No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On the Degree of Kinship between Slavic and Baltic
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2017
Extract
Judging from the standard works on comparative philology, it seems to be generally assumed that the Primitive Indo-European period was followed by a Balto-Slavic period during which the ancestors of the Slavic and the Baltic peoples still spoke a common language. However, this theory has not remained unquestioned. The first to doubt the existence of a separate Balto-Slavic branch was Meillet, who in 1908 expressed his conviction that Baltic and Slavic must be regarded as two different groups which, after the disintegration of Primitive Indo-European, had each its own independent development. Meillet's statement provoked a lively discussion to which the most important contributions were made by Porzeziński, Rozwadowski, and Endzelin. In 1922 Endzelin recapitulated briefly his arguments in his Lettish Grammar. According to Endzelin, Slavic is the nearest relative of the Baltic languages. This relationship would, however, hardly allow the assumption of a common Primitive Balto-Slavic language; it would only suggest a period of intimate mutual relations. Endzelin's explanation received strong support from the Lithuanian scholar Casimir Būga who, unfortunately for Baltic studies, died in 1924. In various articles written in the Lithuanian language, Būga defended Endzelin's theory, strengthening it with new arguments drawn from his intimate knowledge of the languages in question.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 1941
References
1 Les dialectes indo-européens (Paris, 1908), pp. 40–48.
2 Rocznik slawistyczny, IV (1911), 1 ff.
3 Ibid., V (1912), 1 ff.
4 Slavjano-baltiskije etjudy (Kharkov, 1911). Cf. also Meillet, Rocznik slawistyczny, V, 153 ff.; N. Jokl, Archiv für slavische Philologie, XXXV, 307 ff.; van Wijk, Balties-slaviese problemen (1913), p. 10 ff.; A. Brückner, Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprackwissenschaft, XLVI, p. 217 ff.; A. Brückner, “Das Litauische und seine Verwandten,” Geschichte der indogermanischen Sprackwissenschaft, II, 3, 80 ff., ed. W. Streitberg.
5 Lettische Grammatik, §4 (Riga, 1922).
6 A memorial of Būga by Georg Gerullis appeared in the Indogermanisches Jahrbuch, X (1926), 435–441.
7 Baltisch-Slavisches Wörterbuch (Göttingen, 1923).
8 Les origines du vocabulaire slave: 1. Le problème de l'unité balto-slave,” Revue des études slaves, V (1925), 5–13.
9 Helmut Arntz says in his dissertation Sprachliche Beziehungen zwischen Arisch und Balto-Slawisch (Indogermanische Bibliothek, in, 13 [Heidelberg, 1933]) p. 2: “Nicht zuletzt hat mich Trautmanns Wörterbuch bestimmt, auch für das Balt.-Slaw. an eine Spracheinheit zu glauben, wie sie für das Arische sichersteht.” In his bibliography he refers to several books of Meillet's, but not to the above-mentioned article. — Fr. Specht makes a similar statement, “Baltische Sprachen,” Stand und Aufgaben der Sprachwissenschaft (Festschrift für Wilhelm Streitberg zum 23. Februar 1924 [Heidelberg: Winter, 1924]), p. 626: “Nach Trautmanns Darstellung des baltisch-slavischen Wortschatzes in seinem Baltisch-Slavischen Wörterbuch halte ich einen Zweifel an einer Urverwandtschaft kaum noch erlaubt, wenn es auch manches Abweichende zwischen beiden Sprachstämmen gibt.” — Philip Scherer, Germanic-Balto-Slavic Etyma (Language Dissertation No. 32; Baltimore, Md. 1941) refers only to one book by Meillet, namely, Le slave commun.
10 Recherches dans le domaine du lexique balto-slave (Opera Facultatis Pkilosophicae Universitatis Masarykianae Brunensis, No. 37), Hrno, 1934.
11 Cf. Chr. S. Stang, Die westrussische Kanzleisprache des Grossfürstenlums Litauen (Skrifter utgitt av Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo. II. Hist.-Filos. Klasse. 1935. No. 2), Oslo, 1935. 166 pages and 5 plates.
