LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XL (1998)

Aloyzas VIDUGIRIS

Institute of the Lithuanian Language, Vilnius

ZANAVYKAI – DESCENDANTS OF THE SŪDUVIAI OR THE SAMOGITIANS

Professor Juozas Pikčilingis encouraged me to take a closer interest in the Zanavykai dialect. Although belated, this work is intended to fulfill the late professor’s wishes on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of his birth and the 450th anniversary of the first Lithuanian book, and to express the author’s personal affection for this region.

Zanavykai is the usual name for the northern subdialect of the southwestern Aukštaitians, that is, one of the dialects of the Kaunas subdialect group. It is the northernmost part of the so-called Užnemunė, or Sūduva, lying between the Nemunas, Šešupė, and Višakis rivers. Almost all of it falls within present-day Šakiai District (now part of Marijampolė County). The Zanavykai dialect, together with that of the neighboring Kapsai, is one of the most important dialects underlying standard Lithuanian. The father of standard Lithuanian itself, Jonas Jablonskis, and many other prominent figures in the culture of the resurgent Lithuanian nation and state came from this area.

The very name zanavykų is of non-Lithuanian formation, derived from the Slavicized name of the Nõva River, Nava (recorded as Navupe in inventories from 1561), and the Slavic prefix za- ‘beyond’; compare derivatives formed in a similar way, zanemùnščikas, zanemùnščikai, or zalemùnščikai (in the latter form, consonant l instead of n arose through dissimilation), and the place names Zadvariškė, Zagriaūžis, Zapùrvė. Thus, in Lithuanian the zanavykus should be called užnoviškiais (‘people from beyond the Nõva’). The name zanavykai is generally used by their southern neighbors, the kāpsai (who say kāp instead of the word kaĩp), to highlight the characteristic falling-rising pitch accent pronounced across both components of diphthongs and diphthongal combinations in the Zanavykai dialect, as well as the preservation of the full preposition kaĩp. The right-bank tributary of the Šešupė, the Višakis, and the middle course of the Šešupė as far as Kudirkos Naumiestis are generally considered the dividing line between the Kapsai and Zanavykai. The name zanavykai is purely geographical and not entirely precise. The true Zanavykai area begins before the Nõva, just beyond the middle course of the Šešupė and the Višakis tributary, and extends a little beyond the Nõva’s middle course, past Griškabūdis, since around Sintautai, Lukšiai, and Lekėčiai the quantity of unstressed long vowels in open word endings is no longer consistently well preserved. Historical and political circumstances have determined certain differences within the Zanavykai dialect.

History tells us that throughout Užnemunė and considerably farther south and southeast, until the second half of the 13th century, a distinct western Baltic tribe lived there, known from chronicles by several regional names, now used as umbrella terms – Sudovians (known from Western European and Teutonic chronicles), Yotvingians (from Slavic sources), Dainavians (Lithuanian), Poleksians or Poleksenians (Polish). The Sudovians, as one horde-

22

and organized West Baltic tribes, bravely defending their existence, are thought once to have occupied a substantial part of what is now northeastern Poland, western Belarus, and southern Lithuania. Hemmed in by more powerful neighbors, in the 13th century they were largely confined between the Nemunas to the north and east, the Beaver River to the south, the Raminta Forest and approximately the present-day border with the Kaliningrad Region to the west. At the end of the 13th century they were finally defeated and brutally ravaged by the Teutonic Knights. Most of Sūduva is thought to have become almost entirely deserted (Totoraitis 1938: 1–15). The remnants of the Sūduviai, who continued to live for a long time in what is now Lithuania’s Užnemunė, are evidenced by a considerable surviving layer of ancient place names and various linguistic features. That the Sūduviai once also lived in southern Lithuania is indicated by certain features of phonetics, morphology, and vocabulary, found only sporadically but characteristic of all western Lithuania (see below).

After the Treaty of Melno (1422), the northern part of Sūduva (the so-called Zanavykai area), as far as Kudirkos Naumiestis and the mouths of the Šešupė, Višakis, and Nevėžis, belonged to the Samogitian Eldership. For this reason, it is sometimes thought that the present-day inhabitants of Užnemunė (Sūduva)—all the southern western Aukštaitians (southern Kaunas speakers)—are descendants of Aukštaitian migrants from Samogitia at that time. It is often even joked that a Suvalkian, especially a Zanavykas, is nothing other than a Samogitian thrown across the Nemunas. Seemingly confirming this claim, the southern Aukštaitians (or western Dzūkians) still call their northern neighbors—the southern western Aukštaitians—Samogitians. Thus, it is worth clarifying here how much truth and how much invention these claims contain, and ultimately how the so-called wasteland became the cradle of standard Lithuanian and the center of Lithuania’s national revival.

