19 are used. In later editions there are already the variants poetas 11 8, III 12, thesis 11 107, III 143% (TZZ 1936 also thesis; SNŽZ 1924 inserted a differently morphologically formulated variant thesis). Variations with short and long vowels. In the textbook of V. Dubas there are pairs of terms that vary in vowel length, e.g.: kalamburas 1 63 —kalambūras 11 99, 111 114, naturalistinė drama I 173 —naturalistinė drama 11 256, III 267, naturalistiné mokykla 1 252 —naturalistinė mokykla 11 259, II 269, naturalistinis romanas 1 246 —naturalisti- * The spelling of the terms literatūrinė revoliucija I 163 (see literatūrinė revoliucija 11 242, 111 252), lyrynė poéma 1 90 (see lyrynė poema 11 141, III 154) literatūrinė and poėma with € is probably a proofreading error. Although these terms are used only once in the first edition, the presence of proofreading errors can be judged from the terms with the elements literary, poem, e.g.: literary direction 1 100, literary school 197, literary current 1175; poem 1 11 (1), cycle poem 1 33, dramatic poem I 166, etc. 127 the appearance in later editions could be explained by the desire to keep the term closer to the original (cf. formula) or other reasons. This version was proposed much earlier by J. Šlapelis and was included in the SNŽZ in 1924. SNŽŽ 1907 and 1924, Maironio (see Keinys 2002: 34), V. Kamantauskas dictionary writes genius. In modern terminology, however, the variants of the first edition (1923) (formula, genius, hero) are used. They also presented TŽZ 1936. Variations of the terminology ends appear not only over time, as we have just discussed, but are also used in the same edition. For example, the first edition contains both psychological analysis 1 227 (see analysis | 54, character analysis I 174, analysis of literary phenomena 1 XIV), and psychological analysis 1 233. In later editions, only psychological analysis is used 11 323, III 333. In Z. Žemaičio Geometry and trigonometry termbook, two variants are written —analizis (analysis- ). At the beginning of the 20th century, the variant analizas was probably used (this is SNŽŽ 1907; this variant was later recorded in SNŽŽ 1924), which in 1928 was changed to analizė in V. Kamantauskas’ dictionary. In the 1923 edition, the term novela 1 141 is used perhaps only once (the first time), and after about 40 pages only the novella is used consistently (as in later editions) W 183, II 204, III 214. Both variants are also written in SNŽŽ 1907, Maironio textbook (the latter still has the phonetic variant novelė) (see Keinys 2002: 40). Different morphologically formed variants idilė 1 10 and idilija 11 24, III 28. As can be seen, these variants were used at different times. The second version is presented in SNŽŽ 1907, as well as SNŽŽ 1924. Its appearance (perhaps due to Russian influence) in later editions of V. Dubo textbook is not accidental. The term idyll was also used by Maironis (see Keinys 2002: 30). The fact that the expression of this term varied in interwar Lithuania is evidenced by TŽZ 1936, which contains both variants idyllia, idyll. However, now is the prevailing variant idyll. The variants of the endings include the unequally Lithuanianized variants of epic I XV, II 3, III 9 and epic I XIV. The latter version of the ending was added to the Greek epic without modification. Only one use of this variant has been found (in the appendix of the first edition, although there is an epic on the adjacent page). Nevertheless, it should be noted that the epic, ma134 tyt, was used until V. Dubo. This term of Greek origin can be found in the textbook of K. Bizauskas in 1918 (p. 64). Maironis used the variant epas (see Keinys 2002: 30). Variants of a number. Number variants account for 14.3% of all morphological variants. In the textbook of V. Dubas, the Middle Ages III 66 and the Middle Ages 1127, 111 31. These variants compete only in the third edition of the book (see also Early Middle Ages III 55, Medieval Literature III 286, Middle Ages 111 35 and Medieval Ideal 111 66). It