Introductory remarks
Problems of the type of proverbs are relevant to compilers of texts for scientific collections, to systematizers of a national stock of proverbs, to researchers of their history, variation and the development of their social content and artistic forms, as well as to paremiologists-comparativists. However, the term 'proverb-type' is seldom met in paremiologic literature and even more seldom its content is discussed, although through the studies of systematizers of folk tales or other types of folklore, it might not be difficult to define it. It is a set of national variants (on an international scale - multilingual equivalents) of a separate proverb.1
By what criteria are we to determine the bounds of a set, while paremiologists comprehend the essence of a variant differently? In entire groups of the texts of proverbs the data of several levels often interlace, repeating or concurring in some respects on the one hand, or retreating from one another into separate directions on the other. Therefore, it is not easy to distinguish stable indications in order to establish the end of one proverb and the beginning of another one. In classifying proverbs and arranging them for systematized publications, the solution of these questions varies. There appear contradictions in theoretical studies, i.e. in the projects of systematizing the texts, in the introductions of proverb publications, in articles.
The aim of this article is to survey the more significant studies by paremiologists, who have discussed the type problem of proverb to some extent, and the systematizing of proverbs in general, laying out the author's conception of the type and the possibilities of classifying proverbs. This was devised in the course of arranging the card index of Lithuanian proverbs and their comparative issue. The comprehension of the type is presented as an international category based upon the most common features of the structure of proverbs.
About the history of the term
A famous American paremiologist Archer Taylor was the first to introduce the term 'proverb-type'. In the book The Proverb, published in 1931 and recognized world-wide, he dealt with proverbs as an international phenomenon from different aspects, using the examples from English, German, Latin, French works. Referring to the proverb as a property of many national cultures, he called the equivalents of the same saying expressed in one separate language or by means of several tongues, 'the variants of the proverb', while a set of variants was called 'the type' (Taylor 1931:20— 22). Discussing the ways of variation Taylor indicated the diversity of some specific details and the main features in proverbs, as well as in fairy-tales, ballads or in other genres of folklore. They are linked by similarities, the locutions being broadened either by duplicating analogues or adding contrasting elements or changing obsolete and incomprehensible details (ibid. 22).
Finnish paremiologist Matti Kuusi stressed the significance of the monographic analysis of separate, representative proverbs in 1957, and he referred to the proverb as a set of variants, written down in different places and on different periods. He drew attention on the groups of variants which appear as primary or secondary (Kuusi 1957:47-48). The analysis and comparison of equivalents, according to Kuusi, may help in solving the problems of the origin of the image, evolution and social functions of the proverb (ibid. 50).
In 1965 Kuusi presented the idea of a type-index (Verzeichnis) of inernational proverbs (Kuusi 1965:13), and in 1966 he suggested the main criteria and terms for the analysis of the structure of the proverb (Kuusi 1966:97-104). He pointed out the components shaping the proverb on three levels:
1) an idea (Idee);
2) a structure (Struktur);2
3) a kernel (Baukern).
Kuusi refers to the texts of different nations where the idea and the kernel coincide as the variants of the same proverb. The texts linked by the common idea and structure are suggested to be called equistructural synonymous proverbs (Strukturgleiche Synonym - Sprichwörter); the texts with the same structure, and having the adequate kernel of a message, but expressing a different idea, might be called congruous proverbs (kongruente Sprich-wtsrter). The article also deals with the ways of developing the variants incorporating additional motives, contaminative proverbs (Kontaminations-sprichwörter) and compound proverbs (zusammengesetzte Sprichwörter) are described. It is also shown that in variants some elements appear to be comparatively stable, others are mobile (Kuusi 1966: 98-99).
The type in Permiakov's system
A series of teoretical studies and issues of texts followed trying to explain and to practically demonstrate the possibilities for systematizing proverbs. Russian paremiologist Grigori Permiakov experimented on the theory of classification, Kuusi reported his projects of the type-index of international proverbs, some polemic observations were published by Estonian folklorist Arvo Krikmann and Latvian paremiologist Elza Kokare.
While classifying proverbs of different nations, Permiakov did not pay attention to whether they were international or not. He grouped the Russian translations of proverbs of Oriental nations according to the logical-semiotic features which, in addition, were made to agree with the so-called topical pairs. Having analysed different aspects of the structure of proverbs as the signs of conformable situations or interrelations of things (Permiakov 1979:17), Permiakov applied his self-made scheme to Yu. Bregel's "Proverbs and Proverbial Phrases of Oriental Nations" (Poslovitsy... 1961) and to other textual issues. Four classes of situations or situational invariants, including the existing and possible ways of generalization expressed in the form of a proverb, are singled out in the system.
