Pronominierte nominalformen in der Wolfenbütteler Postille (1573–1574)

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Old Lithuanian; Postil; (In)definiteness; Pronominated nominal forms.

ENThe article deals with the pronominated word forms, which are intended to mark definiteness in the nominal domain, and with their usage in the Wolfenbüttel Postil (1573–1574). The function of the pronominated forms in Old Lithuanian has so far only vaguely been defined. It is therefore expedient to evaluate the entire data of a closed text corpus which represents neither a purely canonical translation nor a continuously translated text. (Old) Lithuanian shows a more complex structure of reference differences than a mere morphological dichotomy of pronominated (definite) vs. simple (indefinite, non-definite) forms. The Wolfenbüttel Postil (over 131,000 text words) is suitable for the investigation of pronominated nominal forms in Old Lithuanian, since it represents a mixture of an originally written and a translated text, the latter being a translation of canonical and non-canonical text. In the WP, we find pronominated adjectives (330 types in total), ordinals (4 types), pronouns (personal, demonstrative, possessive and relative) and participles (177 types in total). On the syntactic level, the pronominated forms function as attributes, subject predicatives, object predicatives and, in case the pronominated forms are nominalized, as subjects, objects and predicatives. The largest group are nominal phrases with pronominated adjectives. In most cases the pronominated adjectives are used in a positive form. Among the rare superlative forms, the salutation sup.vok.pl. malanauſeghi krikſʒanis ir krikſʒenkas ‘dearest Male and Female Christians’ dominates. The only pronominated comparative wireſneghi ‘the seniors’ occurs in nom.pl., while in other cases the simple form is preferred. The ins.pl. also occurs more frequently in a simple form.The second largest group consists of NPs with attributively used pronominated participles (five out of seven theoretically possible formations, no examples of a past participle frequentative and none of a future participle passive). Neither the pronominated adjectives (including the ordinals) nor the pronominated participles stand in secondary local cases or the dat.pl., possibly because these forms would be difficult to pronounce in the flow of speech, thus for the reasons of language economy. All pronominated forms are used regardless of whether a NP contains such modifiers as a demonstrative resp. possessive pronoun or a genitive. No formal criteria can be established according to which the use of a pronominated constituent is obligatory in a NP. Within the NP, the pronominated forms most often take the position of both the preposed and the postposed attribute. There is no correlation between the position of the attribute and the choice of the pronominal form, and thus of its interpretation. Although the process of disambiguation of endophoric and exophoric NPs is not (yet) completed in this language stage, the pronominated forms appear to be favoured for the formation of established terms. (In order to be able to identify the referent in religious texts, the readers resp. listeners first had to acquire the relevant knowledge.) These include: maloniausiasis sūnus (‘the dearest Son’ 43x), amžinieji amžiai (‘the eternal ages’ 17x), gyvasis Dievas (‘the living God’ 12x), griešnasis žmogus (‘the sinful human being’ 11x), and gerasis piemuo (‘the Good Shepard’ 5x). The specific use of pronominated forms is represented by the participles following the headword, which replace a finite postnominal attributive relative clause. Almost a quarter of all pronominated participles in the WP are such relative participles.They correspond either to a relative clause or a attributive participle of the Latin translation source. Latin seems to have a favourable effect on the choice and preservation of Lithuanian pronominated relative participles. The word order within the relative participle construction, on the other hand, is not decisive in whether the participle is pronominated or not. Pronominated adjectives and participles also occur as a nominal predicate. As subject predicatives with a headword they occur in the nominative and instrumental, without a headword only in the nominative. In the Lithuanian constructions AcI and accusativus cum participio (AcP), both influenced by the Latin AcI, they have the function of an object predicative. In the predicative position, too the pronominated participles alternate with the simple ones. By ellipse of the headword the pronominated forms become nominalized. Nominalized participles dominate in the WP (59 types), followed by the adjectives (45 types). Just like pronominated forms in the NPs, the nominalized forms are not used in the dative and locative pl. On the other hand, the pronominated allative pl. can be found. Generalization is indicated by those pronominated participles and adjectives that occur more than ten times. Among them are: tikintieji (‘the believers’ 67x), griešnasis (‘the sinner’ 51x), piktasis (‘the villain’ 47x), numirusieji (‘the deceased’ 32x), šventasis (‘the saint’ 18x), gerasis (‘the good’ 12x), teisusis (‘the just’ 12x), išmintingasis (‘the wise’ 11x), aklasis (‘the blind’ 11x). In the case of nominalization, the pronominal forms are also not obligatory. The nominalized participles of the Latin translation sources have clearly played a supportive role in the choice of nominalized participles (and not of corresponding nouns) in the Lithuanian text. [From the publication]

• Bugenhagens Passions- und Auferstehungsharmonie als Quelle der litauischen Postille von Johannes Bretke / Jolanta Gelumbeckaitė. Navicula litterarum Balticarum : Philologische Baltikum-Studien für Jochen D. Range zum 65. Geburtstag / herausgegeben von Stephan Kessler und Christiane Schiller. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006. P. 63-74.
• Die Litauische Wolfenbütteler Postille von 1573 / herausgegeben von Jolanta Gelumbeckaitė. Wiesbaden : Harrassowitz, 2008. 2 t.
• Kalbos dalių paribio problemos / Aurimas Markevičius. Acta linguistica Lithuanica. 2012, t. 67, p. 140-155.
• Lietuvių kalbos kultūra / Aldona Paulauskienė. Kaunas : Technologija, 2000. 255 p.
• The Historical morphology of definiteness in Baltic / Florian Sommer. Indo-European linguistics. 2018, 6, p. 152-200.
• Towards a semantic map for definite adjectives in Baltic / Axel Holvoet, Birutė Spraunienė. Baltic linguistics. 2012, 3, p. 65-99.