The material of the Atlas of the Lithuanian Language makes it possible to examine more broadly the past of the southern western Aukštaitians (Kaunas speakers), or the so-called Zanavykai, and their closest neighbors on three levels: phonetics, morphology, and vocabulary. The phonetic level is generally considered one of the most important. Other linguistic levels—the morphological and lexical features and their distribution—can also provide equally important supplementary data. In addressing the question of the Zanavykai’s past and origins, the more important evidence consists of varying dialect features, some of which may be older and others newer, some having come from one dialect area and others from another, some being more widely distributed and others more restricted. So let us try, at least approximately, to determine what the Zanavykai dialect shares with western Lithuanians and what is distinctive, what it inherited from earlier times and what it acquired from neighboring dialects. In general, the Zanavykai dialect, as one of the dialects of the western Lithuanian area, has preserved more archaic features. This is evident from many of the features presented below.

In terms of many phonetic features, the Zanavykai dialect fits harmoniously into the dialect continuum of this region. This study does not attempt to examine the sound-system features of this distinctive dialect, unique in certain respects, but instead focuses on their distribution. This makes it easier to see which dialects the Zanavykai are more closely aligned with and from where the influence spread. Let us begin with features found across a wider area and proceed through increasingly restricted distributions.

23

1. All western Lithuanians (Western and Southern Aukštaitians and Samogitians, or at least a substantial part of them) share the following archaic features of the western type: a) the stressed vowel a has not been lengthened in the pronouns māno, tāvo, sāvo (LKA 1982: 21–22. Map no. 2.); b) the stressed vowels a, e have not been lengthened in two-syllable infinitives and verb prefixes, e.g.: kàst(i), nèšt(i), àpsuku, nènėšu, pàdeda, prãneša, tebèk.alba, tèšnekā (LKA 1982: 31–32. Map no. 13.); c) the short stressed e has been preserved in the suffixes of comparative adjectives, e.g.: aukštesnis, -ė, gerèsnis, -ė, jaunèsnis, -ė (LKA 1982: 32–33. Map no. 14.); d) the short stressed stem vowels i, u have not been lengthened, e.g.: bùtas, bùvo, kìtas, lìže, lìbos, vìsas (LKA 1982: 37–38. Map no. 19.); e) the tautosyllabic diphthongs am, an, em, en have not been narrowed, e.g.: kãmpas, lángas, lãnkas, pántis, sámtis, pémpė, péntis, pẽnktas, švẽntė, tẽmpti, tèšnekā (LKA 1982: 83–89. Maps nos. 68–72.).

2. Apart from among Southern Aukštaitians, the following features inherited from ancient times are found more or less widely among Western Aukštaitians (Kaunas, Šiauliai, and Klaipėda subdialects), and sometimes also across a considerable area of Samogitia: a) long stressed and unstressed stem vowels a, e are retained, e.g.: kãsnis, grãžtas, grẽžt(i), skẽst(i), sprẽst(i), kãšnėlis, grãžtėlis, žãšėlės, grẽžimas, tẽsimas (LKA 1982: 61–63. Maps nos. 44–45.); b) stressed a in open endings has not been shortened in the accusative singular forms of pronouns, e.g.: aną, ką, katrą, tą (LKA 1982: 63. Map no. 46.); c) together with Samogitians, approximately as far as the Žagarė–Šiauliai–Kėdainiai–Kaunas–Prienai–Krosna line, l is not velarized before e, ei, ę, ė, e.g.: lėdas, leĩdžia, lẽkia, pelėnai, kiaũlė, pėlės, sáulę (LKA 1982: 33–35, 53, 66. Maps nos. 15–16, 34, 49.); d) the long y is preserved somewhat more widely in the ending of the third person future tense of mixed verbs, e.g.: badýs, darýs, matýs (LKA 1982: 60–61. Map no. 42.); e) the preposition į is pronounced long in the Klaipėda subdialect of Western Aukštaitian, the adjacent Samogitian area, and the Kaunas subdialect area as far as Vilkija, Kaunas, and Marijampolė (LKA 1982: 68. Map no. 53.); f) the unchanged initial vowel e is preserved not only across a larger part of Samogitia but also in a smaller part of the Kapsai area, approximately as far as Skriaudžiai, Sasnava, and Vištytis, both on its own and in the clusters ei, el, en, er, e.g.: ẽglė, eketė, ẽsti, ežìa, eilė, eit(i), éln.ias, éngt(i), erškėtis (LKA 1982: 26–29. Maps nos. 9, 10.)