In one of his first articles Permiakov describes these classes as follows. In the first group of invariants the relations between a thing and its characteristic features are shaped, if a thing (P) has one feature (x), it also has another conformable feature (y), e.g. "Kazhdoe nachalo imeet konets". In the second group the relations between the things are shaped: if there is one thing (P), there is also the other one (Q), i.e. "Esli est' koza, budet i moloko ". In the third group the interrelation of peculiarities of different things is shaped: if a thing (Q) depends on the other one (P) and the latter has a peculiarity (x), then the thing (Q) posseses the same peculiarity (x), i.e. "Iz griaznogo iztochnika i voda techet griaznaia". In the fourth group the relations of things according to the presence or lack of some peculiarities are shaped: if a thing (P) has some positive feature, but a thing (Q) has not got it, the thing (P) is better than (Q), i.e. "Svoia borona luchshe chuzhogo pluga" (Permiakov 1968A:227-228).
Acknowledging the fact that while observing only the logic formuli (later he called them shaping groups - formoobrazuiushchie gruppy), the set of figurative ingredients of proverbs (predmetno-obraznyi sostav), which compiles the indication of them, is disregarded (Permiakov 1978:105), Permiakov made his principle agree with another one, i.e. he also broke proverbs up into subject groups, which in theoretical explanations were called invariantal pairs. In this case the data of the set of figurative ingredients are also abstract, marking out such pairs of notions, which reflect the substance of the image, i.e. content and form, totality and part, beginning and end, large and small, old and young, good and bad, etc.
Dividing the bulk of the texts concurrently into two, Permiakov presented them in two sections in his last edition of proverbs and proverbial phrases of Oriental nations. Shaping groups make up the first section. Its essence is described in the subtitle: "Proverbs and proverbial phrases of Oriental nations, arranged with reference to the types of interrelations of things while inside them, by the means of logic transformation" (Permiakov 1979:69). In the second section the texts are divided into subject groups. Its subtitle reads as follows: "Proverbs and proverbial phrases of Oriental nations, arranged with reference to the types of opposed things while inside them, by the shaping features, i.e. by the character of their logic relations" (ibid. 239).
Smaller sections in both parts are expressed by metatexts as well. For example, the shaping features of the texts in the fifth subgroup "Impossibilities-possibilities" (Nevozmozhnost'-vozmozhnost') of the first subdivision of the first section are described as follows: "A. There are some things (actions) that can be put into practice under no circumstances, and which, therefore, appear nowhere and never" (Permiakov 1979:91). In one of the smallest subgroups such texts are found: "Skol'ko ne vertis', svoikh ushei ne uvidish' (malag. 80, 111)", "Rukoi vodu ne skhvatit' (nenets. 92, 67)", "Ty ne mozhesh' razzhech' ogon' v vode /.../ (nandi 122, 3)", etc. (Permiakov 1979:91). The seventh section of the first subdivision "Content-form" (Soderzhanie-forma) in the second section is called: "Originality-uniformity of the form and/or content of things". The kernel of the image of some texts compiling the very small sections concurs more or less, but that one of some other texts is different. For instance, in one section consisting of two texts, we read: "Ukazhdoi ptitsy svoe operen'e (tur. 98, 35)", "U vsiakogo dereva svoia kora (tamil. 93, 61)" (Permiakov 1979:242).
Permiakov must have understood the smallest sections of subdivisions or their groups as the types of proverbs. In one of his theoretical articles, having discussed the fundamentals of the self-founded system of classification, he states that with the use of this method for classification of proverbs the concept of the type of the proverb could be formulated: "The type of the proverb can be defined as an intersection of a certain complex of thematic elements of the themes of the proverb with a certain shaping subgroup" (Permiakov 1978:133). According to him, "intersections of subject invariantal pairs (groups) and shaping pairs virtually combine the logical-semantic plan and the plan of the realities into one general plan of the content of proverbs" (ibid. 132). However, in some other articles Permiakov denies the significance of realities for classification of proverbs. He considers them as building material only (Permiakov 1968A:226).
The type in Kuusi's system
Kuusi criticized Permiakov's system, publishing his own projects of a type-index of international proverbs. He pointed out that heterogeneous proverbs also fall under types marked out according to Permiakov's system (Kuusi 1970:473) and therefore to find a required proverb in Permiakov's system is as easy as to look for a needle in a haystack (Kuusi 1972:734-735). In his projects M. Kuusi does not describe the structure of the whole planned index (macrostructure), but provides the illustration of its basic sections (microstructure). Taking into consideration the fact that every proverb consists of the data of several levels and while searching for those stable on the universal scale, Kuusi describes the type in one of his most elaborate projects referring to the relations of binary opposition (Kuusi 1972:710). "Structural analysis is not a skeleton key to all the locked doors of paremiology but it is a key that opens the way from seeming equivalences and differences to an ordered perception of essential similarities and contrasts" (ibid. 735).
