Dėl Zietelos šnektos priklausomybės ir kilmės

LITHUANIAN LINGUISTICAL QUESTIONS XXXVI (1996) LITHUANIAN LANGUAGE: RESEARCHERS AND STUDIES Aloyzas VIDUGIRIS ON THE DEPENDENCE AND ORIGIN OF ZIETELOS SCHNEKTA The pronunciation of Zietela (darnoso, Il3arnasa, 3aetena, 3eueno, |. Zdzigciol) is perhaps the most misguided of all the known Lithuanian šnektas. It does not match any of the present Lithuanian dialects or dialects. There are various opinions about the origin of the name. However, most of them lack validity. The aim is to analyze in more detail the relationship of Zietelos schnektas with other dialects of Lithuanian language, to present more authentic data on Zietelos schnektas and to put forward one more hypothetical idea. Of all the peripheral Lithuanian dialects, the Zietela dialect is the most distant to the south. It is located more than 100 km from the Lithuanian state border, about 20 km beyond the Nemunas, halfway between Lyda and Slanimo, at the river Zietela (left tributary of Maūčėdis (Maūčadis)). Many linguists of different nations have studied and studied the dialect of Zietela: E. Volteris, J. Rozwadowskis, K. Būga, P. Arumaa, J. Gerulis, Chr. Stangas, E. Fraenkelis, J. Balčikonis, J. Senkus, T. Sudnik, A. Nepokupnas and others. Until the Second World War, one of the most famous Lithuanian and German Baltists and dialectologists of the time, Jurgis Gerulis (G. Gerullis), had gathered the most material about the Zietela dialect. He paid special attention to the schnekts of Zietela and Lazūnai. After twice he had come to these two talks. The first time J. Gerulis came to Zietela in 1928 or 1929, but he stayed there only for three days because of the obstructions of the Polish authorities at the time (the Polish police expelled him from the village of Zasečiai because he did not have all the necessary documents and permits). The second time he came with his assistant, the Norwegian Baltist Chr. The season lasts for about 30 days (from the end of August to the end of September). They were guarded by Bv. The village teacher Kotryna Žukelytė-- Juodienė. Unfortunately, during the war, all the collected material was lost along with the translator. Only a few sheets with words written by J. Gerulis for the great Lithuanian language dictionary have survived. Prof. J. Gerulis left a profound impression on many because of his appearance, quick orientation, sharp mind and conspiracy. In addition, he was impressed by the fact that he spent the night only in the garden, in a sleeping bag (because fleas cut inside the sleeping bag). For the time spent, the informants were rewarded generously. Teacher K. Žukelytė-- Juodienė repeatedly said that "no one has studied the dialect of Zietela as well as Professor Gerulis". Together with J. Gerulis he published in 1958 a short description of the phonetics and morphology of the Zasečiai village schnekt. Stangas (Stang 1958: 171–201). It is probably not without the influence of J. Gerulis that the Zietela dialect is considered the most isolated and isolated dialect of eastern Lithuanian. However, due to the pronunciation of the nasal 3, ¢ and the diftongs an, en, it is not strictly Eastern and differs from other dialects of the Vilnius region (Stang 1958: 173). * In Lazūnai J. Gerulis with Chr. Stangu came from Gervėčiai (DW 1930:176) 127 In fact, the Lithuanian spoken by Zietela now does not completely match any of the existing Lithuanian dialects. It is as if composed of various dialects of the Lithuanian language — in some features it is closer to the eastern Highlands, Vilnius dialects, in others — to the nearest neighbors Southern Highlands, in thirds — to the south-western Highlands (Kaunas dialects) and others. Most often, a certain feature, according to its distribution or the area occupied by the phenomenon, covers several or only a part of the recommendations. Therefore, before we begin to divide the individual features of the Zietela dialect