12 Būga, K., “Die litauisch-weissrussischen Beziehungen und ihr Alter,” Zeilschrift für slavische Philologie, I (1924), 26–55 Google Scholar. Cf. also K. Būga, Lietuvių kalbos žodynas (Kaunas, 1924), pp. xxxii and xxxiii.
12a Cf. Senn, “Einiges aus der Sprache der Amerika-Litauer,” Studi Baltici, II (Rome, Italy, 1932), pp. 35–58, and Mencken, H. L., The American Language (Fourth Edition, New York, 1936), pp. 669–673 Google Scholar.
13 Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie, I, 26–55. Cf. also Senn, “Lithuanian dykas and Related Words,” Mélanges linguisliques offerts à Mr. Holger Pedersen (1937), pp. 456–470.
14 Pranas Skardžius, “Die slavischen Lehnwörter im Altlitauischen,” Tauta ir Žodis, VII (Kaunas, 1931), 3–252.
15 Stanisław Westfal, “Uwagi o zapozyczeniach polskich w jezyku litewskim,” Comptes Rendus des stances de la Société des Sciences et des Letlres de Varsovie, XXV, 1932, Classe I, pp. 75–95 (Warsaw, 1933).
16 Senn, “Polish Influence upon Lithuanian ” Language, XIV (1938), 148–153.
17 Pp. 4 and 58–65.
18 Mühlenbach-Endzelin, Lettisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch, III, 223 and 227.
19 Cf. K. Būga, “Die Metatonie im Litauischen und Lettischen,” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft, LI (1923), 109–141. Other studies dealing with problems of accentuation: N. van Wijk, Die baltischen und slavischen Akzent- und Intonationssysteme (Amsterdam, 1923); R. Ekblom, Zur Physiologic der Akuntuation langer Silken im Slavo-Baltisclten (Skrifter utgifna af K. Humanistiska Vetenskaps-Samfundet i Uppsala. 22: 1), Uppsala, 1922; R. Ekblom, Zur Entslehung und Entwicklung der slavo-baltischen und nordischen Akzentarten (Skrifter … 26: 2), Uppsala, 1930; K. Būga, Lietnvių kalbos žodynas, pp. xix-lii; Tore Torbiörnsson, Litauiska Akcenlfrågor (Uppsala, 1934); id., “Bałtyckosłowiańskie zagadnienia akcentowe,” Symbolae Grammatical in Honorem Joannis Rozwadowski, II (Cracow, 1927), 35–44; Louis Hjelmslev, Eludes Baltiques (Copenhagen, 1932); Jerzy Kurylowicz, “Le problème des intonations balto-slaves,” Rocznik slawistyczny, X, 1–80); Jerzy Kuryłowicz, “L'indépendence historique des intonations baltiques et grecques,” Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, XXXV (1934), 24–34; J. Kuryłowicz, “Intonation et morphologie en slave commun,” Rocznik slawistyczny, XIV (1938), 1–66; J. Endzelin, “Bemerkungen zu J. Kurylowiczs Ansichten über die baltisch-slavischen Intonationen,” Zs.f. slav. Phil., XV (1938), 348–354; Giuliano Bonfante “Delia intonazione sillabica indoeuropea,” Reale Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Anno CCCXXVII-1930). Serie VI, vol. III, fasc. 3, 209–253.
20 Cf. Būga, Zs. f. slav. Phil., I, 37 f.; A. Shakhmatov, Kurs islorii russkago jazyka, pp. 2, 82, and 82; Karl. Meyer, H., Historische Grammatik der russischen Sprache, pp. 31–34 Google Scholar.
21 On p. 59 Machek seems to state that in Russian the word pirstŭ has been replaced by Palici. Apparently the author wished to say that such a replacement has occurred to a certain extent, Russian përst being now mostly used in elevated style.