The first example depicts the possible way for the proverbs to be classified in the index, and accordingly Kuusi has used and published many texts of European, Asian, African nations, discussing two irreconcilable competitors. The entire stock (type) of texts is called: "Two (rivals do not agree) in one (place) " (Kuusi 1970:473). The latter has been divided into 12 small sections. In section A, for example, there are 4 texts. The English variant refers to the discord of two kings, the Latin one — of two thrones, the Tadjik one - of two shahs, Idomic one - of two strong men on a bridge (ibid.). The texts of section D are about two women in one house (the English variant), two suitors in a girl's bed (the Finnish variant), and about two owners of one house (the Vietnamese variant) (ibid. 473-474).
The second example of Kuusi's international index is more exhaustive (Kuusi 1972). The essential questions of the index designed by the author are discussed, the structure of two types is displayed, the principles of binding and detaching of texts are set forth. The illustrations contain "one-two (majority)" or "one-whole", or "a part-the whole" antipodes. The types receive current numbers, their names are expressed by metatexts, the types are divided into small sections and are indicated by the letters of the alphabet.
The second type no. 1.8 of the first group is called "X of two or many caretakers (owners) will be in want of care" (ibid. 718). The smallest sections are entitled as follows:
A. Property, things
B. House
C. Field
D. Domestic animals
E. Man
In section D (Domestic animals), for example, six texts in English, French, Russian, and German are presented. They say that a common horse is most badly shod (English), a horse belonging to two owners is hungry (Chinese), a common donkey is always overloaded (French), sheep perish when pastured by many shepherds (Lak), one man's pig will live, nine men's pig is sure to die of hunger (Finnish), a dog of two yards is never fed (Estonian) (ibid.). In section E (Man) four texts are given saying that the man of two homes dies of hunger (Gandish), the guest of two houses dies of hunger (Marathish), a baby under a wardship of two nurses died of hunger (Georgian), the one who serves everybody receives no reward (Danish) (Kuusi 1972:718).
The criticism of Permiakov's and Kuusi's systems
A. Krikmann stressed the presence of essential and complementary meanings in these systems, as well as the fact that they assign sentence-shaped descriptions to classifiable texts (Krikmann 1974:856). He also marked out some shortcomings and questionable things referring the one and the other. The inexhaustiveness of semantic characteristics and the patterns of hierarchic systems caused the strongest doubts (ibid. 866).
As Krikmann sees it, the poetic as well as the folkloristic sides of proverbs suffer in both systems. Proverbs are not logical or philosophical statements but phrases bearing figurative meaning. He says it is doubtful whether there is "any ground to speak of proverbial meanings as "potentials" at all, beside those actual meanings they have or have had in the tradition of concrete peoples, cultures, etc." (ibid. 878).
Proverbs are complicated structures, and the metatexts presented in the descriptions of types are not capable of describing all the relations manifested in proverbs. If we would try to compile an exhaustive description of a semantic structure, then this description would turn out a comlicated one beyond comprehension. However, it would show clearly, that "the abstracting or generalizing of the proverb's semantic description is nothing else than tearing a certain substructure or a particular relation out of the total structure at the cost of severing its ties with the rest of it (i.e., neglecting all other semantic information)" (ibid. 868). Krikmann has noticed that many similar units in Permiakov's work fall under different classes and that some classes repeat the others (Krikman 1974:865).
E. Kokare has regarded Permiakov's system from the aspect of comparative paremiology. She considers Permiakov's book as generally valuable and based on strict criteria, though it does not escape criticism. As Kokare sees it, the titles of sections and subsections in Permiakov's book are too abstract in many cases, removed from the artistic generalizations of the proverbs having figurative meanings (Kokare 1984:279). Combining the two criteria (logical and linguistic) while grouping the texts, Permiakov could not avoid repetition. She notices quite a few cases of the same example falling under different sections (ibid. 280). Too much attention is paid to the modality of sentences, too many small subgroups are formed (ibid. 284). Quite different examples are attributed to the same type (ibid. 280). The titles sometimes impose on specific texts meanings which they do not possess (ibid. 286).
Here Kokare also discusses the question of the content size of the type. She states that but entire types, including synonymic proverbs and their variants, rather than separate variants of proverbs, must be attached to the edition of comparative texts (ibid. 282). The author of this article is also reproached by E. Kokare for not including in the book "Lithuanian Proverbs" (Grigas 1976) synonymic proverbs into the type, i.e., proverbs in which an identical idea is expressed by different artistic images (Kokare 1984:278).
The problem of the type in the study of proverbs
In the comparative study of Latvian proverbs "International and National in the Latvian Proverbs and Proverbial Phrases " (Kokare 1987) Kokare compares Latvian proverbs to the ones of other nations. She also discusses the problem of the type, formulating the following criteria for the ascertainment of the type:
1) the similarity of the syntactic and poetic structure;
2) the semantic adequacy of the image system. (Ibid. 28.)