At the same time, the innovations of the Zanavykai and neighboring dialects should be noted: a) probably by analogy, e is also pronounced in the word ekmuõ around Eržvilkas, Jurbarkas, Šakiai, and Kudirkos Naumiestis (LKA 1991: 34. Map no. 27.); b) e has narrowed in the word ẽsù ‘I am’ in the Zanavykai area as far as Kriūkai and Barzdai, in part of the Kapsai area as far as Vilkaviškis, and north of the Nemunas as far as Vilkyškiai, Šimkaičiai, and Veliuona (LKA 1991: 82. Map no. 78.), among other places.

3. The following old or more recent features, generally extending into Lithuania Minor, are used only in the Kaunas subdialect area (mostly in its western part): a) the unstressed a in open endings has been preserved without shortening in the nominative plural forms of present active participles, e.g.: kẽkią, láukią, sãką (LKA 1982: 64. Map no. 47.); b) the long ę in the same position has been preserved in the nominative singular and plural forms of the past active participle, e.g.:

24

bijojęs, bijoję, buvęs, buvę, šakęs, šakę (LKA 1982: 66–67. Žemėl. nr. 50–51.); c) sukietėjęs bendraties priebalsis t išnykus balsiui i, pvz.: áust, bijót, nešt, pjáut (LKA 1982: 105–106. Žemėl. nr. 90.); d) kietai tariamas priebalsis l žodžiuose (skoliniuose) páltas, pőlka, válas (LKA 1982: 109–103. Žemėl. nr. 86.); e) žodyje pėsčias, -ia įterpiamas priebalsis k – pėkščias (LKA 1982: 117. Žemėl. nr. 100.); f) metatetinių žodžių primdėlė, pirmgalys vietoj pirmdėlė, pirmgalys vartojimas (LKA 1982: 121. Žemėl. nr. 104.); g) tvirtapradės šaknies būtojo laiko neveikiamųjų dalyvių kirčiavimas pirmąja kirčiuote, pvz.: pagirtas, -a, nušautas, -a, prikáltas, -a (LKA 1982: 127–128. Žemėl. nr. 108.) ir kt.

4. Only the Zanavykai, together with the western Veliuona and Klaipėda subdialects, Lithuania Minor, and adjacent Samogitians, share the pronunciation of the circumflex accent across both elements of diphthongs and mixed diphthongs, e.g.: baĩgia, eĩna, kaũkia, lãukas, vaĩkas, bãlsas, dãlgis, dãržas, pẽršti, dūmblas, gūlt(i), kìmba, lìnksta, pìrštas, pū́rvas (LKA 1982: 39–40, 125. Maps nos. 21, 106.).

5. The Zanavykai dialect is divided in half (along a line running from Sintautai between Lukšiai and Griškabūdis, Jankai, Lekėčiai and Višakio Rūda, Zapyškis and Pažėrai) by the differing pronunciation of unstressed long vowels in open word-final position: a) the unstressed endings -ą, -ę of noun and adjective accusative singular forms remain long only in the southern part of the Kaunas subdialect area, that is, in the southern part of the Zanavykai area and in the Kapsai dialect, while north of the line mentioned above these vowels have been shortened, e.g.: gẽrą kẽlią ~ gẽrą kẽlią, didelę ūpę ~ didelę ūpę (LKA 1982: 64–66. Maps nos. 47–49.); b) open word-final ė, o remain unchanged south of the line mentioned above not only in the southern part of Western Aukštaitian but throughout the Southern Aukštaitian area as well, whereas north of it these ė, o, as in the Veliuona subdialect, have developed into the short i, u, e.g.: kárvi ~ kárve, lãpi ~ lãpe, lĩepi ~ lĩepė, mãti ~ mãtė, bróliu ~ brólio, laũku ~ laũko, bū́vu ~ bū́vo, sãku ~ sãko (LKA 1982: 49–50, 56–57. Maps nos. 32, 38); c) throughout southern Lithuania, the open-final (accusative singular) vowels į, ų are similarly preserved without shortening, whereas in the northern part of the Zanavykai area, as far as the line mentioned above, they are short, e.g.: geležini peili ~ geležini peilį, sáldu mẽdu ~ sáldų mẽdų (LKA 1982: 70. Maps nos. 56–57). It is thought that this shortening of endings took place no earlier than the 17th century (Salys 1966: 37). Apparently, the wave of shortening endings reached both the northern part of the Zanavykai area and the entire so-called striukiai subdialect of Lithuania Minor at about the same time. Thus, before then, all Southern Western Aukštaitians, like Southern Aukštaitians, did not shorten endings in this position.