according to the different distribution, it must first be said that in many common features, like other dialects, the Zietela dialect coincides and does not differ from the main dialects of the Lithuanian language. Zietela's speech has the same vocabulary, mostly the same patterns of word formation and substitution, and much of the same lexical syntax. I. First of all, the relationship of the Zietela schnekt with other dialects of ir Lithuanian language should be reviewed. Individual characteristics of the Zietela schnekt are compared in turn with the same characteristics of the eastern, southern and western Highland dialects according to their distribution areas. The data of phonetics (LKAS IT), morphology (LKA III) and lexics (LKA I) of the "Lithuanian Language Atlas" (hereinafter — LKA) are used to localize the coinciding phenomena of Zietela and the comparable dialects. 1 1. The dialect of Zietela is closely related to the dialects of the southeastern Lithuanian language (i.e. piety and eastern aukštaičiai or only to a certain jy part) according to these background ti. "the following features: a) a is pronounced instead of the vowel e at the beginning of a word, e.g. aglėveglėj atkit~ etkit(e), dZeras~ézeras, azi~ezia (see LKA II 26—28, maps no. 9, 10); b) after the hardened I, the quality of the e-type vowels changes, i.e. instead of e, ė, a, € is pronounced, e.g., lakia~lekia, ldidZia~IéidZia, sdulte~sdule, sdulg~saule, ole~ zolé (see LKA II 33—35, 48—50, ground no. 15, 16, 31, 32); c) the preposition and the prefix in ”{”,e.g., in latkg~j laūką, in rūdenį=į rudenj, in turgyu~j turgą, in(t)dugo, inbego, inlifido (see LKA II 68—69, Zemél.-Nr. 53, 54) are removed; d) non-Afrikaans € root nouns dgs. kilm. batiy~ bičių, mergytiy- ~mergyciy and e stem verb bū: tojo kartonio 1 a. jėdiauvėdžiau, metiati~- meciai (see LKA II 95—96 map no. 80); e) the vns of future tense verbs is retained. 1 and 2 a forms of the ancient conjugation, e.g., aisūrmetsit, aisi~eisi, nesu~nesiu, nes (see LKA II 177, zemél. no. 108); f) the kiréising of nouns with the suffix -ėja according to the third accent, e.g., weudėja, pjovėja (see LKA II 128—129 map no. 110); Morphology: a) instead of the 120 stem used: 40 stem noun forms, e.g. jduéias "ox", mėdžias "tree" (see LKA III 23—24, maps No. 2, 3); b) oxytones are used instead of baritone nouns, e.g. sprindis, žvirblijs (see LK/ III 24, 26, maps no. 5, 8); c) masculine nouns vns. na ending „(iju (bk. -ui), e.g., drkliu "for a horse", sėmeniu "for a shepherd- ", žmogus "man" (see LKA III 40—43, map no. 36, 39); d) the use of the forms of the current internal locality, the ilation, e.g., tana laukan "to that field", pirkios laukiiosna, tvdrtuosnan (see LKA III 54—55, map no. 48); e) the noun of the personal pronouns anas, -a, dnys, -os "he, she, they, their". 128 mr Some identical words (lexema) or their variants are used: (a) harrows "furnace for cultivating the soil, harrows" (see LKA I 107—108, map No. 47); (b) apišėvepušė "drebulė" (see LKA I 165—166, map no. 92); (c) the phrase "tool for using linen, bruktuvė" (see LKA I 122, map No. 59); (d) spruce "a tool for cutting grain or grass, a hoe" (see LCA I 111, map No 50); e) niekočia "a long vessel, a gelda" (see LKA I 67—68, map no. 21); f) buys "peasants' dwelling house, troba" (cf. LKA I 34, map. No. 2) ir kt 2.There are no characteristics of Zietela’s dialect that relate to the Vilnius dialect of the eastern Highlands (but differ from that of the southern Highlands). There are only morphological features. However, from a diachronic point of view, these are mostly archaisms, once, as the ancient writings show, widely used: a) verbal forms with morphologically meaningless particles, postpositions -be, e.g., byciabe, neščiobe, butybe, sukcidbés. The consonant of this particle is muffled, e.g., būčiap, dirpčiaap, aičiapė, sūkčiaapės, sūktųsipės. Instead of the particle b(p), Gervėtiškiai have k: būčiak, nuveičiak, aityk. Swinging (see LKA III 107-108, 111-112, maps Nos 103, 104, 107); b) four pronouns that have survived only in marginal Lithuanian dialects (Dieveniškės, Gervėčiai; Lazūnai and Zietela), of which the most disappearing forms are —the existing pronoun of the place, the adesive, e.g., arkliep, bėrnipi, manip, mūsip, kdrveip, vištaip and the going pronoun of the place, the aliative, e.g., arkliép, josp, musump, namdp (see LKA III 55—56, map no. 48); c) from eastern Lithuania only in the dialects of Zietela and Lazūnai is used the athematic form of the present tense verb ait or atti "go" (see LKA III 89—90, map no. 87). However, this coincidence is not essential, because the Lithuanians of Lesser Lithuania had this form, and the Western Samogitians have built a whole paradigm on its basis. In general, Lazūnų and Zietelos speeches are linked by a number of other overlaps, e.g., instead of būva or būna is used the form būsta (see LKA III 91, map no. 84); for gūja—gūsta (see LKA III 91—91, map No 88); giema, next to Zietela giesti "gieda" (see LKA III 88—89, map no. 85); deminutives with suffix -ūtas, -(1)a, e.g. Lazūnų mergutd, mergūtos, Zietelos kiškūtas, mergucios, vaikūtas; word Zdisti, ZdidZia, played 1. to play (musical instruments) 2. to play (cards, chess), 3. to rage, to lay, etc. 3. There are several characteristics that connect the Zietela dialect with the South and South-West Highlands or certain parts of them: From the phonetic point of view, the mixed diphthongs am, an, em, en, e.g., karūpas, langas, penkt, sémt (cf. LKA II 83–88, map. Nos 68-71); from morphology— a) the use of future singular athematic verbs, e.g., būsu 1 a. "will", aisū "I'll go," I say "I'll tell you" (plg. LKA Map III 104, No. 102); b) quotation marks vns. 2 a. forms su "dzūkiška" ending -ai, e.g. būtai, sakyttai, sūktai, alsuktdi, tik kartais būtum, butumei (plg. LKA Map III 108—109, No. 105); c) deminutives šu suffix -uncle, e.g., horseman, nephew, nephew, occasionally nephew (plg. LKA Map III 130—131, No. 116); d) general verb ta suffixes su -yti creation, e.g. grow, hang, ljgyti, hubyti 129 (see the distribution of the latter in LKA III 151, map no. 142); from the lexicon— a) courtyard "courtyard at the residential house" (see LKA I 45, map no. 9); (b) slope "elongated lowland, valleys" (see LKA I 178—179, map no. 103); (c) carriage "horse-drawn chassis, wheels" (see LKA I 89-90, map No 34). There are more such features, according to which the dialect of Zietela differs from the southern and eastern Highlanders and coincides with the southern dialects of the western Highlanders, both with the so-called Kaunas dialects and with the former Kaunas dialects. Little Lithuania in the talks of white-shirted men and jackets. Some of these commonalities are: Phonetic commonalities are essential: a) the shortened acute vowels a (<*ą<*dan), e (<*¢<*én) remain unchanged, e.g., vns of the conjugated a, ia and € root nouns. inagininko forms —basamenéia "basnirčia", nakčia, pakluone, tada (cf. LKA II 23—24, 35—36, map no. 5, 17) and 0 stem nouns vns. in the forms of the indefinite participle —kelė "in the way, on the journey- ", klūone, stabėje (see LKA II 35, map No. 17), b) usually unchanged fixed nouns of the root and limb ¢, ¢ (<*an, * en), e.g., grąžtas, grąžtėlis, tėsa "continues", tasidtis, tą karvę, ranką, pripūvę (see LKA II 61—67, map No. 44—51). Only the firm-ending nasal ¢ is mainly echoed by the diphthong -az, as in Lithuania Minor, less frequently in Kaunas dialects, e.g. geldistuvas "sharpener", pageldisk "cut down", kaisngs "grave", kdisnį "grave", inkdisk "snack" (Gerullis, Stang 1933: 9,11) and perhaps a, iair e stem nouns vns. a white hand, a big cow. In the same way as in the south-western Highlands, kauniskiy pronounces the word drzuolas (see LKA II 61—62, map no. 44); c) the first syllable of pronounced mixed doubles £, u + I, m, n, r is not extended, e.g., dirba, kulsim, pilnas, stumti (see LCA II 