The stability of some components of a pattern, for example that of syntactic ones, is described by Kokare as relative, because different variants and equivalents in the complex of the type are usually expressed by sentences of several models; the data of other levels, i.e. the structure of the poetic image are more constant. As Kokare states, the cases where proverbs of an adequate artistic pattern are used in different meanings are very rare, though sometimes it is impossible to avoid the attribution of the texts, expressed by the same motives of an image to different types (ibid. 36). The type was discussed by Kokare in the book (Kokare 1980) of equivalents of Latvian-Lithuanian proverbs in a similar way.
The problems of the ascertainment of the type are touched upon in some aspects in theoretical articles. Hungarian paremiologist Vilmos Voigt, having analysed one proverb in the form of a questionnaire, has formulated the idea that the meanings of the proverbs, expressed by completely adequate linguistic forms vary noticeably (Voigt 1970:126). Their situational functions also depend on the so-called situational variants (ibid. 127).
In one way or another, the abundance of articles on the analysis of the structure of the proverb points to the problem of the type. For example, American folklorist Alan Dundes, searching for constant components (continuum) in the structure of the proverb, considers what the essential unit of the structural analysis should be: an image, a meaning or a formula for the modelling of the proverb. According to him, the latter might deserve the most consideration (Dundes 1975:963). He drew attention to the fact that in the texts - which consist of one descriptive element and have only one topic and one comment - opposition is impossible (ibid. 966). It demonstrates the impossibility of Permiakov's and Kuusi's principle of referring to binary antipodes that can be applied to all proverbs in the process of their classification.
A significant statement for the understanding of the type is found in D. Burkhart-Chatzeeliades' article on the proverb as an example of the science of communication and semiotics. She indicates that it is inexpedient to reject the classification indications of the sphere of realities, as it frequently occurred earlier (Burkhart-Chatzeeliades 1981:157). The material has been provided by the reality of some social culture, settling the essence of the micro and macro metaphors of proverbs (ibid. 156-157). In this way the above-mentioned idea of Permiakov's is indirectly discarded, according to which the realities form an indifferent construction material in respect to classification.
The type in the publications of proverbs
The very first attempt to compile an exhaustive publication of proverbs encounters the problem of the proverb as a complex of variants and their international equivalents. Some compilers of proverb publications, e.g. the Düringsfelds (Düringsfeld-Reinsberg-Düringsfeld 1875), paid more attention to the idea that equivalents of the proverb render texts expressed at times by very diverse images, while other compilers, e.g. Wander (Wander 1867 et al.), gave preference to a formal criterion, observing the principle of the allotment of the basic words only.
The comparative publications of Votic and Livonian proverbs compiled by V. Mälk are to be singled out of those published in recent decades (Vadja... 1976; Liivi... 1981). Describing her own principle of forming the types, Malk states that "the typological consistency of two or more proverb texts is determined by the identity of their idea and kernel, the kernel being understood as the central element of an image or a complex of concepts" (Vadja... 1976:27). A footnote indicates that the formulation of this concept of the type has been based on the terms proposed by Kuusi.
Kokare followed her own principle for the distinguishing of the type, discussed in the earlier mentioned book of Latvian and Lithuanian proverbs. In it she joined synonymous proverbs into one common type. She gave preference to the common idea rather than to the unity of the image structure. Therefore, besides the types in which the discussed congeniality of the syntactic and poetic is more or less sensed (as she puts it), there appear accumulations of texts, manifesting rather diverse and unrelated poetic images.
For instance, after calling type no. 536 as "Everyone behaves according to one's nature " and dividing it into three groups of texts, Kokare compiles the first group with the proverbs where the images are based on the following motives: a fox counts hens even in a dream; the skin of a stallion neighs even when hung on the fence, a cat, a dog, a goat, a wolf never change their nature (Kokare 1980:293). Combining into one common type texts which are expressed by diverse combinations of realities and abstract concepts, no attention is paid to her own criterion formulated about the similarity of a poetic pattern.
In the information of the international symposium of paremiologists, published in Proverbium no. 25 of 1975, compilers of national and regional publications of proverbs are recommended to be guided by M. P. Tilley's (Tilley 1950), V. J. Whiting's (Proverbs... 1968) and S. Adalberg-J. Krzyzanowski's (Nowa... 1969 et al.) systems of classification. A fragment from B.J. Whiting's book is published here. In all these issues complexes of variants, in which the essential elements of a poetic image concur, are presented as independent proverbs. One common basic word is found for every proverb (type), the types are alloted in the publication, considering the place of the words in the alphabet of a corresponding language.