6. In their pronunciation of the unstressed, unshortened ė, o vowels in closed endings, Southern Aukštaitians align with almost all Kaunas subdialect speakers (that is, the Kapsai, Zanavykai, and the southern part of the Veliuona subdialect), e.g.: ė and (i)ã stems in the genitive singular and nominative plural lãpės, medìnės, pẽmpės, lū́pos, sáujos.

From the differing distributions of the phonetic features reviewed above, one may infer that two streams of influence met in the Zanavykai dialect: one coming from the north (and perhaps from the northwest), the other from the southeast (Zinkevičius 1987: 246). At the same time, however, it cannot be overlooked that, on the basis of the West Baltic languages in southern Lithuania,

25

even before the devastation of the Sudovians, the Lithuanian Western Aukštaitian subdialect and its southern variant must already have formed, or at least begun to take shape. The early Lithuanianization of the western Balts (Mažiulis 1994: 4–6; 1995: 465–469) was prompted by the Slavs’ turbulent advance into Baltic lands, the rapid formation of the Lithuanian nationality that began soon afterward, and the infiltration of migrants from the eastern Baltic lands. The northwestern part of Southern Aukštaitian, or the so-called priedzukis, shows how unevenly features of eastern dialects made their way westward (Morkūnas 1994: 84–92). The eastern boundary of the western Balts was once, apparently, close to the isophone of preserved tautosyllabic am, an, em, en, which in the north almost coincided with the boundary between Samogitia and the lands of Upytė (Maksimaitienė 1986: 22), while in the south, from Ūkainiai (south of Ramygala), it coincided with the eastern border of the Trakai Voivodeship.

In terms of many morphological inflectional and derivational features, the Zanavykai do not differ from neighboring dialects, especially those of the Aukštaitians. In some features they connect with the neighboring Veliuona dialect speakers (the northern Kauniškiai) and the Samogitians; in others, they form a seemingly distinctive area with the neighboring Kauniškiai and Klaipėdiškiai Aukštaitians; in still others, they seem to stand at a crossroads between east and west.

1. The Samogitians, Western Aukštaitians, and Southern Aukštaitians roughly as far as the Kriukai–Pašvitinys–Lygumai line, east of Baisogala–Šėta–Gegužinė–Nerimė–Vokė–Rūdninkai–Butrimonys–Varėnavas (Balatna), form a continuous area in the pronunciation of the endings of third-person singular verbs in the past frequentative tense kišo, kniso, rišo (LKA 1991: 102. Map no. 97.).

2. In terms of the plural dative ending of various stem classes, the Zanavykai area (especially its western part as far as Lekėčiai, Griškabūdis, and Barzdai), like that of the Veliuona dialect speakers (as far as the Jurbarkas–Girkalnis–middle Dubysa line), is covered by two layers: a more archaic one, extending through the northern Kauniškiai into Samogitia (e.g., vyrams, peiliams, boboms, gražioms, akims, nosims, vagims, sūnims, seserims), and a more modern, simplified layer, originating in Aukštaitian dialects, i.e. without the ending -s (e.g., vyram, peiliam, bobom, gražiom, akim, nosim, vagim, seserim, sūnim, alongside the Veliuona dialect speakers and other Eastern and Southern Aukštaitians’ sūnām, and the Samogitians’ sūnāms) (LKA 1991: 61–65. Map nos. 56–61.).

3. The Zanavykai (excluding Lekėčiai), together with the western part of the Veliuona dialect area (but excluding Veliuona), the Western Aukštaitian Klaipėdiškiai, and the Samogitians, form a continuous area in retaining the suffix -ininkas, e.g., darbininkas, daržininkas, šeimininkas (LKA 1991: 128–129. Map no. 115.). Similarly, in the same area (now including Lekėčiai and the town of Veliuona), the stem-internal form bitis is found alongside the less common bitė (LKA 1991: 33. Map no. 23.).

4. The Zanavykai, together with some Veliuona dialect speakers and Klaipėdiškiai Aukštaitians, align with the Southern and Eastern Aukštaitians in retaining the stem-internal third-person singular present-tense verbs gāli, gùli, nóri (LKA 1991: 97–98. Map no. 94.).