38-39, map No 20); d) the y endings of secondary verbs of the a root with the suffix -ytt in future tense 3 a. are not shortened, e.g. daris, prasys, sakis (see LKA II 60—61, map no. 42); e) the people of Zietelis, like the people of Western Aukštaitija, do not use dzūkavimas, i.e. they say, for example, duzia, jaučiai, nakčia || nakčiai, dvi, marti, pati (see LKA II 93—97, map no. 80); f) always strongly pronounced abbreviated communicative consonant t, e.g., dirbt, nēšt, pjdut (K. Būga even wrote after this t the Russian hardening sign s —buts, sakyts, siuts (cf. LKA 106–107, pp. 107. No. 90). From the morphology, the use of momentary verbs with the suffix -telėti is noteworthy, e.g. diktelėti, bachteléti "pokštelėti", žviltelėti "žvilgtelėti" (see LKA III 152, map no. 143): in the Southern Highlands only -terėti or -terti. Zietela's dialect is also distinguished from the southern Highlanders and from the western Highlanders and sometimes from other dialects by individual words (lexical structure): girid "a place covered with trees, any kind of forest" (cf. LKA I 191—192, map No. 113), vedega "an axe with bent blades for cutting beds and beds" (cf. LKA I 87, map No. 33), as well as various other words whose prevalence has not been studied, e.g., kartis "a long, thin, stripped-- off tree trunk": southern Highlander šatra; "pressing nipples to extract milk from teSmens- ": the southern and eastern highlanders of Vilnius Ididyti; mulkti "ryti" (a word of Lesser Lithuania dialects) and others. 130 5. There are not many characteristics of Zietela’s schnekt that relate it exclusively to the Southern Highlanders. From the phonetic overlaps between the Southern Highlands and the Zietela schnekt, it is possible to point out a fairly broad pronunciation of the e-vowel, elongated by the accent, in all syllables, regardless of the composition of the following syllable, e.g., dest "deda”, gert, geria, kėlia, nėėša, paérnesé, sudčias, vaikėlis, veda, J Rozwadowski transcribes 'a: d'dga, šilt'ūlis. Probably because of contacts with southern or eastern Upper Saxons some Zeitela Schneck representatives used 4, Ų instead of the nasal ¢, ¢, e.g., izčiaust, prispeji "prinokę- ", ti~te "ten", tusyi~tasit, or used padzikuodavo, e.g., ciesa~tiesa, ciondik~ éiondik, dzieska~- dieska (sl. ”duonkubilis”), skatdzia- ~skaudzia instead of skaūst, skaudi "pauda" and so on. From the morphology of Zietelas $nektai and piety highlanders the commonality mentionable is the ending -sa of the plural local, inessive forms, e.g., juosa, klūonuosa, namuosda, savosa pirkiosa, vienuosa marškiniuosa (cf. LKA III 72—73, map No. 67), from the lexicon —some words or their forms, e.g., dirgéle "nettle" (cf. LKA I 167—168, map No. 94), priemnė "pre-shirt" (cf. LKA I 38, map. No. 5) ir kt 6. There is a great temptation to associate Zietela's schnekt with the so-called surname (according to the old classification of dialects with the southern part of the middle highland about Birštonas, Jiezna, Stakliškiai). These neighborhoods are included in! the area of hardening, which crosses several nasal 4, ę narrowing isophones, includes minetas be-African forms (bitių, dudiau), used diminutives with suffix -utas (kiškūtas, vaikūtas) and others. However, the whole problem is that Zietela’s speech with its variety of phenomena is not confined only to the area of prepositions. 