Die Spuren handschriftlicher Wörterbücher in den gedruckten Wörterbüchern Kleinlitauens

Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Vokiečių kalba / German
Die Spuren handschriftlicher Wörterbücher in den gedruckten Wörterbüchern Kleinlitauens
Alternative Title:
Traces of manuscript dictionaries in the printed dictionaries of Lithuania minor
In the Journal:
Baltu filoloģija. 2020, t. 29, nr. 2, p. 127-160
Povilas Frydrichas Ruigys (Paul Friedrich Ruhig). "Littauisch-Deutsches und Deutsch-Littauisches Lexicon"; Kristijonas Gotlybas Milkus (Christian Gottlieb Mielcke). "Littauisch-deutsches und Deutsch-littauisches Wörter-Buch"; Istorinė leksikografija; Rankraštiniai žodynai; Dvikalbiai žodynai.
Bilingual dictionaries; Historical lexicography; Manuscript dictionaries.
Summary / Abstract:

ENThe research effort focuses on tracing the fragments of older manuscript dictionaries in printed works of lexicography of the eighteenth century published in so-called Prussian Lithuania. Attention is placed on two bilingual dictionaries: “Littauisch=Deutsches und Deutsch=Littauisches Lexicon” (1747) by Philipp Ruhig and “Littauisch=Deutsches und Deutsch=Littauisches Wörter-Buch” (1800) by Christian Gottlieb Mielcke. There are at least five dictionary manuscripts known as “Lexicon Lithuanicum” (Lex), “Clavis GermanicoLithvana” (C), so-called Krause’s(Q) and Richter’s (R) dictionaries and Brodowski’s dictionary (B) which have survived until now. In addition, it is possible to reconstruct some fragments of a manuscript dictionary Q1 (Staatsarchiv Königsberg Msc. 84 4°) which was closely related to Q from secondary sources. The relevant manuscript dictionaries are interrelated as they go back to common sources. In the dictionary foreword, Ruhig mentions a manuscript dictionary by Ernst Dicelius, which has not survived and therefore cannot be characterized any further, as well as some other handwritten word lists in his possession. However, no further details on their character or authorship are presented. Mielcke highlights, in the foreword to his dictionary, that he relied heavily on the manuscript dictionary by Brodowski which, being very extensive, served him mainly as a source for phraseological units, especially proverbs. He also criticizes two other handwritten dictionaries and complains about their scarcity and poor quality. All of the surviving manuscript dictionaries had only the German-Lithuanian direction. Therefore, the analysis focuses on the German-Lithuanian part of Ruhig’s dictionary and its relation to manuscript dictionaries Lex, C, Q, R as well as to the reconstructed Q1.For this reason, it was necessary to identify and separate out the main lexical layer of Ruhig’s dictionary which originates from Ehrenreich Weismann’s “Lexicon bipartitum” (the source for the German lemmas) and the Lithuanian translation of the Bible (1735) (the source for the Lithuanian equivalents). The remaining lexical material was compared with the manuscript dictionaries. It has emerged that it bears a great resemblance to the dictionaries of the Q-family (Q, Q1 and R), whereas Q1 seems to be closest to Ruhig. Due to its fragmentary survival, however, there is not sufficient evidence to make a final, definitive conclusion. Another source of Ruhig’s Lexicon must have been a manuscript dictionary which is no longer extant. It most probably contained bilingual dictionary articles and some phraseological material. The footprints of this dictionary can also be traced in B. As the comparative analysis of Ruhig and Brodowski shows, Ruhig could not have directly excerpted Brodowski’s dictionary. It rather seems that the shared parts in both dictionaries derive from their mutual sources: from the Lithuanian translation of the Bible (1735) which is not always specified in Ruhig’s Lexicon, on the one hand, and from this lost manuscript dictionary, on the other. The research on Mielcke’s dictionary focuses on its Lithuanian-German part and sheds some light on the traces of the extinct Lithuanian-German part of Brodowski’s dictionary in Mielckes dictionary.The analysis focuses on the lexical material in Mielcke which persists after the main layer coming from its principal source — Ruhig’s Lexicon — has been detected and separated out. It is clear that the major part of this remaining lexical layer in Mielcke (additional lemmas, equivalents and especially usage examples and proverbs) is linked to Brodowski’s Lithuanian-German dictionary. Moreover, the Lithuanian names of flowers and mushrooms in Mielcke all stem from thematic nomenclatures in Brodowski’s dictionary and lack German equivalents exactly in those cases which have no equivalents in Brodowski. A supplementary outcome of this part of the research was the suspicion that both parts of Brodowski were not as similar as it was believed before: the majority of the Lithuanian words, which were identified as having come from Brodowski’s Lithuanian-German part, were not found in B’s extant German-Lithuanian part. [From the publication]

Related Publications:
2022-04-04 18:39:19
Views: 2