Antano Baranausko bendrinės rašomosios kalbos idėjos ir jų (ne)realizacija spaudiniuose : (XIX amžiaus pabaiga - XX amžiaus pradžia)

LTAntano Baranausko bendrinės rašomosios kalbos modelis atspindimas mokslo reikalui skirtuose jo tekstuose („Anykščių šilelis“ Leopoldo Geitlerio parengtoje knygoje „Litauische Studien“ [1875], „Ostlittauische Texte“ [1882] ir kt.), kurių spausdinimu autorius pats rūpinosi. Kitose Baranausko knygose skaitytojas randa literatūrinį, religinį, bet ne lingvistinį tekstų variantą ir apie autoriaus bendrinės kalbos idėjas nesužino. Tai apribojo šio bendrinės rašomosios kalbos modelio sklaidą. Tokia Baranausko tekstų leidybos situacija rodytų, kad XIX amžiaus paskutiniais dešimtmečiais leidėjai tekstus redagavo gana laisvai, jei tik leidyba nesirūpino pats autorius. Knygos, išleistos formuojantis lietuvių bendrinei kalbai, nebūtinai atspindi jų autorių kalbines pažiūras. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Bendrinė kalba; Knygų leidyba; Ortografijos istorija; Rašomoji kalba; 19 amžius; 19th century; Book publication; History of orthography; Standard language; Written language.

ENIn 1871-1884, Antanas Baranauskas, teaching a course of homiletics (the theory and practice of composition and delivery of a sermon) to students who spoke various subdialects at the Samogitian Seminary in in Kaunas, created a peculiar standard written language that was based on the polyphonetic principle. In Baranauskas' texts meant for scientific purposes ("Anykščių šilelis", Litauische Studien [1875] edited by Leopold Geitler, Ostlitauische Texte [1882] etc.), in the publication of which he took interest, his language model was preserved. It can be presumed that Baranauskas would have liked to see his other texts published also keeping to his principles. At the end of the 19th-the beginning of the 20th century few of his texts that were not for scientific purposes were printed as separate books: Tėvyniszkos giesmės (1892), Graudus versmai ir kitos naujos giesmės (1899), Katekyzmas isz dekreto Susirinkimo Bažnyczos Tridcntiszkio prabaszczams (1899?, printed on a multiplying device), religious hymn Ant Nekalto Prasidėjimo Panos Švenčiausios (1898-1902?), Kalbomokslis ietuviszkos kalbos ([1899]). The Katekyzmas isz Dekreto Susirinkimo Bažnyczos Tridcntiszkio Prabaszczams [1899?] multiplied by an apparatus reflects his standard written language, perhaps due to a 'more personal' mode of printing that was not so much removed from the author - when the autograph was hand-copied and multiplied. It can be onlyguessed that the author knew of the printing of his Catechism, in which case it could be understandable that his principles were preserved. Baranauskas' grammar book [1899] that Sereika chose to publish as a Lithuanian language teaching/learning aid also reflects the author's standard written language.Baranauskas'poetry (Tėvyniškos giesmės [1892]) and religious texts (hymn Ant Nekalto Prasidėjimo Panos Švenčiausios [1899-1902?]; Graudus Verksmai ir Kitos Naujosios Giesmės [1899]) were printed neglecting his model. It could have seemed to his publishers not suitable; perhaps there was a wish to take into account the reader and written language they were more used to. Graudus Verksmui ir Kitos Naujosios Giesmės that was printed as a supplement to Tėvynės Sargas, shows the language of this periodical, not that of the author. Therefore, in Baranauskas' books that were published at the end of the 19thbeginning of the 20th century and were not meant for scientific purposes, the reader discovers a literary and religious but not a linguistic variant of the texts and does not learn anything about his ideas of his standard written language. Until the 1905 edition of Anykščių Šilelis no mention was made about his model of writing, which limited its spread. The situation of the publication of Baranauskas' texts would suggest that during the last decades of the 19th century publishers edited the texts freely, unless the author was interested in their publication. Therefore books, published at the time when written standard Lithuanian was formed, not necessarily reflect the authors' linguistic attitudes. [From the publication]