Because the collections published by Whiting and Tilley are not large (the texts of the first author are taken from sources dating back to the year 1500, the other author uses sources of the 16-17th centuries), the accumulations of texts comprising separate proverbs (types) are comparatively simple. Texts in the types are arranged according to the chronology of sources. Adalberg-Krzyzanowski's great publication of Polish proverbs and proverbial phrases, on the other hand, includes large groups of texts comprising separate proverbs. They are divided into smaller sections, marked by the letters of the alphabet, the texts in smaller divisions are marked chronologically. The functions of the basic word are attributed to the words which are repeated in the texts most frequently, although those lacking the basic word attributed to the whole proverb, are also attached. For instance, jabfko is the basic word in the proverb "Niedaleko jab lko pada od jab loni", but here we also find the following text "Owoc spad lszy' swego drzewa bliski", in which it is repeated by the word owoc (ibid. 810-811).
The stocks of variants selected according to this principle, make up the types of proverbs, though neither Adalberg in the 19th century, nor Krzyzanowski in his recently compiled publication have used the term 'type'. True, as in every systematic publication some disputable and questionable cases of binding and detaching of texts occur here, but it has practically been impossible to avoid these completely in any system of classification.
Proverbs are objects of folkloristics Permiakov has described proverbs as an object of research for linguists, folklorists and philosophers-logicians (Permiakov 1968A:225). Permiakov himself was mostly interested in the shaping of logical thought in proverbs (Permiakov 1968B). At the same time it should be pointed out that he did not classify proverbs from the point of view of folkloristics. No wonder his method of systematization is unsuitable for the research of proverbs as folklore phenomena. With certain reservations we dare say the same about the principle of systematization adapted to Kuusi's global index of proverbs, undoubtedly valuable for researchers searching in the proverbs for the ways of stylistic-structural modelling common to all nations, though not respecting many other components of the structure of the proverb significant for folklorists. The basis for Permiakov's as well as Kuusi's system is formed by the data from the higher structural levels of the proverb.
From the beginning of folkloristics, researchers have mostly been interested in traditional plots, personages as products of historical reality and social relations, and which are formed by belief, customs, ethical and aesthetical views oriented to those relations. Folkloristics evolved and developed as a science due to the process of collecting, systematizing and studying of folklore heritage, using historic memories preserved in the traditional, artistic and ritual word. For other sciences, such as semiotics, linguistics, sociology, psychology, folklore is an auxiliary means, a source of illustrative examples. The classification of folklore according to aspects significant to them is very limited. Folkloristics in turn explores the origin and development of folklore units, the problems of their ties to ethnic cultures, and requires methods oriented towards their essence.
Though very different from other folklore genres in terms of function and relation to social reality, proverbs are, first of all, phenomena of folklore. They are traditional combinations of artistic words, their history reflects the development of social and aesthetic thought, they are closely related to biographies of various ethnoses and of larger cultural areas. And therefore, the folkloristic aspect proves to be the most important for the systematization of proverbs.
The kernel of the image forms the basis of the type How should proverbs be classified then if following the requirements of folkloristics? What are the conditions for systematizing proverbs as objects of folkloristics?
Folklore - comprised of the major genres such as fairy-tales, legends, songs, ballads - is narrative. The plot - being the most common component of national variants and their international equivalents - is the kernel of a separate piece of creation, the basic component of the artistic structure. While analysing textual variants by the comparative method the deepest layers of the past are revealed. The texts of common plots are presented in catalogues as types. The term 'type' was first applied in this meaning to the theoretical analysis of fairy-tales only, later it was used for other narrative genres as well. The catalogues of narrative folklore are most often called type catalogues and the international type numbers introduced in them are convenient for comparative research.
For such small and common units as proverbs, it might be inexpedient to introduce numeration, on an international scale, and on the other hand, the verbal formulae of separate proverbs are not longer than a few words which are easily remembered and reveal the essence of the work. In the tradition of separate nations quite a number of sayings, exceptionally national or common in very close languages are used. International types might get lost among them. The main criteria for distinguishing a type, however, must be as concrete, constant, and easily stated as in the classification of other folklore genres. What must one look for while determining and distinguishing types of proverbs which are so short and have no plot? Where does the most organic element of nature, closely connected with their origin, development, social functions lie?
Kuusi seems to have discussed and illustrated these elements most clearly in the above-mentioned suggestions on the terms of paremiology (Kuusi 1966), however, for some reasons he has ignored them in preparing the international index of types. He states that the texts, related by the common idea and the kernel, must be understood as variants of the same proverb. Consequently they form the basic units of the type. In his examples the kernel is the motif, common to all variants, forming a corresponding metaphor in image-bearing proverbs and the constant argument of non-artistic generalization in those is understood literally.