has been noted that the secondary terms are usually in the plural form medieval. Maironis also used medieval, although in his textbook the more common variant is medieval (see Keinys 2002: 42). As the material provided by LKŽ XIX 1999 shows, the singular form of this term was used in Aušra, K. Būga and others (probably mainly in the late 19th century — early 20th century). The morphological variants of the number are the competing in the first edition anekdoto elementas 1 35 — anekdotų elementas 1 30 and the non-simultaneous variants miesto kultūra 11 52, 111 55 — miestų kultūra 1 191. The members of these term pairs differ in the controlling sign number of nouns — the opposition of singular and plural is neutralized. Family Variations. There are also three different variants of the family. One of them —koturnas 1 104 —koturnai 11 160, 111 178. These variants are not used at the same time, i.e. not in the same releases. In 1936, the term "female" was introduced. The TŽŽ 2001 includes both variants of the term (preference for the feminine gender word), while VaitkTŽŽ 2001 —only cotrnas. Apparently, the question of the nationalization of this term has not yet been resolved. The morphological variants of the genus are probably the variants grožė I 81 and grožis II 61, 11 66 (and accordingly grožės kultas I 252 —grožio kultas 11 61, III 66). K. Bizauskas in 1918 (p. 9) and Maironis used beauty (see Keinys 2002: 32). Variants of participant forms. Variations of the participle forms in the same editions are travelling song 11 35, TI 39 — travelling song 11 41, III 45, travelling story 1 36 — travelling story I 30. Subordinates expressed by participants differ primarily in the long and short forms of the denominator — travelling and travelling. 135 The latter form of the noun cannot be noun, so there is no contradiction between noun and ordinary form. Variants of the participant type. The subject I 185 and the subject I 129, used in the first edition of V. Dubo textbook, differ in the type of participant. In this case, both compounds denote the same concept, but the opposition of the type of participant cannot be neutralized here, because the passive type is not suitable: the subject seems ambiguous (the subject — "who is affected", and the subject — "the person who is affected; the actor"). Variations of time. Variants unlimited fantasy 1 90 —unlimited fantasy 190, also found only in the 1923 edition of the textbook, —the participant's time difference. It should be noted that unlimited imagination —unlimited imagination would not be perceived as alternatives if taken out of context, but in V. Dubo textbook their time opposition is neutralized. From this overview it can be seen that the most common variants in V. Dubo textbook are the endings of terms (52.3% of all morphological variants). Other morphological variants are much less common. After 14.3% of morphological variants consist of number and gender, 9.5% — form of participants, after 4,896 — kind of participants and time variants. Less than half (42.8%) of the variants compete in the same edition of V. Dubo textbook (at least one), Pseudovariants. The noun and ordinal forms can not be considered variants in theory, because in the linguistic system they are linguistic units of different meaning. Competing terms of the same meaning, formed from these forms, could be considered as pseudovariants, e.g.: barronic poem 11 85 — barronic poem II 84, sensual school 1 84 — sensual school 11 135, III 149, comic element 1 135, II 190, III 202 — comic element 11 203, III 214, first artist 1 102 — first artist II 158, 111 176, poetic means 11 275, 111 284 — poetic means 11 28, III 32, main character I 116, II 175, III 192 — main character I 116, II 40, III 250, chief hero 11 83, III 83 — chief hero classical work II 251, III 261 — class work 1 169, "pseudoclassical" tragedy pseudoclassical tragedy II 61, III 66 and others. 