7. Zietela’s spoken language is sometimes not limited to all the discussed dialects. For example, Zietelos šnekas is linked to the northern Lithuanian dialects by the elongated vowel e of the higher degree: brangesnis, gardasnis, mazasnis. Other characteristics, such as the 3rd century past participle form bit, biti "was", as well as the use of the preposition and prefix sa instead of su, make us turn our attention to the already extinct Lithuanian dialects of Lesser Lithuania. All the comparisons and comparisons of the features of Zietela’s schnekt and the main dialects of the Lithuanian language mentioned here are, of course, relative. Of course, there is a huge time gap between many things that are similar. Over many years or centuries, the ranges of these features may have changed significantly, the isophones or isoglosses that distinguish or connect these phenomena may have shifted significantly in one or another direction, innovations may have occurred. There is no lack of new things, especially borrowed ones, in Zietela’s speech. However, there are also many preserved and old things that are no longer present in the main dialects of Lithuanian. v The comparison of the characteristics of the budingesniy Zietela dialect with the corresponding phenomena of the eastern south and western Highland dialects shows that the Zietela dialect is peculiar and does not completely coincide with any dialect of the Lithuanian language. In the dialect of Zietela, as in the nearest southern Highland dialects, two different dialects or streams have merged: the eastern (southern) Highland and the western Highland. When comparing the dialect of Zietela with the dialect of Southern Highlands, the difference is that the dialect of Southern Highlands is covered by a thick layer of the dialect of Eastern Highlands, while the dialect of 131 In the western part of the village there is a high-altitude mountain range. This indicates that in the formation of Zietela's schnektai, her ties with the southern Highlanders were limited. II. 1998-1999 The question of the Lithuanian origin of Zietela is much more complicated. So far, the main view has been that Zietela is Prussian expatriates spoken, from 13th century, a. preserved in the Slavic surroundings. This opinion was served by about1276 m. The record in the chronicle of Ipatius that Traidenis, who had accepted the Prussians who had escaped from German slavery, had accommodatir ed one part jų Grodno, o another Slanime (PSRL II:874). Some scholars thought about Prussians in Zietel (Keppen 1927: 39; Volter 1912: 151—160), Other — sūduvius (Jotvingius) (Kaminski 1953: 63; Otrembsky 1961: 7—8). The first researcher of Zietela Schneck E. Walter cited ir more passages iš Dusburg chronicles, where the inhabitants of Pagudėja and Barts, who fled after the suppression of the Prussian uprising, are described į The Lithuanian-controlled Grodno region. He was the first to point out some peculiar Zitelos snicket features reminiscent of western whites (Volter1912: 152—160). Of course, the assumption cannot be ruled out that there were no Prussian refugee settlements around Zietela. ar Perhaps just too uncritically those chronicles hints accepted by scholars as a ready answer to the question, where į about iš The Lithuanians came to Zitelą. No one raised the question of how the į Western Balts, having entered a Slavic environment, could have amalgamated. As if it were enough The name of Prince Traidenis of Lithuania. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that those rebels were not influenced by The Lithuaniį an state, into whose composition this region fell from 13th a. century. However, in view of the time to self-government ir administrative apparatus (whose Lithuanianness, if it was at all, is highly doubtful) such an isolated transformation of the Suduves or Prussians into Lithuanians (sulietuve-= them) is hard to imagine. Iš essentially quite different Zietela’s Lithuanian origin is her own cause to raise the question | Zietela's schnekt system, its relationship with other Lithuanian dialects and its geographical position. Geographically, Zietela's dialect is b. in the ancient lands of the Suduves (Jotvingi, or Dainavi; for their names see Būga 1961: 126—130; Zajaczkowski 1940: 57—76), which were colonized early by Eastern and Western Slavs. From the south-east side, one after the other, in the 11th century, Eastern Slavic fortresses were built here: Valkavisk, Slanim, Zditov, Zaslavl, Minsk, Naugarduk, Grodno. — iš of which they collected