The idea, i.e. the thought expressed by artistic image or non-artistic generalization in texts of the same verbal kernel is commonly the same. This is determined by the amazing ability of a language as means for coding thoughts to limit and regulate denotative and connotative meanings of words and their combinations in corresponding contexts. It eliminates the danger of misunderstanding in cases of the so-called free and constant combinations of words. That is why in examples analysed by Kuusi, the so-called congruent texts, i.e. those of the same structure and kernel but expressing different ideas, are very scarce.
Synonymic proverbs are quite a different matter. The texts, linked by common or similar ideas but having a different kernel, are frequent. As expressed persuasively in Kuusi's examples, they do not form one and the same proverb. The idea, subject and semantics are derivative, abstracted components of the structure of the highest level. They become common traits when detached from a concrete image.
The afore-mentioned compilers of the publications of texts perceived the basic component shaping the proverb concurrently with Kuusi. The material itself suggested for researchers who had worked individually to consider the proverb as an accumulation of variants. Already in the 19th century this idea was nearly reached by compilers of large publications, such as Karl Friedrich Wilhelm Wander, the author of the great collection of German proverbs (Wander 1867 et al.), the Düringsfelds, the authors of the comparative edition of German and Roman proverbs (Düringsfeld— Reinsberg-Düringsfeld 1875). In recent decades the same principle of type shaping has been consistently applied and corroborated by the Estonian compilers of comparative collections and the national edition of texts (Vadja... 1976; Liivi... 1981; Eesti... 1980 et al.).
The kernel of the image of the proverb is a phrase, being shaped by the structure of verbal variants. It is a concrete and relatively stable unit accessible to direct observation, and settling the organic unity of the image and the origin of the statement. Words as codes of realities and abstract notions belong to the category of lower levels of the structure. Words and their combinations form a concrete and stable basis for the texts to be compared, paralleled and distinguished, i.e. to organize the types of proverbs. The semantic data, for example, of those of higher levels are derivative. Analysers, researchers, and rather often the very users of proverbs may interpret them differently, even in contradictory ways. Observing them as the very criterion for systematization, it is impossible to avoid the danger of diverse comprehension and ascription of the idea. They are too general and broad to enable a description of type as an organic unity.
The problems of the complex and composition of the international type
The experience of systematizing and studying of proverbs, and especially the compiling of comparative editions of texts, demonstrate that the data on the surface structure of texts repeat regularly or concur not only in national (monolingual) but also in international (polylingual) types of proverbs. Common motives in kindred languages and also in those belonging to different families are created by using the same or similar realities and abstract notions, expressing lexical equivalents. They are modelled with the help of sentences with analogous syntactical constructions. True, the more widely the proverb has spread in different languages and zones of culture, the greater number of variants, adaptations or regional versions of it are created. But the unity of the main components, settling the structure of the image is, nevertheless, evident. It is proved in many cases by the notes, explaining the meanings of artistic texts and situations of their usage, found in collections.
Quite a clear concept of the type structure of popular international proverbs can be formed observing the Düringsfelds' comparative edition, in which a number of equivalents in Romanic and Germanic languages have been paralleled (Düringsfeld-Reinsberg-Düringsfeld 1875). In order to elaborate on this idea, in the following the structure of an international and particularly old proverb is described.
The proverb is "Kas kitam duobe kasa, pats jon ikrinta " (He that digs a pit for another, falls himself into it). It is referred to in the Bible and by Lucian, a writer of the fourth century. All European nations know its equivalents and the Far East is also aware of it. According to the Estonian paremiologist Reitsak, the proverb came to Europe from the Far East (Reitsak 1967:171). As the known data prove, the oldest English equivalent was recorded in 1509, the first Polish one dates from 1522, the German one from 1605, the Russian one dates back to the 17th century. Its motif was used in Russian in 1280 in the psalm-book of Simeon. The kernel of the proverb consists of the themes of the digging of the pit and the digger himself falling in. There is a variant of it, where only the first component (he/she digs a pit for somebody) is used. It also joins in the structure of the type organically. The unity of the idea of the equivalents is convincingly expressed by the context in the Bible or in some other sources if used in any other coherent narrative. V. Zhukov indicates a number of examples of its usage in Russian fiction and generalizes its idea as follows:
"One who is up to mischief may get into it" (Slovar... 1956:25). The content of the proverb is explained in the sources of other nations in the same way.
Comparing the multilingual equivalents of the proverb it is easy to distinguish several models of syntactic structure forming five versions.
A. "Kas kitam duobe kasa, pats jon ikrinta" (He that digs a pit for another, falls himself into it). Equivalents are found in Lithuanian, Latvian, Byelorussian, Russian, Polish, German, English, Latin, French, Spanish, Czech, Croatian, Sorbian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Rumanian, Albanian, Greek, Turkish, Danish, Norwegian, Italian, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, Assyrian.