136 O. Achmanova considers the co-rooted words of the same meaning, which can replace each other, as variants (Axmanoa 1957: 213-217). This approach in Russian linguistics has led to a debate about the distinction of the operative variants and their relationship with synonyms. For example, E. Filin argues that pre-Singai: the affixes of co-rooted words of the same meaning do not lose their functions, so such words are not variants (Ounun 1963: 131-133). The Russian language encyclopedia states that verb variants are grammatical variants with variant verb affixes (P512 1998: 62). In the theory of word formation, V. Urbutis, a specialist in word formation in Lithuanian, looks at constructive variants from a different perspective: he is not talking about constructs, but about variants of the means of construction — adverbs. J. Vaskelienė wrote about the difference between operative variants and operative synonyms. It states that ‘variants of the same word are those variations which differ from each other in non-essential phonetic or morphological features which do not alter their meaning’. However, the linguist notes that in practice it is not always easy to distinguish these language units (Vaskelienė 2000: 11-13). Options for the purposes of this article are differences of the same term arising from options of instruments. These differences do not change the meaning of the term, it is perceived as the same word. Therefore, there are two different types of variables that are considered to be variables of the same type. In the textbook of V. Dubas only four pairs of variants of action terms were found, e.g.: klasikinė komedija 11 173, 111 191 —klasinė komedija 1 klasikinė tradicija klasinė tradicija 116, 11 61, II 66 — 1 43, 11 255, 111 265 — 1 171. The adjectives with secondary elements classicinis, -ė, pseudoklasikinė have the suffix -ik-, 0 klasinis, -ė, pseudoklasinė —ne. Making a pronoun -inis adjectives of iš international nouns su -ika, the suffix of the base word -ikyra is released. The adjectives class, -ė, pseudoklasiné are thus formed. However, the ambiguity (similar to noun class derivatives) is possible after releasing the aforementioned prefix. į It is probably for this reason that the terms classical comedy, classical work, classical 137 tradition, “pseudoclassical” tragedy have been used since the second edition of the textbook (see also classical dramatic tradition 1 143, pseudoclassical comedy I 157 and classical poetry 11 23, 111 28, “pseudoclassical” drama II 255, 111 250). In 1924, he published a book on classical and modern literature. Maironis also used classic drama “klasikinė drama”, classical literature “klasikinė literatūra” (see Keinys 2002: 30, 42), i.e. terms whose adjectives with secondary elements are formed by releasing -ik-. In 1926 J. Jablonski corrected the classical to classical (see Jablonski 1959: 395). In 1928, he wrote: „Klasinis (class) dalykas Cia [A. Vireliūno Our language education. —AM.) is not unnecessarily distinguished from the “classical (classical)” subject” (Jablonskis 1959: 463). TŽZ 1936 presents classic, but classic. Syntactic variants Syntactic variants are syntactic constructions of exactly the same meaning (Župerka 1983: 28). In the Russian language encyclopedia, syntactic variants include control, alignment and weave variants (PAID 1998: 62). The textbook of V. Dubas contains syntactic variants that differ in the order of the elements. In the textbook, the prepositional terms vary, e.g.: dainininkas specialistas I 134 —specialistas dainininkas 1 34, daina giesmė II 17, III 21 —giesmė daina 11 88, 111 102, rašytojas realistas 1 246, 11 352, III 359 —realistas rašytojas 1 246, 11 351, NW 358. These options are simultaneous. Three pairs of variants were formed because of the use of the sign after, 0 not before the sign word, which is not characteristic of Lithuanian, e.g.: daiktas simbolizmas I 173, II 259, III 270 — symbolism daiktas 11 259, 111 270, drama liturginė 11 194 — liturginė drama 1 133, 11 190, 111 202, idėjinis simbolizmas 1 175 — symbolism idėjinis 11 259, III 270. Only ideological symbolism and ideological symbolism can be found in different editions of V. Dubo textbook. The term "liturgical drama" is used only in the second edition. In the 1931 edition it was replaced by liturgical drama, cf. „Drama liturgicinė ne Prancūzijoje plėtojosi ne taip sparčiai“ II 194 and „Liturginė drama ne Prancūzijoje plėtojosi ne taip sparčiai“ III 204. 