22 Cf. Senn in Studi Baltici, III (1933), 85: “In der historischen Entwicklung des Litauischen zeigt sich als einer der mächtigsten Faktoren eine starke Neigung zum Schematsieren, besonders aber zu polarer Anordnung der Sprachformen.” About “polare Ausdrucksweise” consult Havers, W., Handbuch der erklärenden Syntax (Heidelberg, 1931), pp. 149 f. and 161 fGoogle Scholar.
23 Cf. footnote 9 above.
24 “I dialetti indoeuropei,” Annali del R. Istituto Orievlale di Napoli, IV, 69 ff.
25 “Balto e slavo,” Studi Baltici, II (Rome, 1932), 1–22. Cf. also Pisani, Studi sulla preisloria delle lingue indoeuropee in Reale Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Anno CCCXXX–1933). Serie VI, vol. IV, fasc. 6, 545–653, especially Chapter II, “Germanico baltoslavo e tracofrigio,” pp. 573–594.
26 See the list of titles given in footnote 19 above.
27 Studi Baltici, II, 18 f.
28 Mentioned in footnote 4 above.
29 Lettische Grammatik, §4.
30 Syntax der litauischen Kasus (Kaunas, 1928), p. 47.
31 For Middle High German cf. Senn, An Introduction to Middle High German (New York, 1937), §29.
32 It is not without significance that Jonas Jablonskis (pseudonym: Rygiškių Jonas), the father of the modern Lithuanian standard language, received his education only in the Russian language and used only Russian textbooks as models for his Lithuanian grammar. Cf. Rygiškių Jono, Lietuvių kalbos gramatika (Kaunas, 1922), p. 4.
33 Syntax der litauischen Kasus, p. 87 f.
34 Endzelin, Slavjano-baltiskije etjudy, pp. 190 and 200, and Lett. Gramm., §4.
35 Syntax d. lit. Kasus, p. 198 ff., and in Archiv f. slav. Phil., XL, 77–117 (with exhaustive bibliography).
36 Cf. Behaghel Deutsche Syntax, II, §612; Streitberg, Gotisches Elementarbuch (sixth edition), §§300–303; Mansion, Althochdeutsches Lesebuch (second edition), p. 46; Michels, Mittelhoclideutsches Elementarbuch (fourth edition), §242 A.2 and §245 A.I; Senn, An Introduction to Middle High German, §§66 and 115.
37 Senn, Kleine litauische Sprachlehre (1929), 238–242.
38 Senn, “Zum Gebrauch der Aktionsarten im Litauischen,” Studi Baltici, III (1933), 80–92.
39 Cf. Stender-Petersen, A., Slavisch-Germanische Lehnivortkunde (Goteborg, 1927)Google Scholar and Senn, A., Germanische Lehnwortstudien (Heidelberg, 1925)Google Scholar.
40 Cf. B. Sereiskis, Lietuviškai-rusiškas žodynas (Kaunas, 1933); J. Baronas, Rusų lietuvių žodynas (second edition, Kaunas, 1932).
41 Pisani, Studi Baltici, II, 15 f.
42 The form širšuo is known from Constantine Shirwid's dictionary published in 1629 (Dictionarium trium linguarum) where no accent is given. Būga, Kalba ir senove (Kaunas, 1922), p. 224, against H. Hirt, Indogerm. Grammatik, II, 129. See also Būga in Taula ir žodis, II, 106 f.