B. "Nekask duobe's kitam -pats ikrisi " (You don't dig a pit for another — you will fall yourself into it). Equivalents are found in Lithuanian, Byelorussian, Russian, Polish, Finnish, Karelian.
C. "Kitam duobe kasdamas, pats ileksi" (If you dig a pit for another -you will fall yourself into it). Equivalents are found in Lithuanian, Latvian, Turkish.
D. "Kitam duobe kasa - pats jon ikrinta " (He digs a pit for another and falls himself into it). Equivalents are found in Latvian, English, Latin.
E. "Vienas kitam duobq kasa " (They are digging a pit for one another). An equivalent is found in Polish.
The unity of the kernel of the image in all versions is evident. The idea of versions A, B, C, D, combining both motifs and that of E, imply that only the theme of digging a pit merges. The only difference is that the component of the digging of the pit is perceived more as an artistic argument while that of falling into it is understood as an artistic generalization or warning. Therefore, version E, which lacks the generalizing part, receives the status of a proverbial phrase, while the other four are proverbs. In general, while dealing with versions expressed in a different way and by different types of sentences, we also perceive the adequate differences of modality of statements, coded by them, and their dependence on the linguistic context and extralinguistic situations in turn.
While observing the correlation of equivalents, it is possible to guess some peculiarities of the external structure determined by historic development and ethnic environment. The fact that version A has got the largest amount of equivalents in European languages, gives rise to the thought, that its linguistic model may be the fundamental and the oldest one. Not all versions have become popular to the same extent in different languages. For example, according to the data of the card index of Lithuanian proverbs, version V is the most characteristic and numbers 200 variants, version A has only a few, version S has less than ten.
If the kernel of the image is understood as the fundamental component of the structure of the proverb, and only those texts in which the kernel is repeated are called the proverb's variants and equivalents, then it is inexpedient to supplement the type composition with proverbs expressed by other - though similar - motifs. Therefore, the texts having the motif of digging a pit are distinguished from those in which the same idea is expressed by, for example, the images of setting a trap or a snare: "He that sets a snare for another, falls himself into it". Its equivalents are also found in Lithuanian, Latvian, Polish, German, English, Dutch, Norwegian, Swedish, Latin, French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese. The oldest English variant dates back to the year 800. Besides it has also been used in the works of Ovid.
Both complexes of equivalents and variants, though close on the level of semantics, function independently from the oldest times. Their images, bearing various realities and notions, were often used in parallel ways in the same language. They cannot be referred to as two modulations of the same image, because different metaphors have been applied to them. If we mark out the proverb with the motif of the pit with the symbol P, the proverb with the motif of the snare S and the idea with/, their overlaping can be described graphically as follows (see the diagram): two projections from realities and examples of life to the sphere of moral relations make up a parallel, but do not interlace. Expressing the same idea, they can serve as substitutes but one never repeats the image motifs of the other. Therefore, it will come in very handy to indicate the ties of semantics of both types in the system classification but there are no reasons to join them into one common type.
| Diagram: | |
1. The ascertainment of the type as the basic unit is one of the first stages in the compilation of the scientific collections of proverbs or their comparative research. The exact comprehension of the basic component of the structure of the proverb, the consistent reference to its data are the conditions determining the scientific value of the activity. The component which forms the proverb as an autonomous unit and enables us to single it out from other proverbs, is the kernel of the artistic image, while in the expressions which have maintained their direct meaning, it is the logical combination of notions. Its essence is judged by the verbal structure of the text.
2. Defining the interaction of the other components and the kernel in his theoretical article on the terms of the structure of proverbs M. Kuusi realized the kernel to be the most important component, forming the type. Knowing well the material to be systematized, the compilers of the best scientific collections considered the kernel to be the essential component of the proverb and referred to them. The data is also used for the compilation of card-indexes of the stocks of national proverbs. The importance of the kernel itself is revealed in the comparative studies of separate proverbs.
3. Judging the type by the components belonging to higher structural levels, it is inevitable that researchers are lost in the unlimited expanses of common traits characteristic to proverbs. The content of the notion of the type becomes too complicated, the expressions, even of the diverse origin, acquire the status of variants and equivalents. Therefore, the analyser is obliged to refer to the unity of meanings and idea if the data exceed the bounds of the unity of the kernel of the image.
Systematization of the texts always presents some doubtful and obscure cases. Difficulties arise while observing the interlaced motives of the kernel, which are characteristic of diverse types of proverbs, confronting the contaminations, the elaborations which sometimes change the image of the proverb considerably. Peripheral texts existing within the limit of two or several types, come into being. All this compels the analyser to ascribe or delimit conditionally and, in addition, employ references, combining two or more types. However, it does not diminish the significance of the kernel of the message.