5. Only across a greater or lesser area of the Western Aukštaitian Kauniškiai and neighboring Klaipėdiškiai, chiefly along the border with the Königsberg (Kaliningrad) region, are the following features widespread (some of them are unequivocal archaisms): a) stress placement—

26

mo variantas musė (LKA 1991: 33. Žemėl. nr. 24.); b) nuosekliai išlaikytas u kamieno dgs. vardininkas sūnūs, pietūs (LKA 1991: 57–58. Žemėl. nr. 49.); c) geriausiai išlaikoma visų laikų ir nuosakų veiksmažodžių daugiskaitos 1 a. forma su galūne -e: dirbame, geriame, mylime, ėjome, bėgdavome (LKA 1991: 85–86. Žemėl. nr. 82.); d) esamojo laiko 3 a. forma pjauja (LKA 1991: 95. Žemėl. nr. 91.); e) priesagos -ėti vedinys (bendratis) gyvėt(i) ‘gyventi’ (LKA 1991: 151. Žemėl. nr. 142.); f) sutrumpėję prielinksniai gerý ‘geryn’, sený ‘senyn’, žemý ‘žemyn’ (LKA 1991: 153. Žemėl. nr. 144.);g) įjo kamieno vns. vardininko forma zuikys (LKA 1991: 25. Žemėl. nr. 6.).

The name zuikis, zùikis, zuikys, found only in western Lithuania, is also a matter of lexicon, since east of the Joniškis–Radviliškis–Kėdainiai–Jonava–Jiežnas–Druskininkai line the word kiškis is already used. The word zuikis is thought to be of Curonian origin (Kaukienė 1995: 473). However, it is unclear when it began its journey into historical Sudovia (throughout the whole of Užnemunė and beyond), since the Sudovians formerly called the hare, like the Prussians, by the word sasnis (cf. the place name Sasnavà). The influence of the Samogitian Eldership, which crossed the Nemunas only in the 15th century, can hardly have sufficed for the word zuikis to spread so widely. The Sudovians probably began using this word as they became Lithuanianized, before the tragedy that befell them at the end of the 13th century.

Other lexical data are no less important, prompting various thoughts about the origins and distribution of individual words, and so on. In terms of many traditional names, the area of the Zanavykai dialect lies mostly adjacent to Western Aukštaitian. Sometimes particular names for objects (words) connect all Zanavykai, or separate parts of the Zanavykai area, more closely with the northern Western Aukštaitian and more distant dialects; at other times, they connect them more with the southern dialects, especially the western speech varieties of Lithuania Minor.

1. The following items have almost uniform names throughout the southwestern Lithuanian-speaking area (in the Samogitian, Western Aukštaitian, and Southern Aukštaitian dialects): a) pelūdė ‘a place or extension at the edge of a threshing barn for pouring chaff’ (LKA 1977: 54. Map no. 15.); b) erūkas, erūkas ‘a lamb’ (LKA 1977: 148–149. Map no. 74.); c) gluosnis ‘a tree or shrub with slender branches (Galix)’ (LKA 1977: 164–165. Map no. 90.); d) lydekà ‘a predatory freshwater fish (esox lucius)’ (LKA 1977: 154. Map no. 80.); e) šaltinis ‘a spring flowing from the ground’ (LKA 1997: 180–181. Map no. 104.); f) in a somewhat narrower area of western Lithuania, the old name for a male duck, gaigalas, has been preserved (LKA 1977: 145–146. Map no. 73.); g) dal̃gis ‘a tool for cutting grain or grass’ (the masculine form is used in the Western Aukštaitian and Samogitian dialects) (LKA 1977: 111. Map no. 50.).

2. A distinctive lexical area, almost entirely contained within the Western Aukštaitian Kauniškiai region (the so-called Kapsai, Zanavykai, and Veliuona dialect speakers): a) pértráuktis ‘a bar connecting the front axle of a wagon with its rear axle, usually together with the draught pole’ (LKA 1977: 90–91. Map no. 35.); b) kám̃pa ‘a crosspiece of a sleigh, a runner crossbar or a runner crossbar and spoke together’ (LKA 1977: 101. Map no. 44.); c) jungėlis, jūngas ‘a tie connecting the flail handle to the striking head’ (LKA 1977: 118–119. Map no. 57.); d) skràn-

27

da ‘kailiniai’ (LKA 1977: 144–145. Žemėl. nr. 72.); e) vyturys ‘žvirblinių būrio paukštis giesmininkas, vieversys (Alanda arvensis)’ (LKA 1977: 151–152. Žemėl. nr. 79.); f) bulvė ‘daržovė, kurios valgomi šakniagumbiai turi daug krakmolo (Solanum tuberosum)’ (LKA 1977: 161. Žemėl. nr. 87.); g) kadugys, kãdugis ‘sausų vietų dekoratyvinis spygliuotis krūmas ar medis juodomis uogomis, kadagys (Juniperus)’ (LKA 1977: 165. Žemėl. nr. 91.); h) dilgėlė, ‘piktžolė, vaistinis, pluoštinis augalas, kurio stiebas ir lapai turi dilginamųjų plaukelių (Urtica)’ (LKA 1977: 167–168. Žemėl. nr. 94.); i) srãvažolė, stravažolė ‘graižažiedžių šeimos vaistinis augalas (Achillea)’ (LKA 1977: 168. Žemėl. nr. 95.); j) rikė ‘javų guba’ (LKA 1977: 186–187. Žemėl. nr. 109.); k) žiaunė ‘kepalo papentis, žiauberė’ (LKA 1977: 189–190. Žemėl. nr. 112.).