138 The variants choral melinė poezija 11 87, IN 101 — melinė choral poezija II 90, III 105 differ in the order of the controlling and coordinating marks. Of this pair of concurrent variants, the second member would be more acceptable, as the usual position of the alignment mark is before the control mark. In the textbook of V. Dubas there are also compound terms of multiple words, which are characterized by the opposite order of the notes. In the first edition there is competition between the “comedy of the cloak and the sword” 11 202, 111 212 /comedy of the cloak and the sword I 139 —“comedy of the sword and the cloak” 1 137, in the second edition — the color of time and place II 225 —color of place and time I 186, II 180, III 197, in the second and third editions — the school of poetry of “a pleasant new style” 11 28, 111 142 —the school of poetry of “a new pleasant style” 11 56 /school of poetry of a new pleasant style 111 60. As you can see, the position of both the control and the coordination marks in the term can vary. The varying terms "comedy of the cape and sword" | comedy of the cape and sword and "comedy of the cape and sword" are translations of the term "comedia de capa y espada" I 137, II 198, III 210, 0 school of poetry of the "pleasant new style", school of poetry of the "new pleasant style" | school of poetry of the new pleasant style —"dolce stil nuovo" II 127, III 140. As can be seen, the textbook of V. Dubas differs in the order of the elements of both two-word (6096 syntactic variants) and multiword (40%) variants of terms. 8096 variants compete in the same edition of the textbook. Mixed variants The textbook of V. Dubo uses variants of terms belonging to several types of variants, e.g.: spelling and syntactic constructions —dainius poétas 1 37 —poetas-- dainius 1 73, literatūra fableaux I 198 —fabliaux literatūra 11 286, perijodas,, Šturm und Drang“ I 85 —Šiurm und Drang periodas 1 235. The competition of the latter pair of variants is not accidental. SNŽŽ 1907 only records the period, while TZZ 1936 indicates the period. Maironis wrote a period—Sturm und Drang period (see Keinys 2002: 51). There are not only two, but three variants of the term competing in the textbook, belonging to two types of variants: spelling variants are dramatur139 gas symbolist 11 264, 111 274 —dramaturg —symbolist 1 180, which compete with the symbolist dramaturge 11 259, 111 270 as syntactic variants. The writing of the second variant with dashes instead of a dash is probably a proofreading error (see also poetas-redaktorius I 20 — poetas-redaktorius Į 30). Conclusions 1. Traditionally, a variant is defined as a different form of the same linguistic unit with the same meaning. In Lithuanian terminology, variants are almost unexplored. 2.V. Dubo universal literature textbook is a useful source for studying the terminological change in interwar Lithuanian literature and related fields. The terminology of the 1923, 1927 and 1931 editions of the textbook is characterized by the variability of single-word and compound terms (125 lines of variants). The textbook contains all variants of terms distinguished according to the types of language: phonetic and spelling, morphological, constructive, syntactic, as well as mixed variants. Phonetic (and spelling) and morphological variants of terms prevail, together forming as many as 85,696 total variants. The majority of such variants are the result of uneven internationalization of borrowings (for example, poésie and poetry, formule and formula). Variants of terms of Lithuanian origin are rare (for example, keliaujantysis dainius —keliaujantis dainius). (3) If this article were to deal only with the terms of a single