tribute, proclaimed Christianity, assimilated the local population. Iš Southwest į Prussian ir Sudetenlands were fiercely conquered by the Poles. Unable to overcome the resistance of the Prussians and Sudovians alone, in 1230 they called on the Hungarian Order of the Cross for help (Dundulis 1968: 38). Especially against the Suduves in 1254 was formed the “Duchy of Halicz, Volhynia, Masovian” ir The German Order's alliance, aiming to divide the captured lands" (Tautavičius 1994: 4). The population of the village gradually decreased. In the south, historians distinguish three more pronounced boundaries — the Bug, its tributary Narev (Narvis) and finally the Narev tributary Bebra (Tautavičius 1994: 6). Sūduviai in the 13th century (just before their extinction) are located north of Bebra and Luupiai, between the ko Nemunas middle ir Ramintos girios (Nalepa 1964: 60; Ivinskis 1990: 43). Outside these boundaries, the Söduvia were mostly only settlers (Kamiriskil 1953: 63 tt. ; Nalepa 1964: 11—60). In our opinion, these borders of the Suduves were more political than real, ethnic. in the lands colonized by the Strangers, undoubtedly, both Lithuanians and Sudevians and Prussia132 ns remained for a long time. Was it not because of the Baltic tribes living here and their resistance that the highlands of southern Transylvania (Valkavisk, Slanimo, Zditov, Naugarduk, Grodno regions) were named Black Russia?! The memory of the Sūduvi who lived in the western part of this area survived until the 19th century: mid-1800s (Gaučas 1974: 21—24). There are also some old houses, including the old town hall. In addition to the well-known Kšna (from Kirsna, see V. Toporov 1959: 251—261) of the upper left tributary of the Bug and the puns with sandu -da (Jaselda, Sokolda; Būga 1961, 601—602), the river names Zelva (left tributary of the Nemunas and the city of Grodno district), Zietela (left tributary of the Maūčėdis, former lake and city, now Diatlovas Grodno district), villages Dainava, Zasėčiai (Zietelos district) are also worth mentioning. The long-standing bilingualism of the Baltic Slavs is evidenced by the name of the lake Svitezj (or Svitiazj) in A. Mickevičius’ native place, which is paraidžiai echoed by the Sūduvian name of the lake Svaitingis in the Alytus district (A. Nepokupno’s matching- ). The origins of these hydronyms alone cannot be explained by the arrival of Western Balts. In southern Lithuania, due to the consonant s instead of š, it is apparently archaic (Suduva is the name of the river Visinčia (right tributary of the Šalta in Šalčininkų district), cf. Vaistetis (Lake Trakai), Veisiéjis (Lake Lazdijai) and Viešintas (Lake Anykščiai- ), Viešinta (Kupiškio river) (Skardžius 1973: 70; otherwise —Vanagas 1981: 388). In the dialects of the Salcia and Visinta river basins, the diphthong ie often becomes consonant to i, e.g. gidéj "singed", paminė "preemenė" (see LKA I 38, map no. 5). It is interesting to note that the upper Visintos rivers completely coincide with the folk-syllabic doubles am, an isophone. Perhaps to the suduvisky names should be added place names that do not have afrikatas, e.g., Minditai (Lydos rj. k., cf. Mindičiai Šiaulių rj. k.), Skubėtai (Vilniaus rj. Jašiūnų apyl. k.), Žlaūktai- <* Žliaugta- <* Zliaugta up. (Šalčininkų rj. k.); plg. Pabėtai (Labguvos apylinkės k.), Šukėtai (Šakių r. k.) and others. Some elements of the West Baltic language are still present in Zietela's dialect. These are mainly features that have not survived elsewhere or whose traces are found in the supposed former western Balts, especially in the Sūduvian lands. Most of them are phonetic in nature. The dialect of Zietela, like the southern dialects of the western Highlands, has probably best preserved the western (Suduvian) vowel system: 1. "Unobscured" folksyllabic diphthongs am, an, em, en, nasal 4, ¢, shortened acute endings -a, -e (by the way, the modern Lithuanian common language formed on the