Kirčiuočių mišimas

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA XLVI (2002), 185-192 REMARKS Remarks MIXING OF DICTIONS In many southern Highland dialects (Léipalingis, Veisiejai, Kapčiamiestis, Drūskininkai, Ratnyčia, Pelesa, Žirmūnai, Rėdūnia, Merkinė, Seinai, Pūnskas) in some cases there is a coincidence of the strong and weak accents (according to prof. J. Balčikonis, the sounding strong accent — from his lectures in 1953-1954). Probably that is why even the pronunciation schemes have failed: grudu „grūdu“, gruduos „grūdus“, but gnidas, k'elmūs „kėlmus“, but k'eė. Imas, ža.yklū „mark“, žanklūs „mark“, betža.y7klas, žiedū „ring“, žieduos „ringus“, karštū „hot“, karšti „hot“, but kd.rstas, ka.rstu; grrnū „pure“, grrnūs „pure“, but grinas, nuogū „nude“, nuogūs „nude“ Drsk (Švendūbrė, Jaskonys); žantūs „žėntus“, žverū „Žvėriu“, dgs. gln. "Zveris "beast", tv'irtū "strong", p'lirmū "first" Rtn? (cf. still heard and confirmed by others Lake Bilsas varying pronunciation bi. lsu ir b'ilsū (Balčikonis 1978b: 383-384; Savukynas 1966). Such examples were recorded in 1958 and later in the surroundings of Rodūniai (in the villages of Kargaudū, Klišių, Naujų Smilginių, Piliakalnio, Leliūšių); (tur.) du sun, but vns gln. stūnu, marci at nugū žūpakal'u; nup'ir.ko. in new rings; rukščūs barščūs n3.r k'aū.le.m p’Llk; with p'irmū, though p'i.rmas: vai m'er.go's dar. | su p'irmū gūlas // Thin facts written and in Laziiny conversation: gru.dūs, vezus, mešiūs (but grain, well) Lz (Pas. jungūs LzŽ98,102 — the junction LZŽ98; stumūs LzŽ1 14 — the lift there; lung — loin L27139: thick LZŽ245 — thick LzZ there; fat Lz (Pasalys) — dgs gln. rzeb’us there, gruduos p. 151, storūs p. 150, bet storas p. 151, kaulūs p. 140, klun'i p. 147, unkšč'isa, p. 151, bet ū.nkšč'is dgs. ward., from Akch'u. dgs. klm. —p. 151 (the last example is the broken I-th accent) and so on. Similar things are found in the discourse of Dievéniskiy (cf. Grinaveckienė 1993: 134—179); cf. sentences heard in Poškoniai village in 1999: ka.rtus /m'ėsk karcūs [apples] those žd.me.n; Two dogs lost. nu3ve. ; I'm going. klecis plėša | v'isa | v'ienūs san'ūs aždauža až'e ji and so on. Even more frequently this was said in the already extinct Zietela dialect: g'ies'm'ax —g'ies'm'- ės ZrŽ205; grinas, grinū Z12219; krėsla' —krėslūs and krėslus ZrŽ316, lango JR74 —dū langū p'irk'on instat'- ēm Z1Z341; mėšlūs ZrŽ398; miire ir murė ZrŽ418; pėdas —piedūs and pėdus ZTZ469; p'irmas —sa p'irmdai ZTŽ487; kunodas dau nesuras Z12643; ša.udus "straudus" and šaudūs ZTŽ659, vienas —vind.i (vns. in. viena) ZTZ768, etc. It is pronounced even g'iema, but g'iem'i, g'iemū ZTŽ204, Vowels e, i, u, o', bivowels ie, uo. This question has already been raised (see Lazauskaitė 1998: 27-28). 186 | REMARKS atjūnkau and atjunkaū ZTŽ249; šiltūs kal’in’its ZrŽ663, in Pagirūs ZT, but Pagiriai (3?) ZrŽ821 and so on. Probably correctly, Prof. J. Balčikonis in 1953-54 has taught that when the language decreases, when its system deteriorates, first of all the pronunciation begins to deteriorate. Sometimes it seems that the pronunciation scheme of a common word (e.g. kėlinės and dgs. gal. Pants ZrŽ283, k'ėp'in'im- 'i "livers" dgs. in. and k'ep'in'ū' dgs. kilm. ZrŽ286, weak (4) ZrŽ589 = (3); skėpta (1)? —ZTZ597; column (3)? —ZrŽ675; musician (1) ZrŽ420 = (2); pakutys (3) ZrŽ450 = (3?), pelenas (1) ZrŽ470 = (2), pekornia (1) ZrŽ470) = (2), etc. In the case of various writings (from different people’s writings, because there is fluctuation even in the speech of one person, e.g., in the village of Poškoniai in the district of Dievėniškiai in 1999 one woman heard važd.vo- .m in trd.bas ~ važiavom in Trébas and vaZiioc in trobas nemožna —važiuot in Trobas nemožna- ), sometimes it is not clear which accent to write for one word after another. Often, due to the final pronunciation of these two vowels, it is assumed that there is a fourth vowel. Unfortunately, F. de Saussure's law could not be applied to the second syllable from the end because of the presence of a fixed prefix (in conversations only k'@.Imas, ka.rštas, Zd.pklas, p'i.rmas, etc.), there must have been some other reasons. They could have been like this. Because of bilingualism or other reasons, the differences in accents have weakened or even disappeared, but in some cases the dialects still have the tendency to accentuate some syllables. The greater number of nouns, adjectives, even numerals and participles are words of the fourth accent, which was like a generalized ending vns of some (perhaps all?) words of the firm root. innagininko and dgs. the final consonant of the adjective. It will also be contributed by the fear of the young scientists (especially in the cities) to divert the accent from the short end to the long syllable in front. Those new