3. Names used chiefly by the Zanavykai and Kapsai (Kaunas dialect speakers living beyond the Nemunas): a) kãimas ‘a peasant’s place of residence and work, a homestead’ (the Veliuona speakers and neighboring Samogitians have the variant kãima) (LKA 1977: 45–46. Map no. 9.); b) išautys, išautis ‘a part of a wagon’s undercarriage, a bar connecting the front axle to the rear axle’ (LKA 1977: 90–91. Map no. 35.); c) angis ‘snake’ (a word shared by the Sudovians, Prussians, and Lithuanians, used chiefly by the Kapsai and southern Zanavykai, and also found in neighboring Southern Aukštaitian, Klaipėda, and Lithuania Minor dialects) (LKA: 152. Map no. 80.); d) statinė ‘a large wooden vessel made of staves, shaped like a cylinder’ (LKA 1977: 68–69. Map no. 22.).

4. Names or their variants used only in the Zanavykai and Veliuona dialects (Central and Northern Kaunas dialects): a) kašė, kašė ‘basket, wicker basket’ (LKA 1977: 79–80. Map no. 28.); b) avižė ‘a large, water-dwelling insect of the dragonfly group, a dragonfly (Aeschna)’ (LKA 1977: 158–159. Map no. 85.).

5. Only the Zanavykai have the word sklendė ‘a device for fastening a door or window, a latch’ (LKA 1977: 40–41. Map no. 6.).

6. The following names meet within the Zanavykai area (sometimes dividing it into parts): a) north of the Sintautai–Lekėčiai line, the term for the floor of a grain-storage building is aslà, while southward, as far as the Šakiai–Lekėčiai line, it is gréndymas ‘a beaten-threshing-floor barn floor’ (LKA 1977: 53–54. Map no. 4.); b) southward, as far as Šakiai–Lukšiai and Lekėčiai, the grain-storage building is called klúonas; northward, as far as Šakiai, Sintautai, Griškabūdis, and Kazlų Rūda, it is called klojimas; while in the west, as far as Kiduliai, Šakiai, Sintautai, and Žvirgždaičiai, the Germanism skūnia is used (LKA 1977: 53. Map no. 14.); c) southeastward, as far as Veliuona, Plokščiai, Lukšiai, and Sintautai, the word krėslas is used for ‘usually the front part of a wagon, into which the shafts are fitted’, while in the northwest the hybrid term gývrungis is used, shared with the neighboring Western Aukštaitian Veliuona dialect and the eastern part of the Klaipėda dialect (LKA 1977: 93–95. Map no. 37.); d) eastward, as far as Šakiai and Plokščiai, the term rõgės is used for ‘a winter conveyance that slides on runners’, while in the northwest, as far as Žalioji (south of Kudirkos Naumiestis), Barzdai, and Višakio Rūda, the term is šlajos (indeed, around Šakiai, Lukšiai, Griškabūdis, Kudirkos Naumiestis, and Barzdai, šlajos means a work sled, whereas rõgės refers to a lighter, ceremonial winter conveyance) (LKA 1977: 100–101. Map no.

28

43.); e) south of the middle Šešupė, as far as Barzdai, Griškabūdis, Lekėčiai, and Zapyškis, an elongated depression in the ground is called klonis, while northward, as far as Kybartai, Vilkaviškis, Kazlų Rūda, and Skriaudžiai, the widespread name is lomā (LKA 1977: 178–179. Map no. 103.).