basis of the western highlanders' southern dialects — the so-called kapsai, zanavykai, present Kauniškiai, as well as baltsermėgiai and striukai in Lesser Lithuania — sometimes hinders the perception of the archaic nature of those dialects); 2. the unfinished process of the diphthong ei turning into ie (e.g., sviékas, sviekata, pasviék and sveikas, sveikata, šievė, less often tiep (<teip), more often tep and only viekest, vikėst "more"; 3. Perhaps also vowel u before, consonant v turning into i in the words brivai "brows", liezivis "tongue", živis "fish" (Volter 1912: 158); 133 4. Unlawful vns. abbreviation of the ending of the noun, e.g., arklūks ”horse”, nteks, vaiks (Būga 1961: 136; Zinkevičius 1987: 262). Among the most common types of consonants are: 1. The correct pronunciation of the consonant z instead of ž in the words baznyčid, ząsis "goose" or in the mixed form zėmė, zi“ md, zivts, zvaizdė, more often zveris, zverys, žemė, žūmė, Fema, živis, žvaigždė, less often žvėris, etc. The prefix s instead of š is usually pronounced before the consonant v, e.g. svéntina, sviy(k)ščia, svir(k)ščia next to švėntina, švy(k)ščia, švir(k)ščia "whistles- ". It is possible that the object, s, z consonants instead of š, ž have survived or arisen due to the analogy of the corresponding sounds in Slavic languages, but it can hardly completely deny the role of the Western Baltic substrate. All the more so, that this phenomenon has survived in the southern highlands of the south (about Druskininkai, Kabeliai, etc.); 2. Probably the archaism of the Sūduvian times is to use the consonant combinations st(rt.), šč, št, zd without the inserted consonants k, g (if this is not the reverse phenomenon, i.e. simplification, cf. Endzelins 1974: 430—431), e.g., dustas, sometimes dukštas, paūštė "bird", ryštė "whip" (cf. Prussian ryste), rūštas, | rūštus "sour", skraždė "swan", švirščiamvšvirkščia, žvirždos "sand, gravel", but usually early, likes, soft; 3. The appearance of the prefix j instead of v in personal pronouns vns. in adjective and sometimes vns "adjective forms, e.g. sajim "with myself", tajim "with you", less often sajip, tajip "with you" (cf. Prussian maim and Lazuny schnektos maima, eit maimim, taimim); 4. irregular changes of consonants, of which somewhat more frequently consonants t, d before the vowels of the front row, as in the southern highlands, turn into k, g, e.g., less often girgėjau, dž. girdėjau, girsa< dirsa, dirsė, kiltas, dz. bridge, pagege, d. burned, silk, d. itis "heat, fire, flame", top, d. upper; 5. Limited use of Afrikaans, e.g., daritio "denties", dantei "teeth", gaidiy, gardiū, gaidiūmi "gaidžiams", jautius, ramteis, žodei" žodžiai", žodiūs, žodeis, greta dančio, gaidžių, žodžiais, not to mention the regular forms that can be explained by analogy — bitių, ėdiau, metiad, etc. Some of the features mentioned here among the phonetic phenomena can be treated as morphological, e.g., o vns of root nouns. of the noun sometimes abbreviated ending -as, particular vns of personal pronouns. the shape of the innagnik. Morphological phenomena must be distinguished from the verbal noun vns. The 2nd person form with the ending -ai, e.g. būtai, aitai, sakytai. The fact that this innovative ending is quite old is shown by the fact that its strong initial pronunciation and spread from the Curonian Lagoon in Lithuania Minor (Gerullis, Stang'as 1933: 48) to the isophones am, an and Zietela in the southeast (LKA III 108—409, map no. 105), i.e. in the supposed former Sūduvių nadruvių and Skalvių lands, has been preserved in the southern Highlands. The past tense form bit(i) (compare Latvian bija "was"), the preposition i and the prefix sa(-) and others are probably inherited from the language of the western Baltic tribes. Unfortunately, so far too little is known about the Sudovian language itself. Today, more-| than ever, its individual relics, archaisms, are hunted. It is assumed that the Sudovian