43 Kalba ir senovė, pp. 263–265.
44 Studi Baltici, II, 14 f.
45 Endzelin, Lett. Gramm., §28; Būga, Kalba ir senovė, pp. 68 f., 127, 217, 341 f. The theory was first presented by Endzelin in Izvêstija otdêlenija russkago jazyka i slovesnosti imperatorskoi akademii nauk, XII, 1, 40 ff., and again in Lietuvių Taula, II (1919), 284–291. Endzelin's explanation was rejected by Bezzenberger in Zs. f. vergl. Sprachw., XLIV, 305 and Meillet in Rocznik slawislyczny, V, 160 f., but he came back in Lieluvių Taula, II, 284 ff. Later publications on this subject (all opposed to Endzelin's theory): Eino Nieminen, Der urindogermanische Ausgang -ai des Notninativ-Akkusativ Pluralis des Neutrums im Baltischen, Helsinki, 1922 (reviewed by Būga in Taula ir žodis, I, 428; Specht in Indogerm. Forschungen. Anzeiger, XLII, 48–53; Sittig in Zs.f. slav. Phil., VI, 284–289); Specht in Stand und Aufgaben der Sprachwisscnschaft, p. 632; Louis Hjelmslev, Etudes Baltiques, pp. 103 ff. (reviewed by Ernst Fraenkel in Göttingische gelehrle Anzeigen, 1933, Nos. 7–8, 257–263); Chr. S. Stang, “Die Flexion des Verbs iet im Lettischen und das Problem vom Ursprung des Diphthongs ie,” Norsk Tidskrift for Sprogvidenskap, VIII (Oslo, 1935), 1–6.
46 Alfredas Sennas (= Alfred Senn), “Prof. K. Būgos reikšme kalbų mokslui,” Commentationes Ordinis Philologorum, I (Kaunas, 1925), 273–293, especially 286.
47 Stiidi Baltici, II, 16.
48 Lietnvių kalbos žodynas, LIX f.
49 Lett. Gramm., §85.
50 Pisani, loc. cit., p. 16.
51 Cf. Endzelin, Lett. Gramm., §89.
52 Lieluvių kalbos žodynas, §§38 and 41.
53 Pisani, loc. cit., p. 18. For a description of the use cf. Endzelin, Lett. Gramm., §§704–711; Hermann, Eduard, Litauische Studien (Berlin, 1926), pp. 83–95 Google Scholar; Marguliés, Die Verba reflexiva in den slavischen Sprachen (Heidelberg, 1924).
54 This was first brought to my attention by my colleague Otto Springer, who quoted from his own dialect.
55 Fischer, Hermann, Schwäbisches Wörterbuch, V, 1387 Google Scholar.
56 Loc. cit., 17.
57 Pisani, loc. cit., p. 18.
58 Cf. also Endzelin, Lett. Gramm., §331.
59 Loc. cit., 14. See also Wenzel Vondrák, Vergleichende Slaviiche Grammatik, I (Göttingen 1924), 180–188 and 420–425; Meillet, A., Le slave commun (Paris, 1924), pp. 66 ff.Google Scholar; Arntz, Sprachliche Beziehungen zwischen Arisch und Balto-Slawisch, 8 f.
60 Cf. Mühlenbach-Endzelin, Lelt.-D. Wb., II, 531.
61 Endzelin, Lett. Gramm., §4; but cf. also Arntz, loc. cit., p. 17.
62 Loc. cit., p. 16.
63 Kalba ir senovė, 213.
64 Senn, “Die athematischen Verba in Mikalojus Dauksza's Schriften,” Studi Baltici, IV, 85–122, especially 102–106.
65 Endzelin, Lett. Gramm., §4.
66 Cf. Senn, “A Contribution to Gothic-Finnish Relations,” The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, XXX (1931), 143–149 and “Ostpreussens Vorgeschichte sprachlich beleuchtet,” The Germanic Review, XV (1940), 3–19. A discussion of various aspects of this lake with full particulars is presented by Būga in an article “Marios ir jūrės,” Kalba ir senovė 231–241, and Tauta ir žodis, II, 98–110.
67 “Upių vardų studijos ir aisčių bei slavėnų senovė,” Tauta ir žodis, I (1923), 1–20; “Aistiškosios kilmės Gudijos vietovardžiai,” ibid., II, 1–27; “Šis tas iš lietuvių, ir indoeuropiečių senoves,” ibid., II, 98–110. A summary in the German language of the results of Būga's investigations is given by G. Gerullis, “Baltische Völker, ” in Max Ebert's Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte, I (Berlin, 1924), 335–342.