authorisation, there would be far fewer options. The lines of variants in V. Dubo textbook have usually appeared over time, i.e. one version is used in one edition and another in another. There are more than two-thirds (70,496) of such options in the textbook. Since the variability of some terms (for example, troubadour and troubadour, epic and epic) is confirmed in other publications of the first half of the 20th century, there is no doubt that such variants are a reflection of the change (or non-establishment) of language norms, the result of language development. Examined textbook variants of terms show an attempt to seek a more regular expression of terms, more orderly Lithuanianize borrowings. However, there are a few cases where the first edition is now in force, rather than later versions (for example, prelude, idyll). 140 The possibility that the variability of terms (especially when term variants compete in one edition) could lead to redagavispragos mo (subsequent o releases), maybe jo even absence (first edition). LITTERACY IR SOURCES Akhmanova O.ir kt. 1974: Terminology: Theory and Method, Moscow. Bartkus G. 1987: Vladas Dubas is a - cultural ir historian of literature. — Cultural bars 6, 56-57. Bizauskas K. 1918: Theory of Writing and Literature 1, Kaunas. Būga K. 1961: Selected Writings 3. Compiled by Z. Zinkevičius, Vilnius. Dubas V. 1923: Introduction to į General Literature, Kaunas-Marijampolė. Dubas V. 1927 [1931]: Introduction to literature, Kaunas-Marijampolė. DZ. 2003: Dictionary of Modern English. Man. red. St. Keinys, Vilnius, Lithuania (e. authorization). ISO 10241:1992 (E): International terminology standards — Preparation and layout. Jablonskis 1934: Jablonski- 's Writings. Red. J. Balčikonis, Kaunas. Jablonskis J. 1959: Selected Writings 2. Compiled by J. Palionis, Vilnius. Kamantauskas V. 1928: A short dictionary of irregular ir barbarisms in language, Kaunas. Kantvydis B. 1927: Doc. V. Dubas. Introduction to literature [Rec.]. — Lithuania 190, 2-3. Keinys St. 1966: Verb synonyms in terminology. — Science ir and technology 2, 48; 3, 29; 4, 28-29; 5, 29. Keinys St. 1974: Synonymy of terms. — Lexical ir syntax questions, Kaunas, 44-51. Kaunas St. 1980: Terminology alphabet, Vilnius. Keinys St. 2002: Maironis in the ir tcrminology of our literary science. — Terminology 9, 26-54. Kniūkšta P. 1976: Adverbs - No bad words. Action, meanings, grammatical synonyms, Vilnius. KTZ 1990: Gaivenis K, None ys St. Dictionary of the English Language, Vol. KWST 1975: Kleines Dictionary of Linguistics Termini. Hrsg. R. Conrad, Leipzig. LKZ 11968, XVI 1995, XIX 1999: Lietuviy languages Zodynas, Vilnius, LCZ instruction 1980: The Lithuanian Language Dictionary, Vilnius, 2001. LE 2004: The Linguistics Encyclopedia. Ed. K. Malmkjer, London. LLE 2001: The Encyclopedia of American Literature, Vol. V. Kubilius, V. Rakauskas, V. Vanagas, Vilnius (e. authorization). LST 1988: Lexicon of Linguistics Termini. Hrsg. R. Conrad, Leipzig. OCDL 1997: Matthews P. H. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics, Oxford, New edition York. 141 Miliūnaitė R. 1995: Variant phenomena of common language usage (registration and evaluation). —Language Culture 67, 39-49. Miliūnaitė R. 2003: Basics of Lithuanian Grammar Standardization, Vilnius. PetrILKZ 2001: Petrauskas V. V Spanish-- Lithuanian Dictionary, Vilnius. 1988. pp. 19. "Synonyms". Language figures, Kaunas. 1992: French-Lithuanian dictionary. Compiled by A. Juškienė, M. Katilienė, K. Kaziūnienė, Vilnius. Pupkis A. 1980: Fundamentals of Language Culture, Vilnius. RST 1115-90: Principles and methods of terminology, Lithuanian RST 1115-90 (ISO 704— 87), Vilnius. Skardžius P 1941: Lithuanian language word making, Vilnius. Skardžius P. 1999: Selected Writings 5. Compiled by A. Rosinas, Vilnius. Skujina V. 2002: Principles of the emergence of Latvian terminology, Riga. 1927. pp. 27. "Literature". Doc. V. Dubas. Introduction to literature [Rec.]. - Lietuvis 213, 2-3. STJ1968:Gotąb Z.,Heinz A.,Polanski K. Dictionary of language terminology, Warsaw. 