Imparative in the writings of the Lithuanian reformers of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

This article aims to discuss synonymous forms and constructions to express the imparative mood in "Catechism" of Merkelis Petkevičiaus (hereinafter PK) and "Postilla" of Jokūbas Morkūnas (hereinafter MP). Similarities as well as differences were found. The imparative mood with formants -k(i), -kig or -(i)gi(k) was used in both, PK and MP. Archaic 2nd person with particle -gi of the imparative mood was used more often in Part III of MP than in Part I of MP or PK. More imparative forms with ending -ki were found in PK and Part I of MP meanwhile they were not used in Part III of MP. More reflexive forms of the imparative mood were used in Part I and Part III of MP than in PK. 2nd person singular of the imparative mood with long formant -kigik was used only in PK. Petkevičius more often wrote negative prefix ne- and imparative mood forms separately meanwhile usually it was written together in Part I and Part III of MP. Future and present tense forms or construction conjugated verb form + infinitive close to the imparative mood were used. The latter construction is usually made up of modal verbs "turėti/galėti" and infinitive. "Galime/turime + infinitive" was more often synonymously replaced with 1st person plural imparative mood forms in Part I of MP than in PK and Part III of MP. It explains why significantly fewer of such forms were used in Part I of MP than in PK and Part III of MP. The ratio of synonymous present and future tense forms in the researched parts of Postilė was similar but three times fewer of such forms were found in PK. Analysis of forms and constructions to express the imparative mood can hardly contribute to determining the authorship of MP – many forms and constructions were word-for-word translations from Polish. This research into imparative mood forms and their usage in PK and Part I and Part III of MP showed that most probably Petkevičius did not contribute to translating the researched parts of MP. Most probably Part I and Part III of MP were translated not by the same person