Inga Strungytė-Liugienė
{"title":"Johanno Arndto Rojaus Darǯelio maldų redagavimo istorija (1807–1817)","authors":"Inga Strungytė-Liugienė","doi":"10.33918/26692449-23005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The History of Revisions of Prayers in Johann Arndt’s ROJAUS DARǮELIS (1807 – 1817)\n\nS u m m a r y\n\nJohann Arndt (1555–1621), the German theologian and next-generation religious reformer is the author of the uniquely successful prayer book titled Paradiesgärtlein (Magdeburg,1612). The first known Lithuanian translation of Arndt’s Paradiesgärtlein appeared in early 19th century in Prussian Lithuanian. It was published in 1807 by the widow of Gottlieb Lebrecht Hartung, a printer from Königsberg. This article aims to reveal the history of revisions of six prayers from Johann Arndt’s Rojaus Darelis (The Garden of Paradise) that were first published in Königsberg in 1807. The goal is to show the revision trends and content transformations Arndt’s texts underwent in the second, 1816 Königsberg edition of Rojaus Darǯelis, the 1816 Tilsit edition, and the unofficial 1817 conventiclers’ (Lith. surinkimininkai) hymnal Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai (Tilsit).\nThe analysis of the prayers has shown that the language of the hymnal Rojaus Darelis\n(Königsberg, 1807) is rather grounded on the standard of the official ecclesiastical and\nphilological papers of Prussian Lithuania: the prevalent southern subdialect of the Western Aukštaitians of Prussian Lithuania. It is dominated by rather stable normative elements of morphology and diacritic orthography, as evidenced in the philological written works of the period: the grammars of the Lithuanian language by Gottfried Ostermeyer (1791) and Christian Gottlieb Mielcke (1800). The only identifiable non-grammatical orthography trait is the ending -ęs that sometimes appears in the acc. sg. endings of feminine adjectives, pronouns, and numerals.\nA comparison of the prayers from Rojaus Darǯelis that were published in Königsberg in\n1807 and in 1816 has revealed that the texts had remained stable and free from major or\nsignificant revisions content-wise. This edition is even more consistent in its placement of the stress-marks than the one before. Efforts are made to keep up with the standard trend of spelling and language that prevailed in the official printed texts (grammars) of Prussian Lithuanian.\nIt has been established that the making of the new edition of Rojaus Darelis published\nby the printing house of Johann Heinrich Post in Tilsit in 1816 relied on the Königsberg\nedition that had been released earlier that year. This is evidence in the morphological and lexical revisions that had been carried over. Structurally, the prayers in the 1816 Tilsit edition had remained intact. There were a little bit more orthography and syntactic differences compared to the 1816 Königsberg edition. It is probable that the Tilsit edition had had an effect on the preparation of Arndt’s prayers that were later featured in Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai, a hymnal by Kristijonas Endrikis Mertikaitis (Tilsit, 1817). Nonetheless, it is the 1816 Königsberg edition (or the prior 1807 edition) that is to be considered the original source of the prayers published in Mertikaitis’s hymnal.\nIt was in Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai by Kristijonas Endrikis Mertikaitis (Tilsit, 1817) that Arndt’s prayers underwent the greatest extent of transformation. Contrary to the Königsberg or Tilsit editions mentioned in this article, this edition is teeming with differences on all sorts of levels: orthography, phonetics, morphology, lexis, word formation, and syntax. Analysis of the relationship between the sources shows that Mertikaitis’s hymnal did not try to follow the widely recognised grammatical usage. This unconventional approach most probably was the product of Mertikaitis’s savvy of the period language and lack of literacy. It is worth mentioning that Mertikaitis was not a man of academic or spiritual elite, but rather a vibrant preacher of the home-prayer service and schoolteacher who tended to pastoral care, matters of saving his own soul and those of the others as well as eternal life, someone who did not see making language more grammatically correct and standard-compliant as an important part of his earthly concern.","PeriodicalId":335211,"journal":{"name":"Archivum Lithuanicum","volume":"535 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivum Lithuanicum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33918/26692449-23005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

