Leksyka dwóch XVI-wiecznych antyreformacyjnych informatorów wyznaniowych w kontekście genezy tych druków („ikonoklasta” vs. „ikonomach”, „zmalowane” vs. „wykonterfetowane”, „gamratka” vs. „miłośnica”)
The lexis of two 16th-century anti-reformation confessional guides in the context of the origins of these prints (“ikonoklasta” vs. “ikonomach”, “zmalowane” vs. “wykonterfetowane”, “gamratka” vs. “miłośnica”)

Summary/Abstract: In 1561, two anti-reformation religious guidebooks were published anonym­ously: Rodzay… and Wizerunk… The researcher’s attention is drawn to two fragments of these prints in particular, because they are surprisingly similar (these are the only places in both works that coincide). The aim of the article is a lexical analysis of these fragments and an attempt to answer the question whether linguistic findings provide arguments to explain the genetic relations of the analyzed prints: original text – translation – compilation? This question especially concerns the Wizerunk…, about which much less is known than about the Rodzay…Three pairs of lexemes were analyzed, showing different lexical solutions adopted by anonymous authors: ikonoklasta vs. ikonomach, zmalowane vs. wykonterfetowane, gamratka vs. miłośnica.The formulated conclusions seem to confirm Zbigniew Nowak’s non-linguistic thesis that in the case of Wizerunk… we are dealing with a compilation, but at this stage of re­search it is difficult to specify this thesis in detail.

• Details
• Contents