Mažmožiai 7–8

161 The search must be tested, and the confrontation of ideas and concepts will one day, no doubt, lead to the formulation of a better theory of syntactic relations than that formulated by the SRT. Axel Holvoet Received 2005 05 13 Lietuviy kalbos institutas P. VileiSio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lietuva MAZMOZIS 7 We have known for a long time, we were taught, that the sonant n allophone 7 is soft only before k’ (this was investigated by prof. Aleksas Girdenio (Kalbotyra 48-49 (1), p. 165-167), presented in the author’s Lithuanian Language Dialect Zodyne (2001), This is how it is pronounced throughout Lithuania (some southern highlands, called dziukai, due to the influence of Slavy jj replaces 7). Now in the journal Lituanistica (2004, 4 (20)) appeared (after research work of Vilnius Pedagogical University) Arimantas Raskinas, Gailius Raskinas, Astos Kazlauskienes article,,Lietuviu bendrinés Skekamosios kalbos garsy fondo kirimo principai* (p. 53-62). It states, probably according to prof. Antana Pakerj (as prof. A. Girdenis' quoted passage shows), that in common language ay’ks’t’ i, tan’kmé,, dy’ks’t’is (p. 56) should be pronounced, 0 usually everywhere lietuviy is pronounced anks'ti, tagkm’é:, d.yks'vis and so on. It is an unbelievable proposition and a negative thing (perhaps in that article the noun with the suffix -ybé priegaidés —tikimybé (p. 61) = probability should not be changed). IS VPU through the pupils injustice comes and 1 LKI: in the important publication Lietuviy kalbos tarmiy chrestomatija (2004) we find /uj'.kt',,lenkti* (SirvintiSkiai) (p. 162), an'ki'@du (Pakrazantis) (p. 215), dey'.kt' (p. 18 —theoretical part). It is even going to the book consultant Prof. habil. dr. A. Listen! There is a clear bé:k't' (p. 62). And this is SiauliSkiu- ... MAZMOZIS 8 Zemaiciy Naureje (all dounininkai, nauriniai dinininkai, vad. varni8kiai, Siauriniai donininkai —from Satigy j Siaure) iS ally briefy and tvirtagaliy finaly detracts kirti j Zodzio pradzia (universal detracting of the word). In those snippets it can also be that the conjunction is also given to the variable prefix of the word (this is observed by Jonas Jablonskis, editing Antanas Juška's zodyna). In the third volume of Lithuanian Linguistics (1960) (p. 62-63) it is written about this in the Zemaičiai — Kurvénu, Papilés, Kaunatavos, Raudény and other snekty, read about Kalnalis (P. Kniaikstos), Latikuvos (V. Grinaveckio), even in the west of the upstate Sakyna (A. Jonaitytes) Snekty similar phenomena, his own pronunciation used in the work: near Siupyliy near Gruzdzit. Many dialectologists, especially akad. Zigmas Zinkevicius, authors of the first Lithuanian dialect chrestomacy. The dialectologist Aleksas Girdenis and his student Dr. Lina Muriniene have now written extensively about this issue in the article,,Peculiarities of Kircio attraction in the Eastern Siaurés Zemaiciy dialect“ (Baltistica 36 (1), 2001, pp. 87-102). Already faded since the 1960s, the problem raised is discussed very clearly, with various encrypted examples, even the frequency is indicated, 162 | COMMENTS Variations are given in Akménés, Klykoliy, Papilés, Vegériy, TirkSlid Snektos (abbreviation Vg (p. 92-93) was Vaiguva, but there is no Sito reiSkinio —it will be some mistake). In most cases, such kiréys i$ pazyminiy are not diverted everywhere, sometimes i8 short finals (but puo Zemaic’its Rdn, Trs, Siaudiné at Pp; puo_aglik- ’és Krs and others). Some examples are given in the new Lithuanian dialect chrestomaty (2004): Darbénuose ¢(5) 3érdéi ~ if Sirdié (transposed from Sirdie); é jrega-(transposed as jégdi); ar ne eX jiega-(~ is jégai) —negi is tvirtapradés galiinés galéty kirtj This way to distract! This is unexpected, because it is related to the outstanding personality of the linguist who consulted the §j publication. Vytautas Vitkauskas Received 23 May 2005 Lietuviy kalbos institutas P. Vileisio g. 5, 10308 Vilnius, Lietuva »EMPTY SPACE* IS A METHODOLOGICALLY VIOLABLE PROPERTY! Vytautas Ambrazas in his answer Can something mean a blank space? (Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 50, 136-138), discussing my Observations on the connection to the so-called zero, considers that my,,logic statements are correct, but they are not at all contrary to the concept of zero presented in the Grammar* (p. 136), because in it zero is,,examined as a methodological concept that helps to determine when the absence of a certain indicator has a defined grammatical function“ (p. 137). If zero (or this place) belongs to methodology, then it should be used as usual in other sciences — “unloaded* semantics- ”. A I myself am not opposed to the use of zero as a purely technical means (see explanation of vowel change, where the term zero degree of that change is used). I am not opposed to the term of this place, because, for example, in the formal grammar theory is used this (baziniy elementy) string, whose symbol E is revealed as ‘ ””. I am only concerned about the need to give it a place, because such grammar is distinct from all empirical sciences (in fact, I cannot consider grammar to be a purely mental dimension, because language is not a psychology for me). In my reasoning about the so-called null connection I have already shown how logical preconditioning arises: some textual non-communicated meaning is ignored and an additional meaning is assigned to the text (dél perinterpretation). I think it happens so often because When I found the article Nulinis kalbos elementas (p. 441) in the Lithuanian language encyclopedia published in 1999 and, after considering everything carefully, realized that I could not agree with the greatness of its statement, I decided to summarize my reasoning in a short time in three texts: (i) about verb nuling jungi, (ii) about verb nuline endings and (iii) about verb nominative sentences (such as, for example, Ziema.), to which some also attribute the verb bati nuling expression. Only after that I had to explain in detail my views and,,zero* elements of language and only then I expected to participate in the discussion, if anyone disagreed with my reasoning. But, after publishing my ideas about the word nuline jungi (Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 48, 177-184), all sorts of misfortune completely interrupted my reflections, 0 during that time I received a polemical reply from Vytautas Ambraz. After that, temporarily withdrawing from the previous idea, I am forced to enter into a discussion. I tell the readers of this text that some of the arguments about the null elements of language I keep for the future, because I hope to write about both the null finals and the nominal verbs. 2 Tpoce, M., Jlanten, A., Teopua dopmaavnolx epammamuk, Mocxea, 1971, 15.