language was an intermediate language between Lithuanian and Prussian, but it is not known how much it has retained common features with both languages. It is also not known how many and what traits have been inherited and how many have been acquired 17134 by the present suduviy descendants of the newly assimilated Lithuanians and Slavs. The influence of Lithuanians and their language on the Suduves and their closest neighbours is believed to have begun from the 5th to 7th centuries AD, when Eastern Slavs began to invade the eastern (central) Baltic lands (Mažiulis 1994: 6). Among the western Balts, there were probably also a number of Lithuanian refugees from the eastern regions. Other Baltic tribes were soon included in the process of forming the Lithuanian nationality. Apparently, by the beginning of the 13th century, even before the Crusader Order moved, a number of the Sūduvi, as well as their closest neighbors, the Nadruvi and the Skalvi, had already become heavily populated or merged. Similarly, the process of assimilation of the Sūduvi had to take place about Zietela. It is possible that at some point the border between the Suduves and the Lithuanians, who were heavily pressured by the East Slavs, passed through Zietela. This would be shown by the double name of the village in the vicinity of Zietela — Dainava in Lithuanian and Jatviazj (Jacvezj) in Slavic. Both names are of ethnonymic origin and refer to the same tribe of Sūduvi. Therefore, the origin of Lithuanians not only in this village, but also in the Zietela area, tends to be explained as Prussian or Sudevian refugees mentioned in the Ipatijus chronicle. However, since Lithuanians and Sudovians began to mix early, it is not necessary to consider only Sudovians as natives. After all, the natives, it is believed, are also Slavs themselves. On the other hand, if there were villages founded by the rebellious Sūduviai, the double name of the village Dainava alone reveals that they had already moved into the Lithuanian or merged with their tribesmen. In this way, over time, more isolated Sūduvian settlements in the south and south-west (around Gardina, Slanija, Valkavika, Prūsai, Baltstogė, etc.) have apparently merged. This is shown by the fact that a considerable layer of Baltic and Lithuanian toponymy, anthroponymy, borrowed words and traces of Baltic and Lithuanian culture have survived here (Nepokupnyj 1976: 5—198; Nepokupnas 1983: 5—199; Laučiūtė 1982: 9—150; Kondratiuk 1985: 10—250; Zinkevičius 1987: 43—135; 1993: 84—89; 1994: 15—23; Gaučas 1988: 195—213; LTE IX: 241). The dialect of Zietela Lithuanian, early found in the East Slavic (Halic Volhynia princes) rule and their cultural environment, was for a long time separated from the main dialects of the Lithuanian language. A wide stretch of the Pannonian Plain had become heavily empty and deserted due to the constant attacks of the Eastern Slavs and even the Tatars and the fights with the Suduves and Lithuanians (Lowmianski 1931: 56—57). In the years of the Great Duchess of Lithuania, after the wars, these places were again inhabited, but now mostly mixed. From the 14th century to the middle of the 17th century, the areas inhabited by Lithuanians extended, although not always compactly, to Zietela, but also beyond it (cf. Zinkevičius 1993: 31—39; 1994: 19—23 and the maps attached there). Unfortunately, with the weakening of the Lithuanian statehood and the rapid decline of the Lithuanian baronship and church, the conditions for the Lithuanian language to survive became very unfavorable. Many lives were lost in the wars with Russia and Sweden, especially in the 17th century, when the Russian army occupied the country, and there was famine and several plague epidemics. There is a small area of forest between the village and the mountains. Therefore, many of the garsyno and other changes that took place in the Southern Highland dialect have no longer reached Zietela's schnekts. 135