7. The following varied names, ethnographic terms, and borrowings link the Western Aukštaitians (Kaunas dialect speakers, Klaipėda dialect speakers, or some of them) with larger or smaller areas of neighboring dialects and with the dialects of Lithuania Minor: a) būtas ‘an entrance, vestibule’ (LKA 1977: 38–39. Map no. 5.); b) stubà ‘a peasant’s dwelling, a farmhouse, a cottage’ (in the Kaunas dialect area it has probably displaced the older word trobà) (LKA 1977: 34. Map no. 2.); c) dyselýs, dýselis ‘a wagon steering device, a bar for steering a two-horse wagon’ (LKA 1977: 93. Map no. 36.); d) šlaunys ‘a part of the Western Aukštaitian, Kaunas-dialect two-horse wagon used to fasten the drawbar’ (LKA 1977: 93. Map no. 36..); e) skiètas ‘a wagon crossbar for attaching the shafts, found only in a limited area of western Lithuania’ (LKA 1977: 91–92. Map no. 36.); f) bùkšas, bukš(w)à ‘wheel hub’ (LKA 1977: 100. Map no. 40.); g) kripė, kripės ‘wagon body, side railing of a wagon’ (LKA 1977: 99–100. Map no. 39.); h) špykis, špykis ‘wheel spoke’ (LKA 1977: 98. Map no. 41.); i) rinkùtė, rinkėlė ‘a part of the scythe ring, a ring’ (LKA 1977: 114–115. Map no. 53.); j) pãkalas, prãkalas ‘scythe wedge, a wooden peg’ (LKA 1977: 115–116. Map no. 54.); k) brókštas, brokštėlis ‘a wooden vessel for churning butter, a churn’ (LKA 1997: 141–142. Map no. 71.), among others.

8. The following names link the southern part of Western Aukštaitian, and sometimes only the Kaunas dialect area beyond the Nemunas, with Southern Aukštaitian: a) tvãrtas ‘a building for keeping livestock’ (LKA 1977: 49–50. Map no. 13.); b) vežimas ‘a horse-drawn conveyance, a wagon’ (LKA 1977: 89–90. Map no. 34.); c) keltuvė ‘the handle of a flail’ (LKA 1997: 116–117. Map no. 55.); d) mėkšras ‘a small, flat freshwater and marine fish of the carp family, the roach (Rutilus rutilus)’ (the name, widespread in southern and northwestern Lithuania, extends only as far as the Nemunas) (LKA 1977: 153–154. Map no. 82.); e) apsiaùti (kėlinės) ‘to put on (shoes)’ (LKA 1977: 192–193. Map no. 110.), among others.

The vocabulary listed here is quite heterogeneous. Alongside old, inherited vocabulary, there are also entirely new elements—a substantial layer of borrowings, especially Germanisms. It therefore cannot be relied on indiscriminately. Nevertheless, its significance for determining directions of influence is no less than that of phonetics.

Conclusions. The area of the so-called Zanavykai dialect almost entirely coincides with the boundaries of present-day Šakiai District. Although the name zanavykai is purely geographic and not entirely precise, it has nevertheless become firmly established in usage: a weekly newspaper called “Zanavykai” is published, and Zanavykai clubs of people from the region are active. The Zanavykai is one of the dialects of the Kaunas subdialect of Western Aukštaitian. It forms the western part of Central Kaunas and fits harmoniously into the system of Lithuanian dialects.

Historically, the Zanavykai occupy the northern part of old Sudovia, which, it is believed, was the earliest to experience the influence of the emerging Lithuanian ethnicity and language. In the Middle Ages, a dy kra arose here, about which the Teutonic chronicles speak,

29

was the result of constant struggles and campaigns against the Lithuanian state lasting more than two hundred years. However, that wasteland was not absolute, but rather relative. Although in the 15th–17th centuries the Zanavykai area belonged to the Žemaitija Eldership, the dialects of the nearest western Highlander neighbors of that eldership (the so-called Veliuona speakers) can hardly have had a decisive influence. This stream of influence, coming from the north toward more distant southeastern areas, was strongly impeded by an equally powerful stream of influence advancing from the neighboring dialects of the Trakai Voivodeship. However, the southern dialect of the Trakai Voivodeship was not homogeneous. It consisted of two layers: the first, older layer, of a western character, formed probably on the basis of the language of the western Balts, the Sudovians; and a second layer of eastern features that had penetrated the first to a greater or lesser extent or overlaid it. Most of these features, which did not reach the Zanavykai speech, came to a halt in the transitional strip between the southeastern Kaunas subdialect of Western Aukštaitian and the northwestern edge of Southern Aukštaitian. In addition, the western edge of the Kaunas subdialect of Western Aukštaitian, and thus the Zanavykai speech, has always been directly influenced by the dialects of the southern Western Aukštaitian subdialects of Lithuania Minor. For this reason, the northern part of the Zanavykai speech is essentially a continuation of the speech of the so-called striukiai. Thus, the Zanavykai speech, formed on the basis of western Lithuanian dialects, is a distinctive formation of the southern Western Aukštaitian dialect and, in its roots, still reaches back to the foundation laid by the Sudovians, the ancient inhabitants of this region.

