მრავალგზისობის კატეგორიის ისტორიის ზოგი საკითხი ქართულში

Abstract

Recurrence expresses repetitive (usual) actions performed in the past. It was expressed through the iterative screeves in Old Georgian. Examples of organic formation of recurrence are attested even in Old Georgian; we can find such cases as “maradis movidodis” and “mravalgzis tsaritatsis” that can be considered as a semantic tautology because the descriptive means “maradis”, “mravalgzis” coincide with the semantics of the iterative screeves. Such cases are more common in translated monuments; We would like to know what the situation is in terms of the double expression of recurrence in the original works. To study the issue, we used the editions of the Georgian Four Gospels: “Two Old Editions of the Four Gospels” (1945), “Two Last Editions of the Four Gospels” (1979); we used the Greek original of the Four Gospels (1904) for comparison; we studied the material from the original works “Monuments of Old Georgian Hagiographic Literature” (vol. I, 1963). For New Georgian, we used the works by Ilia Chavchavadze and Akaki Tsereteli. We will try to answer the question, why the scribe decided to use the iterative screeves along with lexical units expressing recurrence: DE, C: “mraval zham tsaritatsis igi, da sheborkilian” (Luke 8:29). In Greek, “πολλοἰς γὰρ χρόνοισ” means “for a long time”, the words “tsaritatsis, sheborkilian” are in perfect tense while “gankhetknis” is an active participle: “διαρρήσσων”. FG and HIK editions: “mravalgzis tsaritatsis igi, da sheborkilian” (Luke 8:29). In Greek, since recurrence is not organically expressed, the repetitive action is expressed by a lexical unit, while in Georgian the translator translates it through the lexical unit and the organic formation. Clearly, the frequency of double expression of recurrence is explained by the influence of the original. Such irregularities are rare in the original monuments, e.g. “mravalgzis israelitsa mistsis upalman” (“Monuments of Old Georgian Hagiographic Literature”, vol. I, 1963: 47). This indicates that the organic formation of recurrence is slowly disappearing. The disappearance of the iterative screeve should have started exactly when it became necessary to use lexical units next to grammatical means. G. Gogolashvili notes, that the existence of the possibility to express the iterative contextually (or lexically, descriptively) could be a contributing factor (and not a cause) to the disruption of organic forms and the beginning of descriptive one”. The descriptive formation was established to convey recurrence in the language, and with 19th-century writers (Ilia Chavchavadze, Akaki Tsereteli) recurrence is conveyed through a particle “kholme” that may be attached to any screeve, e.g. „erti-ors ro gadakhteboda, shecherdeboda kholme da moikhedavda ukan“ (Tsereteli, 1985: 57). Sometimes this particle is used without any need. Recurrence is also expressed by the continuous screeve.