Institute of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore. Vilnius, Lithuania
1) A set is understood conditionally, as it is inconceivable to embrace absolutely all the past and the present recordings of proverbs and the cases of their usage in the written language. When systematizing proverbs and compiling their fundamental editions, the texts available in the depositories of manuscript stocks and in the most important printed sources are usually used.
2) S. Neumann suggested the term 'structure' used by M. Kuusi, taking into account the syntactic forms of a sentence, to be replaced by the word 'formula' (Neumann 1966:130).
Burkhart-Chatzeeliades, Dagmar 1981. "Das Sprichwort als Factum der Kommunikationswissenschaft und der Semiotik". In Proverbium paratum, no. 2:141-172.
Dundes, Alan 1975. "On the Structure of the Proverb". In Proverbium, no. 25:961-973.
Düringsfeld, I.; Reinsberg-Duringsfeld, O. F. 1875. Sprichwörter der germanischen und romanischen Sprachen, vol. I/ 1872, 2/1875. Leipzig.
Eesti... 1980 Eesti vanasõnad, vol. 1/1980, 2/1983, 3/1985. Tallinn.
Grigas, Kazys 1976. Lietuviu patarles. Vilnius.
Kokare, Elza 1978. Internatsionalnoie i natsionalnoie v latyshskom poslovitsakh i pogovorkakh. Riga.
Kokare, Elza 1980. Latvieshu un lietuvieshu sakamvardu paraleles. Riga.
Kokare, Elza 1984. "Teoria i praktika sravnitelnoi paremiologii". In Folklor. Obraz i poeticheskoie slovo v kontekste, 274-289. Moscow.
Krikmann, Arvo 1974. "Some difficulties arising at semantic classifying of proverbs". In Proverbium, no. 23:865-879.
Kuusi, Matti 1957. Parömiologische Betrachtungen. FF Communications, no. 172: 1-52. Helsinki.
Kuusi, Matti 1965. "Suum cuique". In Proverbium, no. 1:11-14. Helsinki.
Kuusi, Matti 1966. "Ein Vorschlag für die Terminologie der parömiologischen Strukturanalyse". In Proverbium, no. 5:97-104.
Kuusi, Matti 1970. "How Can a Type-index of International Proverbs Be Outlined?". In Proverbium, no. 15:473-476.
Kuusi, Matti 1972. "Towards an International Type-system of Proverbs". In Proverbium, no. 19:699-736.
Liivi... 1981. Liivi vanasõnad eesti, vadja ja läti vastetega, vol. 1-2. Somr. by Vaina Mälk. Tallinn.
Neumann, S. 1966. "Zur Terminologie der paromiologischen Struktruranalyse". In Proverbium, no. 6:130.
Nowa... 1969 et al. Nowa ksiega przyslo'w i wyrazen przys lwiowych polskich, vol. I/ 1969, 2/1970, 3/1972. W oparciu o dzielo Samuela Adalberga opracoval Zespol redakcyjny pod kierunkiem Juliana Krzyza-nowskiego. Warsaw.
Permiakov, Grigori 1968A."O logicheskom aspekte poslovits i pogovorok". In Proverbium, no. 10:225-235.
Permiakov, Grigori 1968B. "O lingvisticheskom aspekte poslovits i pogovorok". In Proverbium, no. 11:276-285.
Permiakov, Grigori 1978. "O smyslovoi strukture i sootvetstvuiushchei klassifikatsii poslovich-nykh izrechenii". In Paremiologicheskii sbornik, 105-135. Moscow.
Permiakov, Grigori 1979. Poslovitsy ipogovorki narodov Vostoka. Moscow.
Poslovitsy... 1971. Poslovitsy ipogovorki narodov Vostoka. Somr. by Yu. Bregel. Moscow.
Proverbs... 1968 Proverbs, Sentences and Proverbial Phrases from English Writings Mainly Before 1500 by Barlett Jere Whiting with the collaboration of Helen Wescott Whiting. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Reitsak, A. 1967. "Poslovitsy mezhdunarodnovo rasprostranenia v estonskom i russkom iazykakh". In Uch. zap. Tartuskogo gos. universiteta. Ser. lingvist., no. 200:165-182.
Slovar... 1956. Slovar russkikh poslovits i pogovorok. Somr. by V. P. Zhukov. Moscow.
Taylor, Archer 1931. The Proverb. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Tilley, M. P. 1950. A Dictionary of the Proverbs in England in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Michigan.
Vadja... 1976. Vadja vanasõnad eesti, soome, karjala ja vene vastetega. Somr. by Vaina Mälk. Tallinn.
Voigt, Vilmos 1970. "Variantenschichten eines ungarischen Proverbiums". In Proverbium, no. 15:125-128.
Wander, Karl Friedrich Wilhelm 1867 el al. Deutches Sprichwörter-Lexikon, vol. 1/1867, 2/1870, 3/1873, 4/ 1876, 5/1880. Leipzig.