Received 1998 04 17

LITERATŪRA

K a u k i e n ė A. 1995: Kaip kalbėjo kunigaikštienė Birutė. – Lietuvininkų žodis, Kaunas: Lite-rae universitatis, 469–478.

L K A 1977: Lietuvių kalbos atlasas 1. Leksika, Vilnius: Mokslas.

L K A 1982: Lietuvių kalbos atlasas 2. Fonetika, Vilnius: Mokslas.

L K A 1991: Lietuvių kalbos atlasas 3. Morfologija, Vilnius: Mokslas.

M a k s i m a i t i e n ė O. Upytės senovė. – Upytė. Vilnius: Mintis, 21–30.

M a ž i u l i s V. 1994: Prūsai ir kiti baltai. – Prūsijos kultūra, Vilnius: Academia, 4–6.

M a ž i u l i s V. 1995: Dėl Prūsijos lietuvių kilmės. – Lietuvininkų žodis, Kaunas: Litterae universitatis, 465–469.

M o r k ū n a s K. 1994: Dėl priedzukio ir jo ribų. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 34, Vilnius, 84–92.

S a l y s A. 1966: Zanavykai. – Lietuvių enciklopedija 35, Boston: Lietuvių enciklopedijų leidykla, 34–38.

T o t o r a i t i s J. 1938: Sūduvos Suvalkijos istorija, Kaunas.

Z i n k e v i č i u s Z. 1987: Lietuvių kalbos istorija, Vilnius: Mokslas.

SIND DIE ZANAVYKAI NACHKOMMEN DER SŪDUVAI ODER DER ŽEMAIČIAI

Zusammenfassung

Die Grenzen des Gebietes der sog. Zanavykai stimmen beinahe ganz überein mit denen des heutigen Bezirkes Šakiai. Die Bezeichnung zanavykai ist eine rein geographische, nicht sehr

30

genaue: eigentlich bedeutet es das „Zanavykische“ und ist eine Mundart des Kaunaser westaukštaitischen Dialektes, die jedoch nur den zentralen Westteil des Kaunaser Dialektes umfaßt. Historisch gesehen nimmt das Zanavykische den nördlichen Teil der alten Süduva ein, der – wie es angenommen wird – als erster unter den Einfluß des entstehenden litauischen Volkstums und der sich herausbildenden litauischen Sprache geriet. Das Land verödete im Mittelalter, wohl nur relativ, infolge der beinahe zwei Jahrhunderte andauernden Kriegszüge des Ritterordens und seiner Kämpfe mit dem litauischen Staat. Das Problem der Herkunft der Zanavykai wurde gelöst vor allem aufgrund des in „Lietuvių kalbos atlasas“ / „Atlas der litauischen Sprache“ (Bd. 1–3) vorliegenden Stoffes.

Obwohl das Zanavykai – Gebiet im 15.–17. Jh. zum žemaitischen Bezirk gehörte, war wohl kaum der Einfluß der Mundart, die von den nächsten Nachbarn dieses Bezirkes gesprochen wurde – das Westaukštaitische der Nordkaunaser (das sog. „Veliuonaer“) von Bedeutung. Der Einfluß anderer Dialekte – der in der Nähe von Trakai gesprochenen – verhinderte die Verbreitung der aus dem Norden ins südöstliche Gebiete strömenden Mundart. Der Süddialekt des Bezirkes von Trakai jedoch war nicht einheitlich. Er bestand aus zwei Schichten: die erste, die ältere, die westlich gestaltete, die sich wohl aufgrund der Sprache der westbaltischen Suduwen / Süduviai entwickelte und die zweite, die östlich gestaltete, die die erste stärker oder schwächer durchsetzte oder sie überlagerte. Die meisten Eigenheiten, die das Zanavykische nicht erreichten, blieben stecken am Rande des Gebietes, das den Übergang vom südöstlichen Kaunaser Westaukštaitischen zum nordwestlichen Südaukštaitischen bildete. Außerdem befand sich das westliche Randgebiet des Kaunaser Westaukštaitischen, also auch das Zanavykische ständig unter dem Einfluß der Mundarten des Südwest aukštaitischen von Kleinlitauen. Deshalb wird das Nordzanavykische eigentlich als eine Fortsetzung der sog. Striukiai – Mundart betrachtet. Also ist das Zanavykische, besonders das Südzanavykische, das sich aus den westlitauischen Mundarten entwickelt hat, ein eigenständiger Dialekt, der zum Südwestaukštaitischen gehört und noch Spuren des Süduvischen (die Süduviai sind die Ureinwohner dieses Gebietes) aufweist.

31