pronunciations, clearly confused by the manifestation of this analogy, perhaps should not be presented in dictionaries, in texts (as DRSKŽ and LKZ tried to do), because then we say that 4 pronunciation words can have in the root a firmly beginning preposition (cv'i.rtas, cv'irtū, trd.uktas, trūuktū, etc.). After all, even the users of common language seem to destroy the third accent altogether, because they say griežtū, griežtūs bernūs, aulinius žiedai, giesmė, giesmės, ties Lietuva, su tamsuma, tamsumas and so on. Many people don’t hear the vibrations of the steadfast-hearted anticipation, so they hasten to emphasize vns. innagininką and dgs. the final part with a final accentuated stem, because there is often a deducted accent from various endings: vai.kus, sodu, sodus, miéstus, etc. This will be a phenomenon of a completely new era, which has even begun in Lithuanian conversations. In the opinion of V. Lazauskaite-Ragaišienė, this is almost entirely the result of analogies with other stems (Lazauskaitė-Ragaišienė 2001: 97—109), but the analogous mixing of stems is almost the same in all of Lithuania, and the forms karštū, pirmū, pirmūs, žiedūs, ties Lietuva, etc., occur only in bilingual dialects, in dialects of the border areas affected by casual levelling, as well as in our large cities (especially in Vilnius, Kaunas, Klaipėda). I'm still remembered. is to be. k. temporal verbs g'iema —g'iem'i, g3ve. —go.v'eū. Lz, we'll go. We'll go. (Poškonių k.) and others. In this case, no pronunciation certificates should be written, because the phenomenon is not formed and is rather unclear, as in the case of J. Balčikonis- ’s singular nouns with a true strong-vowel root: Kaūnas, Kaunui, Kaunė (2 or 4), Smalvas, Smalvū, Smalvė (2 or 4, in the absence of plural and cannot be checked; could at least support vns. it is ilatival, but it sometimes fluctuates in conversation, e.g. : Kaunan (many southern and eastern Highlanders) and Kaūnan (DsM —B. Stundžios inf.), because “the designation of paradigms is useless speculation” (Balčikonis 1978a: 372). This is also the case. Niedermann's Dictionary of Lithuanian Written Language, especially in the list of place names (p. 49, Heidelberg, 1968). NOTES | 187 This will help to solve the problem of the pronunciation of the lake b'il.sas: vns. in. of the same person can be pronounced twice —b'ilsū and b'i.Isu. Checked in 2002 (cf. Savukynas 1966: 175-176; Balčikonis 1967: 130). This variation depends on the speaker- 's desire to emphasize vns. inagininką (I even heard the sentence prig’ére. b'i.lsr, although he said vns. vard. b'il.sas). LITERATŪRA BALČIKONIS, J. 1978a: [Rec.] Lithuanian TSR Rivers and Lakes Names, Linguistics 10, 1964. Cited by: Id., Rinktiniai raštai I, sud. A. Pupkis, Vilnius: Mokslas, 371-373. BALCIKONIS, J. 1978b: Letter to the editor. Baltistica 3 (1), Cited by: Id., Rinktiniai raštai I, sud. A. Pupkis, Vilnius: Mokslas, 383-384. GRINAVECKIENĖ, E. 1993: The texts of the source schnets. Journal of Linguistics, 30, 137-159. LAZAUSKAITĖ, V. 1998: On the pronunciation variants of two-syllable o-kamieniu nouns in southern Highland dialects (thesis). Lithuanian Language Institute, Vilnius Pedagogical University. LAZAUSKAITE-RAGAISIENE, V. 2001: Pronunciation variants of double-stemmed u-stem nouns in the dialects of the southern and eastern Vilnius border. The Problems of Paribio Dialects and Languages. 2001, pp. 97–109. SAVUKYNAS, B. 1966: K problema substrata v juhozápadnej Litve. Baltistica 1 (2), 165-176. Vytautas Vitkauskas Received 2002 03 20 Lithuanian Language Institute Antakalnio g. 6, 2055 Vilnius, Lithuania FOR THE RIVER NAME Dané"* The lower part of the river Akmena (Kretingos r.) in Klaipėda dialect is (and was) dane //danej~- Danė | Danija. It was written in German. W. Fenzlaw (1934: 141) the sentence with the word Dange all as one in 1958-1960 have read da.ne || dane and said that they had never met the Klaipeda people who pronounced the consonant g here (only tádlę-tov'ė saw: vo-k'eška parasima Dange | pradé-je t é-p ta-rte —da.ng'e —J. Uzpurvio sister Kohnienés words). Prof. V. Mažiulis refers to F. Kuršaitis' dictionary (K78). People who call themselves Lithuanians have not used this pronunciation even so late (about 1959-1963). Some of the Klaipėda residents who have remained by chance may have started to say “innovatively” about the insurgents who have flooded the region, but they have not heard this before. Hardly from the living language F. Kuršaitis could hear Darige —that form of writings to come. F. Kuršaitis's records from the Tilžė area are without defects, but from elsewhere, from further places, there are even very unbelievable records (i$ random authors- ?), e.g.: zem. unduo, of viekšniai VYTAUTAS MažiuLis. Not Dané, Dariga. Baltistica 34 (1), 1999, 93-98.