约翰·阿恩特(1555-1621),德国神学家和下一代宗教改革家,是唯一成功的祈祷书Paradiesgärtlein(马格德堡,1612)的作者,《祈祷书》的修订史DARǮELIS(1807 - 1817)。阿恩特的Paradiesgärtlein的第一个已知的立陶宛语译本出现在19世纪初的普鲁士立陶宛语。它于1807年由Gottlieb Lebrecht Hartung的遗孀出版,他是Königsberg的一名印刷商。本文旨在揭示约翰·阿恩特于1807年首次出版于Königsberg的《天堂花园》(Rojaus Darelis)中的六篇祈祷文的修订历史。目的是展示阿恩特的文本在1816年Königsberg版Rojaus Darǯelis、1816年Tilsit版和非官方的1817年convention’s (Lith)中所经历的修订趋势和内容转换。surinkimininkai)赞美诗Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai (Tilsit)。对祷文的分析表明,赞歌Rojaus Darelis(Königsberg, 1807)的语言相当基于普鲁士立陶宛官方教会和语言学论文的标准:普鲁士立陶宛西部Aukštaitians流行的南部次方言。它由相当稳定的规范的形态学元素和变音符正字法所主导,这在该时期的语言学著作中得到了证明:Gottfried Ostermeyer(1791年)和Christian Gottlieb Mielcke(1800年)的立陶宛语语法。唯一可识别的非语法正字法特征是有时出现在acc中的结尾-ęs。sg。女性形容词、代词和数字的词尾。对1807年和1816年分别发表在Königsberg上的Rojaus Darǯelis的祈祷文进行比较后发现,这些文本一直保持稳定,在内容方面没有进行重大或重大的修改。这个版本在重音标记的位置上比以前的版本更加一致。正在努力跟上在普鲁士立陶宛语的官方印刷文本(语法)中流行的拼写和语言的标准趋势。已经确定的是,1816年由蒂尔西特的约翰·海因里希·波斯特印刷厂出版的新版《罗哈斯·达尔》的制作依赖于当年早些时候发布的Königsbergedition。这在被保留下来的词法和词法修订中就是证据。从结构上看,1816年蒂尔西特版的祷文完好无损。与1816年Königsberg版本相比,在拼写和句法上有更多的不同。很可能提尔西特的版本对阿恩特的祈祷文的准备工作产生了影响,这些祈祷文后来被收录在了Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai中,这是克里斯蒂乔纳斯·德里基斯·默蒂凯蒂斯的赞美诗(提尔西特,1817年)。尽管如此,1816年Königsberg版本(或之前的1807年版本)被认为是Mertikaitis赞美诗中发表的祈祷文的原始来源。正是在《Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai》(Kristijonas Endrikis Mertikaitis, 1817)中,阿恩特的祈祷经历了最大程度的转变。与本文中提到的Königsberg或Tilsit版本相反,这个版本在所有层次上都充满了差异:正字法、语音学、形态学、词汇、构词法和语法。对来源之间关系的分析表明,默蒂凯提斯的赞美诗并没有试图遵循公认的语法用法。这种非传统的方法很可能是Mertikaitis对当时语言的精通和缺乏文化的产物。值得一提的是,Mertikaitis不是一个学术或精神精英,而是一个充满活力的家庭祈祷服务的传教士和学校教师,他倾向于教牧关怀,拯救自己的灵魂和他人的灵魂以及永生,他不认为使语言更加语法正确和符合标准是他世俗关注的重要组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Johanno Arndto Rojaus Darǯelio maldų redagavimo istorija (1807–1817)
The History of Revisions of Prayers in Johann Arndt’s ROJAUS DARǮELIS (1807 – 1817) S u m m a r y Johann Arndt (1555–1621), the German theologian and next-generation religious reformer is the author of the uniquely successful prayer book titled Paradiesgärtlein (Magdeburg,1612). The first known Lithuanian translation of Arndt’s Paradiesgärtlein appeared in early 19th century in Prussian Lithuanian. It was published in 1807 by the widow of Gottlieb Lebrecht Hartung, a printer from Königsberg. This article aims to reveal the history of revisions of six prayers from Johann Arndt’s Rojaus Darelis (The Garden of Paradise) that were first published in Königsberg in 1807. The goal is to show the revision trends and content transformations Arndt’s texts underwent in the second, 1816 Königsberg edition of Rojaus Darǯelis, the 1816 Tilsit edition, and the unofficial 1817 conventiclers’ (Lith. surinkimininkai) hymnal Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai (Tilsit). The analysis of the prayers has shown that the language of the hymnal Rojaus Darelis (Königsberg, 1807) is rather grounded on the standard of the official ecclesiastical and philological papers of Prussian Lithuania: the prevalent southern subdialect of the Western Aukštaitians of Prussian Lithuania. It is dominated by rather stable normative elements of morphology and diacritic orthography, as evidenced in the philological written works of the period: the grammars of the Lithuanian language by Gottfried Ostermeyer (1791) and Christian Gottlieb Mielcke (1800). The only identifiable non-grammatical orthography trait is the ending -ęs that sometimes appears in the acc. sg. endings of feminine adjectives, pronouns, and numerals. A comparison of the prayers from Rojaus Darǯelis that were published in Königsberg in 1807 and in 1816 has revealed that the texts had remained stable and free from major or significant revisions content-wise. This edition is even more consistent in its placement of the stress-marks than the one before. Efforts are made to keep up with the standard trend of spelling and language that prevailed in the official printed texts (grammars) of Prussian Lithuanian. It has been established that the making of the new edition of Rojaus Darelis published by the printing house of Johann Heinrich Post in Tilsit in 1816 relied on the Königsberg edition that had been released earlier that year. This is evidence in the morphological and lexical revisions that had been carried over. Structurally, the prayers in the 1816 Tilsit edition had remained intact. There were a little bit more orthography and syntactic differences compared to the 1816 Königsberg edition. It is probable that the Tilsit edition had had an effect on the preparation of Arndt’s prayers that were later featured in Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai, a hymnal by Kristijonas Endrikis Mertikaitis (Tilsit, 1817). Nonetheless, it is the 1816 Königsberg edition (or the prior 1807 edition) that is to be considered the original source of the prayers published in Mertikaitis’s hymnal. It was in Wiſſokies Naujes Gieſmes arba Ewangelißki Pſalmai by Kristijonas Endrikis Mertikaitis (Tilsit, 1817) that Arndt’s prayers underwent the greatest extent of transformation. Contrary to the Königsberg or Tilsit editions mentioned in this article, this edition is teeming with differences on all sorts of levels: orthography, phonetics, morphology, lexis, word formation, and syntax. Analysis of the relationship between the sources shows that Mertikaitis’s hymnal did not try to follow the widely recognised grammatical usage. This unconventional approach most probably was the product of Mertikaitis’s savvy of the period language and lack of literacy. It is worth mentioning that Mertikaitis was not a man of academic or spiritual elite, but rather a vibrant preacher of the home-prayer service and schoolteacher who tended to pastoral care, matters of saving his own soul and those of the others as well as eternal life, someone who did not see making language more grammatically correct and standard-compliant as an important part of his earthly concern.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信