1907: A Dictionary of Foreign and Incomprehensible Words. For the relief of readers. It was composed by J. Šlapelis, Tilžė. 1924. pp. 24. "Slovensko-slovenski slovar" (in Slovenian- ). TD 1973: Terminological work, Vilnius. 1936: International Dictionary of Languages. Created by K. Boruta. Ms. A. SirutytėČepėnienė, Klaipėda. 2001: International Dictionary of Languages. Ats. red. A. Kinderys, Vilnius. Urbutis V. 1978: Theory of word formation, Vilnius. VaitkTŽŽ 2001: Vaitkevičiūtė V. International Dictionary of Words, Vilnius, Vaskelienė J. 2000: Verb synonyms, Šiauliai. Vitkauskas V. 1999: Morphological phenomena of Lithuanian dialects and their fluctuation. Habilitation thesis, Vilnius. VLE V 2004: Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia, Vilnius. Voldemaras A. 1923: Docentas V. Dubas. Introduction to General Literature [Rec.]. — Educational Work 3/4, 253-268. Zinkevičius Z. 1992: History of Lithuanian Language 5. The Rise of the Common Language, Vilnius. 1920: Geometry and Trigonometry Terms Collection, Kaunas. Zuperka K. 1983: Lithuanian language stylistics, Vilnius. AxManogsBa O. C. 1957: I'm gonna go no get a little u sugar, Mocks. BemropTt IF. O. 1985: Ture! BapHaHT0B B TEDMHHKHOJIOTHYCCKON JICKCUKE. —Lietuviy Linguistics Questions 24. Problems of the culture and terminol39-45. ogy of scientific language, PopbauenBuuąu K. C. 1978: Bapuakmnocmo ciaoea u azwkoeas Kopma, JIcHnurpal. Fpayauna JI K 1981: K HCTOpHH RopsanHn3anįiHH BapHaHTOB B TPAMMAaTHKAX 142 (Haw. XX B.--60-c rolist). — Jwnepamypras Kopa u 6apuaumnocmo, MOCKBA, 39-69. Cpuncs C. B. 1993: Beedenie 6 mepsunoecdenie, Mocksa. Fpymanene JI 1982: Tlpodae sa coupa anor 06ve.206.- 1e unocinu peuesn eo eapbliPOGAHUA (HUE Mamepula.le HNO 6CKO0 si3bika). ABTOPCGC PAT IMCCCPTULMH Kalil married. nayk, Mockna. Nannnatsenko B. IT. 1977: Pyceras mepno aos, Onbim mtneettcmtūtuec KOO On cams, Mockba. P513 1998: Preoccupied. Longevity. TR. pen. 10. H. Kapay:jros, Mocksa. CIT 1960: Mapyso X. Cio8apb nmėnėeucimiitueckux mepmaunos. Mockna. CAT 1966: Axstanosa O. C. Caoeapo Auneettemiutneckiux mepiuinos, Mocksa. Cynepanckas A. B. 1989: Cynepanckas A. B., Ilornobekas H. B., Bacujipesa H. B. Odwas mepsunoaoas. Bonpocs meopuu, Mocksa. Dir O. FI. 1963: O things H BapuaHTax thing. — Mopoaoawseckas cmpyxmypa ca08a 8 sizblkax pazAtiurbix munoe, Mocksa, Jlenunrpan, 128-133. VARIANTS OF TERMS IN V. DUBAS’ TEXTBOOK OF UNIVERSAL LITERATURE Summary This article deals with the variants of terms in three editions of V. Dubas' textbook of universal literature Įvadas į bendrąją literatūrą (An introduction to universal literature) (the second and the third edition —Literatūros įvadas (An introduction to literature). In Lithuanian terminology variants of terms were hardly ever researched. Traditionally the variant defined is as a different form the of same language unit with the same meaning. In this textbook there are variants of terms in all language levels: phonetics and orthography variants), morphology word formation syntax and also some mixed variants (68.8% (16.8%), (3.2%), (8%) (3.2%). The biggest part of those variants is the result of the Lithuanization of borrowings (for example, poezija and poézija). Variation of terms of the Lithuanian origin is quite rare (for example, keliaujantysis dainius keliaująs dainius). — Variants of terms in V. Dubas' textbook of universal literature most frequently appeared over time (in one cdition one variant used, another one another). Such variants is make up more in than two thirds of the — total. Variability of some terms (for instance, trubadiiras and trubaduras) is present in other publications of literary science dictionaries from the first half the century. Asynchronous variants are the reflection changes language norms or of 20" of in (or lack their a stability), of result language a development. of The researched variants of terms the in textbook show attempt an look for to more precise expression term and of a to Lithuanize borrowings in a more orderly fashion.